1 |
This page is intentionally left mostly blank.
| i
URBAN FLEXIBILITY
Architecture that responds to resident’s lifestyle and affordability in order to form more stable communities Wentworth Institute of Technology
Master's of Architecture Program 2018 - 2019
Joseph M. Taglia
This page is intentionally left mostly blank.
| iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank the following individuals for the overwhelming amount of support through this thesis program: To my parents, thank you for always encouraging me to keep going and reminding me that the hard work will pay off. At the times when I felt overworked, you always sent your love and supportive words reminding me that it will all be behind me soon enough. You knew that sometimes I felt lost in the direction of my project, but still always believed in me that I would accomplish my goals. To my family, thank you for every loving text and call to check in on how I was doing through this process. Having the backing of aunts, uncles, and cousins cheering me on kept me on track and motivated me through the times where I felt my weakest. Every time I visited home, you always talked to me about my work and showed interest in what I was doing in my classes. To my friends, thank you for questioning me and pushing me throughout the research process. I would like to specifically mention Jordan Young, Isabelle Kossman, Megan Rajner and Michael Barker. Each of you were always there to bounce ideas off of when I was stuck and gave honest and constructive comments to help clarify my thoughts when others brushed my concerns aside. To my thesis professors, Rob Cowherd, Marilyn Moedinger and Mike Wolfson, you continually pushed me to think deeper and supported my ideas as they grew and changed throughout the semester. Rob and Marilyn, you have both helped to guide me to success and a new understanding of our built environment. There were times when I felt frustrated by your criticism, but I now understand that it was only to strengthen my project and my abilities to think critically about architecture. I will forever remember the lessons you have taught me. Mike, your ability to advise and aid in the transition from research and data to architectural form helped significantly. Feeling shaky in the transition period between semesters, your advice and motivation helped ground me during the first few weeks while continuing to support the growth of my ideas throughout the semester. My project has become something more than I had ever imagined it becoming because of the direction you've provided, and I am deeply thankful for the dedication you have to your students' success.
iv |
| v
TABLE OF CONTENTS [1] INTRODUCTION
[1.1] THE FLEXIBLE FUTURE OF DESIGN
02
[1.3] DYNAMIC ARCHITECTURE FOR A DYNAMIC SOCIETY
04
[1.2] MAKING A STANCE FOR THE COMMUNITY [1.4] WITNESSING THE PROBLEM [1.5] TO THE READER
[1.6] AN OUTLINE LOOKING FORWARD
03 08 09 10
[2] LITERATURE REVIEW [2.1] GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE
12
[2.3] DEFINING A GENTRIFIED NEIGHBORHOOD
18
[2.2] THE PAST AS A WAY TO UNDERSTAND THE PRESENT [2.4] THE URBAN PIONEERS OF MODERN DAY
[2.5] GENTRIFICATION & ITS EFFECTS ON THE COMMUNITY [2.6] MITIGATION THROUGH GOVERNMENT POLICY
[2.7] ADAPTING ARCHITECTURE FOR FUTURE GROWTH
14 20 22 24 26
[3] DESIGN FRAMEWORK [3.1] THE CASE FOR EAST BOSTON
28
[3.3] THE TRIPLE DECKER - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH
37
[3.2] UNDERSTANDING THE HOUSING TYPOLOGY
[3.4] THE MIRRORED DUPLEX - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH [3.5] THE SINGLE FAMILY - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH [3.6] THE EMPTY LOT - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH
[3.7] MOVING FORWARD WITH FLEXIBLE ARCHITECTURE
36 39 41 43 46
[4] DESIGN OUTCOMES [4.1] DEVELOPING A MODULAR SYSTEM
48
[4.3] DESIGN ITERATION 2.0
54
[4.2] DESIGN ITERATION 1.0
[4.4] DESIGN ITERATION 3.0 [4.5] DESIGN ITERATION 4.0 [4.6] DESIGN ITERATION 5.0
50 58 62 66
[5] FINAL DESIGN & REFLECTION [5.1] DEVELOPING A MODULAR SYSTEM
[5.2] A REFLECTION ON THE THESIS PROCESS
70 79
vi |
THESIS STATEMENT: Urban Flexibility: Architecture that responds to resident’s lifestyle and affordability in order to form more stable communities.
THESIS ADVISOR: MICHAEL WOLFSON
INDEPENDENT ADVISOR: SHARON GENTGES KEYWORDS: ADAPTIVE, HOUSING, GENTRIFICATION, DISPLACEMENT, FLEXIBILITY, AFFORDABILITY, COMMUNITY, URBAN, MITIGATION, INCOME, POLICY, ECONOMY
|1
[1] INTRODUCTION [1.1] THE FLEXIBLE FUTURE OF DESIGN
T
he urban network is a system in a state of constant change. From the physical to the economical, these hubs of communities and development are dynamic in their evolution over time. Boston, one of America's oldest cities, is a prime example of a city that has seen significant growth over the last century, including the last few decades. Physically, the city has grown in shear size, from the small Shawmut Peninsula to the Boston recognizable today. Economically, the city has prospered from the time of the industrial revolution to the rise of modern large corporations that dominate the skyline. Culturally, from the early years of mass immigration to the American shoreline, Boston has taken in people from all over the world helping define and change its neighborhoods. This economic growth, over a long period of time, has contributed to Boston’s placement among some of the top cities in the country today. Not all of this change is positive though. Residents can be indirectly effected through the implementations of larger ideas to better a community. Looking forward, it can be projected that these changes will continue within our neighborhoods. Being aware of the negative impacts, both physically and economically, that change a community and its residents, I argue that we can design our cities in a more efficient way to adapt to these changes, sometimes sudden, to create a more resilient built landscape for both the individual and the city.
2|
[1.2] MAKING A STANCE FOR THE COMMUNITY
N
eighborhoods and communities, specifically within urban environments, continue to change. This is a process that occurs over time as cities adapt to the world that surrounds them. This progression, however, is accelerated due to the gentrification that is experienced as large influxes of people of different backgrounds and certainly higher income levels than the current residences, move in and settle into neighborhoods. Soon after, homes are renovated or replaced to fit the standards of these new residents and businesses that served the long time residents of the area. These businesses begin to fail as they no longer can serve the new population group adequately. They become replaced by larger corporations and higher end stores that the new residents bring with them. As these businesses close, those who worked there become unemployed, and in combination with rising rent prices, can no longer afford to stay in the neighborhood where many may have grown up. With the shift in population comes a shift in culture, as these new neighbors bring a certain culture with them, imposing it upon other from the way they interact and socialize to the way they design, build and decorate their homes. This radical and swift shift that a neighborhood undergoes may at first seem positive with new and renovated buildings, new businesses with job opportunities. There tends to be decreases in crime, poverty and uneducated residents within the neighborhood, but this becomes a problem when the residents who have deep rooted connections to their communities become displaced and pushed out from their communities. Rather than accept this process as unavoidable, how can we utilize architecture as a method that can adapt a neighborhood to these changes and can aid in helping mitigate the urban displacement that transpires as a side effect of gentrification? By focusing our efforts on the way designers approach gentrification and the issues that follow by utilizing flexible design strategies, new residents can integrate themselves comfortably while current residents can adapt their homes to their needs and societies' pressures in order to stay in their homes.
|3
[1.3] DYNAMIC ARCHITECTURE FOR A DYNAMIC SOCIETY FLEXIBLE AND ADAPTABLE ARCHITECTURE, AS A DESIGN
STRATEGY, MITIGATES THE OBSOLETENESS OF BUILDINGS WITHIN RAPIDLY CHANGING URBAN NEIGHBORHOODS.
C
ities are the built environment of change, and with densification and rapid urbanization in constant fluctuation, even more so being that cities change from day to day, year to year, and from generation to generation. The architecture of these spaces can span across centuries, as buildings stand through time and witness shifts in zoning, neighborhood make-up, and urban planning projects with the development of new technologies. Buildings from the early eighteenth century, for example, have seen the rise of industrial America, mass immigration from across the world, multiple wars and wartime policies, the influx and then retreat to and from urban areas and the development of the automobile and new traffic patterns. With these major events, it is safe to say that the city of today can be seen as foreign from the city of yesterday. If this is true, then our built environment should also reflect these changes. Architecture has formed itself through historical events, reflecting upon the needs of the time for those people. Pre-automobile homes and businesses still retain their horse and carriage drop off overhangs, old dumbbell style New York tenement homes still show some of the first attempts at interior room air circulation as workers suffered from air quality related illnesses, and most recently, the rise of glass construction depicts the technological advancements made in glass construction of modern towers. However, as our society develops, our buildings sit in the past as historical testimonies to what life was like for those who occupied them during the time.
4|
Fig. 1.6-2: Left The Denver, Colorado Denver Tramway Co. housed their main factory operations in one of their factory buildings built in 1901 and abandoning the structure in 1950. The Denver Tramway Powerhouse (Margaret Jackson, CC BY-NC-SA) Accessed 19 November 2018 http://www.confluence-denver. com/features/adaptive_reuse_101415.aspx
Some of these buildings are re-purposed with the attempt to alter their original program to match the needs of the current community. At times, this re-purposement works well in adapting to the current city needs. Old industrial warehouses are excellent examples of how buildings can be re-purposed for a growing and changing community. As factory owners abandoned their brick and mortar workshops, these structures began to be filled with new programs such as offices, apartments, and cafes. These new programs fit perfectly within these brick structures due to their universal typology. They stand structurally sound and strong, being designed for heavy machinery and massive material storage. Their windows allow maximum natural light for previous workers to see clearly to manufacture products. Their tall ceilings can adapt to different height spaces for different programmatic needs. With many of these old factory buildings already re-purposed and their growing age, cities and the communities within them will need to find new methods of adapting other building typologies to fit the needs of the people who live there.
|5
Fig. 1.6-3: Right: Today, the Denver Tramway Co. Factory has been converted to REIs Denver main branch. The former skylights allow for a grand space with much natural light and the tall ceilings that once housed the belts and lifts seen in the previous photo allows for numerous architectural interventions such as the large rock climbing station in the center. REI Denver Flagship Store (Margaret Jackson, CC BY-NC-SA) Accessed 19 November 2018 http:// www.confluence-denver.com/ features/adaptive_reuse_101415. aspx
Sometimes, neighborhoods change drastically within a short period of time. The topic of gentrification encompasses this rate of change over time. As a neighborhood changes at such a fast rate, long time residents need to adapt their living situation to meet the society changes. Residential buildings have been able to adapt to neighborhood changes over the past fifty or more years of their lifetime. This is proven with the fact that many apartments are still in use today just as they were when they were first constructed, with some of the same families occupying them generation after generation. These homes have remained even though their surroundings have changed. However, as we see neighborhoods gentrifying within the last few decades, some of these long time residents are now no longer able to remain within their homes. With rising rents, rising land values and major economic class shifts all happening simultaneously, the onces flexible homes are no longer able to bend to the will of society’s changes due to the fact that these effects can happen in what can feel like overnight for these residents. Through use by allowing our homes to become flexible in their form, the buildings and the people who live there can smoothly adapt to their neighborhoods' changes and avoid displacement. 6|
Fig. 1.6-1: Above Discursive Image: Neighborhoods are not static. In order to survive and thrive from century to century, our structures must adapt to the needs of the community. Building typologies must mingle together architecturally. Here, three different typologies come together in what makes up a flexible neighborhood that can withstand the move to the suburban home, the renovation of old brownstones, and the rise of the financial downtown centers. Typologies Working Together (Joseph Taglia, CC BY-NC-SA)
|7
[1.4] WITNESSING THE PROBLEM
H
aving grown up within a medium-sized suburban community, I was removed from many of the effects that city dwellers deal with such as rental prices, property sharing, roommates and public transportation access. My family owned their house on a decent chunk of land where we did not need to share our resources nor worry about our distance to any major shopping centers or employment opportunities. I explain this background because it has shaped my view on the idea of city life as I later moved to a major metropolitan area. Upon arriving within this new and exotic environment, I began to understand the stresses and difficulties that residents here deal with daily. As I searched for my first apartment, I became aware of the rental market and how certain amenities and locations can affect a neighborhood's affordability. I found myself renting a small closet-sized space in an apartment in the Fenway area of Boston. The place was old and in need of repair but I was still paying much higher than my friends renting outside the city with smaller, but newer units. It was then that I began to question why and researched it. Fenway had not always been an extremely expensive neighborhood, and through my research I learned that new properties geared toward the wealthy as well as high-end commercial stores moving into the area had pushed my building's rent to skyrocket. I asked myself surly there are long time local residents here, how is it fair that they must suffer financially because their neighborhood has become cleaner and more vibrant? They did not necessarily ask for these amenities to move in next door. Through my initial research, I also learned how foreign investors skew market value by purchasing high priced units as a way to protect their money. Between these two and witnessing the effects that gentrification has on current residents has motivated me to dig deeper in order to understand the problem and begin to find a way to use architecture and design methods to help keep residents in place during these uncontrolled events.
8|
[1.5] TO THE READER
T
his thesis is aimed towards two main groups of design-minded folks. Overall, the goal is to understand how and why gentrification happens and its effects on communities followed by design techniques that can help mitigate the negative effects such as the displacement of local residents. To students, I hope that this thesis can serve as a guide to understand the issue that our cities are dealing with now more than ever. You are the future of the way we design and shape our cities. The audience we design for matters, therefore, take from the understanding that we are in the process of major changes in the urban environment. Just as urban planners designed the cities of the 1960s to help retain their declining population heading to the suburbs, we must use this new knowledge of today's current issue to plan our designs in order to keep our neighborhood rich in culture and resilient to displacement in future years to come. By allowing our designs to bend and align to the needs of a community, this architecture strategy will allow our built environment to server a greater number of people over time. To the working professionals, urban planners, architects, developers, community organizations and government officials; recognize this as a pressing issue to our modern American metropolis. Our own citizens are losing their homes and their lives full of memories, disconnecting them from a sense of place. We can all agree that positive change is good change within our communities, but we can also see that with that comes negative effects. Work together to help our cities grow and prosper while limiting the negative outcome. Think about how we design the cities we live in and how they can serve the entire community, for a city is not a city without diversity. We cannot allow ourselves to have tunnel vision when attempting to create our urban renewal dreams. Let us broaden our scope and encompass the entire community within our designs so that everyone can grow and prosper through architecture for years to come.
|9
[1.6] AN OUTLINE LOOKING FORWARD
T
ackling the complexity of gentrification happening in our urban neighborhoods needs thorough understanding. Beginning with chapter two, readers learn about what gentrification means for a neighborhood through understanding both the positive and negative effects on a community. Through defining what gentrification is, readers can expect to take away why certain neighborhoods become gentrified and who is at the cause of the process. It also gives a brief, but important historical context to how cities and their neighborhoods have evolved over the last century in regards to the reasons neighborhoods are broken up by both class and race today. With that context explained, chapter two ends by showcasing the ways that government and community organizations have attempted to work together with policy to mitigate the displacement of residents and introduces the idea of flexible design of our built environment that can adapt to this ever changing society we live in. Chapter three takes this research and applies it to a specific area as a testing ground for architectural solutions. Analyzing East Boston, a community across the harbor and just northeast from Boston’s financial center, this chapter focuses on the current situation of gentrification and displacement. By first looking at the demographical data and then the residential typologies of the structures in the neighborhood, this information guides the concept of adapting our residential typology in order to allow the building density to fluctuate as outside forces other than architecture fluctuate. The exploration of this concept is done through the use of the existing typical neighborhood style but is the testing ground for a possible new typology of housing that can fluctuate to meet the needs of those who live there Chapter four covers a series of design testing and iterating in order to achieve this flexible method with our future designs in cities facing such challenges. These design tests evaluate ideas of community within a building, flexibility of the home regarding the lifestyle choices of residents, and abilities of adapting to different family sizes over time as primary methods to discover new ways we can shape our homes. Chapter five covers the final design test of the semester, and arguably the most developed, culminating the ideas and concepts developed though chapter four. A final reflection upon the thesis process and design decisions wraps up the entirety of the book.
10 |
Fig. 2.1-1: Left Boston has physically changed over the last few centuries, allowing for neighborhoods to grow and change. Boston Land Timeline (Joseph Taglia, CC BY-NC-SA)
| 11
[2] LITERATURE REVIEW [2.1] GENTRIFICATION AND NEIGHBORHOOD CHANGE
I
f cities have been and are always in a state of change, then why does the term gentrification create a stir in a room of community members? Through research, it's clear that the term itself is highly debated and considered a controversial topic. Each author who has tackled this subject has his or her own spin on how to define the term, and quite frankly, it makes sense why; it is a subjective one, depending on personal experiences and bias. A developer or landlord may see the pros and cons of gentrification differently than the middle class resident, and still differently from view of the low income residents. It’s extremely important to not become lost in the definition of the term while trying to understand what gentrification really involves. This concept of gentrification, which can have its links to the term urban renewal, is nothing new to cities across the world and certainly not to Boston. During the post-war era of the 1950s and 1960s, cities across the United States beautified and re-developed in hopes to save their declining populations in the time of the rise of suburbia. Decisions made involving city revitalization at the time were considered to be racially charged, while many saw it as an attack on the African American population residing within downtown urban areas. Urban renewal in gentrifying areas of today still have the same overarching goal; to beautify and better a particular community. However, its reasoning is certainly less directed at ethnicity, but more at income level and social class.1 Defining gentrification can be difficult and depending on who is asked, the definition varies. Rather than pinpoint the definition to one particular group's view, it’s important to acknowledge the factual positive and negative effects for all involved.
1. Derek Hyra, The New Urban Renewal (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008), 3-4 12 |
First, what isn’t gentrification? Gentrification is not change to a neighborhood. Neighborhood change is constant and is happening every day all around us. Gentrification is not the re-development of space within a neighborhood to improve the physical environment. That is a process that naturally occurs where people have settled. It is also not individuals different from the current group settling in a neighborhood. The neighborhoods that are considered to be gentrifying are already diverse in their own ways, sometimes more subtle than what meets the eye.2 How can gentrification be defined? A major player not yet mentioned in the equation of gentrification is time. As mentioned, change within a neighborhood happens naturally. New people move in and out, businesses come and go, and community amenities are built and replaced. Gentrification is when these three points of change occur in what can feel like “overnight” to some residents, rather than over a span of years or decades. The new people who arrive come in large groups within a short period of time. They tend to be wealthier than the current residents of the area, attributing to having their say with more power over the government. With more money at hand to create improvements at a fast rate, areas are revitalized more quickly than the current residents had ever expected. Some elected officials may have fought hard for this neighborhood revitalization, only to be turned down once proposed. This rapid change of an influx of, as Robert Beauregard describes them, “Urban Pioneers”, has a positive effects to a neighborhood, but with them come negative effects which trickle down to the long time residents of the community.3
2. Tom Angotti, “The Gentrification Dilemma” Architect Magazine, August 13, 2012, https://www.architectmagazine. com/design/the-gentrification-dilemma_o 3. Robert Beaurgard, “The Chaos and Complexity of Gentrification,” in Gentrification of the City, ed. Neil Smith and Peter Williams (London: Allen & Unwin, 1986), 36-38 | 13
[2.2] The Past as a Way to Understand the Present Fig. 2.2-1: Right Today’s Kendal Square, a downtown district to Cambridge, MA and across the river from downtown Boston used to house the factory of Boston Woven Hose and Rubber Co. (1912) Boston Woven Hose (Max Eskin, CC BY-NC-SA) Accessed 10 November 2018 http://maxeskin. com/blog/2016/02/04/boston-woven-hose/
U
nderstanding the history of Boston’s economic change over time helps to put into perspective just how society have arrived at the situation of American cities today. Boston in the pre World War II era was a city built on industry and shipping, with warehouses and steam-driven factories encompassing the central business district1. Porter Motor Company, B&C Soda Factory, Boston Woven Hose and Rubber, and Charles River Iron Works are all examples of these large scale factory buildings constructed in and around the heart of Boston. In addition, many industrial factories were located in towns at the borders of Boston at that time. Today, these towns have become part of the city, such as Charlestown, Dorchester and Roxbury.2 Their employees who made up the working-class of Boston needed to settle near their job locations in such areas like the West End, North End, and South End neighborhoods, which are all near the current central city area. Historically, these neighborhoods and towns, yet to be annexed by Boston, were filled with blue-collar factory workers. 1. Elihu James Rubin, Insuring the City: The Prudential Center and the Reshaping of Boston. (Berkeley: University of California Transportation Center, 2009), 80-81 2. Geoff Lewis, John Avault and Jim Vrabel, “History of Boston’s Economy: Growth and Transition 1970-1998,” Boston Redevelopment Authority, November, 1999, 1-3 14 |
Fig. 2.2-2: Map of Kendal Square early 1900s locating lower-income Above tenement housing next to factory buildings. Boston Woven Hose (Joseph Taglia, CC BY-NC-SA)
World War II can be viewed as a turning point for the city and its make-up. It is prior to the war where Boston stood as described in the previous section; industrial with a strong manufacturing center dominating the central city. Neighborhoods were filled with semi-level skilled, medium to low wage workers living in the area.3 However, post World War II, Boston’s make up began to shift. Changes within city-wide policy helped make de-industrialization dominate the later parts of the century.4 With the development of suburbia, many middle class and upper class citizens left the city entirely for better luck in the suburbs outside the city. Just within 20 years, from 1950 to 1970, Boston lost nearly 150,000 residents to the surrounding suburbs. With that came the loss of businesses and jobs. 3. Robert Beaurgard, “The Chaos and Complexity of Gentrification,” in Gentrification of the City, ed. Neil Smith and Peter Williams (London: Allen & Unwin, 1986), 40 4. Derek Hyra, The New Urban Renewal (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008), 25 | 15
Fig. 2.2-3 Downtown Boston circa 1969; Shift in downtown industry Above from industrial to service and entertainment. Boston, Massachusetts October 1969 (The Nick DeWolf Foundation, CC BY-NC-SA) Accessed 22 November 2018 https://www.flickr.com/photos/ dboo/427835769/
Manufacturing factories and distribution centers “became dependent upon easy highway access rather than access to rail or port facilities” leading to the fall of the industrial area of the central city.5 In its place rose the service industry, a white-collar workforce of business and financial and insurance firms. Hotels and entertainment businesses also took a chunk of the newly developing downtown city district.6 As these companies flocked to the newly available land for redevelopment, American cities in the Post-War era provided primarily white-collar jobs with fewer blue-collar positions. The change within the central business district of the city allowed for property value to rise, creating the initial set up for a gentrified area.
5. Geoff Lewis, John Avault and Jim Vrabel, “History of Boston’s Economy: Growth and Transition 1970-1998,” Boston Redevelopment Authority, November, 1999, 3 6. Robert Beaurgard, “The Chaos and Complexity of Gentrification,” in Gentrification of the City, ed. Neil Smith and Peter Williams (Londwwon: Allen & Unwin, 1986), 42
Neighborhoods built post World War II were not immune from being gentrified in the coming years. As soldiers arrived home, neighborhoods needed to accommodate the influx of people. New families formed, and a rush to build began. The federal government helped fund many urban housing neighborhoods at the time. It is thought that the way this happened contributed to the reason why neighborhoods today can be viewed as segregated. Public housing built by the government at this time was designed for certain groups of people. Beginning in the years of the New Deal during the Great Depression, the first civilian public housing was constructed, but on a segregated basis.1 Many times, these new neighborhoods had segregated areas that were not segregated to begin with. For example, in Cambridge, MA near Central Square, the neighborhood was made up of half white and half black residents in 1930. Following the war in the 1940s, government housing projects were designed that forced white residents to live in one area and black residents to live in another area. This segregation is something we are still dealing with today in our cities. Unlike the de-segregation of city buses and water fountains, neighborhood de-segregation is not as easy. People have established themselves in a certain community and you cannot just tell them to get up and leave in order to re-diversify. 2 Many poor communities have a certain ethnicity that still dominates an area. Immigrants who did not have much money upon arrival were grouped together in these housing neighborhoods, resulting in an entire low-income community. These communities still exist today and are the areas that have the potential for major displacement concerns as gentrification moves its way into the community.
1."Richard Rothstein - 'The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America'," Youtube video, 15:08, posted by "Family Action Network"March 23, 2018, https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=zKsDq6DOOdY 2."Richard Rothstein - 'The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America'," Youtube video, 15:08, posted by "Family Action Network"March 23, 2018. 16 |
[2.3] DEFINING A GENTRIFIED NEIGHBORHOOD
C
onsidering an area to be gentrified requires careful thought, as the topic itself is very broad and covers many sub-categories. A study done by Governing Magazine gives a well defined view at how to describe a gentrified neighborhood. This study uses median home value, educational degree level of residents, and median household income to qualify an area to be gentrified. Through their studies which covered the fifty most populous cities in the U.S., gentrification was considered to be less common than originally thought, however, it has seen a sharp increase in frequency recently.1 The data depicts a continual increase in gentrifying neighborhoods across the nation and begins to hint for a solution to those who are displaced, whether it be their business or home. Is there a way to predict which neighborhoods are possible areas to see gentrification in the future? Neil Smith, in his writing on this topic, starts to uncover certain elements that qualify an area to be gentrified. He claims that residential and commercial development are linked together. Dense residential districts are more likely to gentrify than commercial districts, since residential make up drives the type and level of commercial development.2 Therefore, looking at residentially zoned areas is a good start to focus on specific areas of the city which may gentrify. There is a need to tackle the problem at its roots, the construction of new residential development, in order to help mitigate the negative outcomes. Derek Hydra builds on the idea of the design of the neighborhood and the way it is constructed. Specifically, in the realm of public housing - a typology that is helpful for low-income areas to afford a place to live - the design tends to be the reason for demolition and redevelopment in a neighborhood. Many of them have large set backs from the street and stand alone on their plot as if their project was put on “desolate land” rather than within the Urban framework.3
1. “Boston Gentrification Maps and Data”, Governing, The States and Localities, accessed October 10, 2018, http://www.governing.com/gov-data/boston-gentrification-maps-demographic-data.html 2. Neil Smith and Peter Williams, “Alternative to Orthodoxy: Invitation to a Debate,” in Gentrification of the City, ed. Neil Smith and Peter Williams (London: Allen & Unwin, 1986), 3 3. Derek Hyra, The New Urban Renewal (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008), 85-86
| 17
Fig. 2.3-1: Right From 1990-2000, this map shows the areas in Boston that are considered to be gentrifying. Boston Gentrification Map: 1990 Census - 2000 (Governing, The States and Localities, CC BYNC-SA) Accessed 15 November 2018 http://www.governing. com/gov-data/boston-gentrification-maps-demographic-data.html
Fig. 2.3-2: Right From 2000-2010, this map shows the areas in Boston considered to be gentrifying. There is an increased area of dark blue shades within just the 10 year difference. Boston Gentrification Map: 2000 Census - Present (Governing, The States and Localities, CC BY-NC-SA) Accessed 15 November 2018 http://www.governing. com/gov-data/boston-gentrification-maps-demographic-data.html
These affordable housing complexes are isolated from the rest of the community, contributing to their failure and change for redevelopment. With the Post War development of highways and railways, neighborhoods have also been disconnected from their surroundings. This isolation leads to the lack of community identity. Neighborhoods that tend to be gentrified are areas with low land value but with potential for change. This potential starts with the fact that the structure and architecture is structurally sound, but lacks upkeep and aesthetic work. Gentrifiers who can afford to fix up these properties move in and use their higher income to help afford the improvements. It is not that the current community lacks morals or general care for their environment, but rather that it is something they just cannot afford to fit into their budget. Neighborhood revitalization can have a positive effect in a community, but with it comes affordability issues and possible displacement for current residents. Both Neil Smith and Michael Lefaiver acknowledge that it is impossible to make everyone happy through design, but they question how designers can do their best to incorporate both new community members and current community members into their architecture. 4 4. Neil Smith and Michale Lefaiver, “Revitalization in a Working-Class Neighborhood,� in Gentrification, Displacement, and Neighborhood Revitalization (New York: State University of New York, 1984), 128-129 18 |
[2.4] THE URBAN PIONEERS OF MODERN DAY
B
y understanding the drastic shift in industry in Boston, it's easier to see how what happened in the past plays a role today in gentrifying neighborhoods, and displacement issues within American cities today. Who are these “urban pioneers” and why do they move to these neighborhoods? They are the modern risk takers; moving into a new unknown location in which their neighbors tend to have little in common with their lifestyle. These may be considered to be the first gentrifiers; the ones that lead the rest to the area. On average, these folks consist of a single or two person household, with affluent professional backgrounds and no children. They move into unknown territory in hopes that their risk in investing into a more deteriorated part of the city will work for them, and those who come after them. These new residents find areas of the city that are usually deteriorated but the buildings themselves remain structurally sound. With the great rush to suburbia behind, these people are looking to be relocate closer to their work, now the central business district of the twenty-first century American city. 1 The racist ideas that are behind the rapid change of neighborhoods are still prevalent from the past. In the mid-twentieth century, urban renewal projects within cities caused an upset within minority communities. In Harlem, for example, Derek Hyra explains how the post war urban renewal was more racially charged as many low income areas saw it as an attack on black communities by white citizens.2 However, today the issue rests more on social class rather than ethnicity. East Boston, for example, is not gentrifying because of its large Hispanic population, but rather because of its location and connection to the modern central business district driving up land value and housing prices.
1. Robert Beaurgard, “The Chaos and Complexity of Gentrification,” in Gentrification of the City, ed. Neil Smith and Peter Williams (London: Allen & Unwin, 1986), 36-37 2. Derek Hyra, The New Urban Renewal (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008), 3-4 | 19
Fig. 2.4-1: Right For over 68 years, Lismore Hosiery Co., a locally owned business in the Lower East Side of Manhattan leased the space on the street corner on the ground floor of the apartment building. Prior to this, the space was a local pizza joint for the community. In 2005, the owner's lease was terminated without renewal when a developer purchased the property for new luxury condos. In the photo, you can see the wall of the apartments above and how the quality has changed. As seen, replacing the local business was a Subway, pushing a local business out as well as the revenue and employment of the Lower East Side. Also, replacing the apartments with luxury condos has altered the make-up of the neighborhood. Grand St & Ludlow Street, Lower East Side (Stephanie Maida, CC, BY-NC-SA) Accessed 25 November 2018 https://guestofaguest.com/ new-york/nyc/13-before-and-afterphotos-that-show-the-changingface-of-new-york-city?slide=10
Furthermore, in the past three decades, America's black middle class has tripled. Hyra gives a perfect example of recent development in the New York City area of Harlem. The gentrification happening to its large African American population is being replaced with other African American residents, something that was much more uncommon during the middle of the previous century. To add to that, these new residents of the same ethnicity moved into the redeveloped Harlem area of middle class and upper middle class income levels, replacing the lower income residents who currently live there.3
3. Derek Hyra, The New Urban Renewal (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008), 4-5 20 |
[2.5] GENTRIFICATION & ITS EFFECTS ON THE COMMUNITY
T
he effects of the gentrification process are mixed. On one hand, the process leaves a neighborhood much cleaner for those who live there. Homes are refurbished, code violations decrease, and property values rise overall.1 On the other hand, this revitalization of the physical can entail heavy social costs to long time residents. The concern about cultural changes within their communities with the arrival of such different newcomers is real, with some arguing that they do not want newcomers even if it results in a better more clean environment for them. Historically, displacement of residents and businesses is not new, especially for the poor, however being displaced by middle and upper class residents is. If nearly 40% of all renters in the low-income bracket move at least once a year, how can displacement among poor communities be a pressing issue? This data leans toward the fact that most renters are not leaving their town or city when in search of a new home. This is where displacement effects differ. The fact that these residents can no longer afford to stay in the same town. They leaving to find better housing options, bringing their culture with them. In this way, a community can lose its identity and diversity. A more homogeneous neighborhood grows from the displacement of a diversified group of individuals.
1. Neil Smith and Michale Lefaiver, “Revitalization in a Working-Class Neighborhood,� in Gentrification, Displacement, and Neighborhood Revitalization (New York: State University of New York, 1984), 128-129 | 21
Fig. 2.5-1: Right This map begins to tell a story about affordability for the people of the neighborhood. Paying more than 30% of income on rent is a sign of possible displacement in a neighborhood. Rent Cost Burdened Households 2010-14 Massachusetts (Boston Displacement, CC BY-NC-SA) Accessed 29 November 2018 https://bostondisplacement.carto. com/viz/da23bc6c-eb9c-11e5b6dd-0e31c9be1b51/public_map
As cities today attract larger corporations, highly skilled workers need places to live. This drives up the cost of housing, and as a result, local resident renters may feel the pressure both economically and culturally to move to a more affordable location.2 Communities that see gentrification in the forefront may lose their small businesses and some of their local residents. While this is upsetting to witness, gentrification does positively effect the area. The process is known to better school systems, reduce crime rates, improve public transportation access, and even create more recreational areas for residents.3 But with displacement, the current long-time residents who can no longer afford to stay, do not get to reap these benefits as they have to relocate to a different area.
2. Richard Florida, “This is What Happens After a Neighborhood Gets Gentrified,” The Atlantic, September 16, 2015 3. Alex Kanegawa, “Gentrification 101: Out of Sight, Out of Mind” Annenberg Media Center, October 6, 2014, http://www.neontommy.com/news/2014/10/gentrification-101-out-sight-out-mind.html 22 |
[2.6] MITIGATION THROUGH GOVERNMENT POLICY
W
hile it matters the way we design our cities to combat those displaced, so does the way we form our policy to help keep people in their homes. With higher land value comes higher rents for both businesses and residents. Rent control, for example, combats the rapid increase of housing pricing for local renters, allowing landlords to only raise the rent at a certain percentage per year. The city of Los Angeles uses this concept today under the name Rent Stabilization Ordinance. By capping the increase of rent at 3% per year, residents and business owners are not as pressured with fast rising rent increases in their area, therefore giving the residents enough notice to make plans to relocate if needed.1 Moreover, the idea of rent control helps to stretch out the length of time community members have in order to make decisions while at the same time bettering the community. Rent control, however, is not the sole solution to the problem. The rent control situation in the area of Boston, for example speaks to as how the policy can negatively impact the market and the city economically. Cambridge’s rent control in the early nineties, prior to its abolishment, lowered the land values of previously higher areas and proved that rent controlled units received little maintenance resulting in little capital investment compared to non-rent-controlled units. Boston has recently attempted to create a new reformed rent control policy under the name of the Jim Brooks Stabilization Act. WBUR, a local radio station in Boston, did a report on the multi-year long process to develop this policy. Starting as a similar rent-control policy, the policy asked to require non-binding mediation between landlords and tenants during any point that the landlord desired to raise the rent more than five percent. It would also require the landlord to notify the city when any eviction notice was given to a tenant for data collection.
1. Alex Kanegawa, “Gentrification 101: Out of Sight, Out of Mind� Annenberg Media Center, October 6, 2014, http://www.neontommy.com/news/2014/10/gentrification-101-out-sight-out-mind.html | 23
ANTI-DISPLACEMENT GOVERNMENT POLICY JOSEPH TAGLIA THESIS PREP II
BOSTON, MA
Key Facts and Notes: - Eviction crisis coined for the city in 2015. - Goal for a mediation of big rent increases. - Proposed to allow evictions of tenants only under certain circumstances.
What is the Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act? The Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act was a housing policy designed by the office of Mayor Martin J. Walsh, to help defend, stabilize, and promote the neighborhoods of Boston in times of gentrification and displacement among local residents. It was framed around the goal of maintaining the diversity within Boston’s neighborhoods through defending and safeguarding Boston renters and former homeowners in post-foreclosure situations from unreasonable termination of lease or any discriminatory or retaliatory reasoning for eviction.
- City should have access to eviction data. - Started off as “Just Cause” Reform and later evolved to become the Jim Brooks Act.
Two Sides and their Views: Residents: The residents of Boston saw this as an overall positive way to mitigate displacement in neighborhoods. They saw their opponents, landlords, as trying to make some extra money off rising rent trends. Landlords/Real Estate Companies: This law was an encroachment on property rights and failure to comply with the new eviction law meant a tenant could stay.
Evictions On The Rise: Boston’s healthy and booming economy during the start of the decade helped its housing market tremendously, with new construction happening in nearly every neighborhood. However, with the positive economic growth came the even quicker rise in rents across much of the city’s housing market. Specifically, East Boston was hit hard, getting the nickname of the eviction hot spot of the city of Boston.
The Mayor Chimes In:
SPRING 2016
Rent control laws had been abolished in Boston back in 1994. Since then:
The 54th Mayor of Boston, Marty J. Walsh, acknowledges the displacement crisis that the city is dealing with in a statement to the public. He and his team release a long-term city planning initiative under the name “Imagine Boston: 2030” specifically mentioning the large section about affordable housing goals for the city.
WINTER 2017
“The average market rent in the inner Boston core has now reached $2,800/month”
Over the next few months, the Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act was met over and discussed thoroughly with board members, community groups, Realtors, and residents to come to a conclusion.
FALL 2017
Goodbye to Jim Brooks: Nearly three years later, little progress had been made in the passing of housing reform in the city of Boston. Many of Walsh’s policies had not passed and went back to the drawing board. There was major concern that laws like these could disrupt the booming economic growth in the housing market of Boston by larger property owners, just as the rent control laws of the late 20th century had done to the city.
Realtors and Real Estate companies claimed that the Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act was a form of Rent Control and would hurt the economic growth of the city as did the previous rent control laws of the late 20th century.
Imagine Boston: 2030 notes that the need for affordable living new construction is now more important than ever, with Boston homes 2.6 times higher than the national average despite household income on par with the national average.
“Rents in Boston have risen more than 55% since 2009”
Major Discussion Among Parties:
The Greater Boston Housing Report Card: 2017; Northeastern University
FALL 2015
Word Reaches Boston City Council:
Reform Of A Hot Topic:
Cut Down And Re-Worded:
The first hearing on the issue reaches Boston City Council, where hundreds of residents of the city showed up to voice their opinion on the matter.
The Boston Mayor released five new Anti-Displacement bills for discussion. One of the main bills, titled the “Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act” was a direct follow up to the previous bill that was voted no upon in the Spring of 2016 by the City Council.
After a decent part of the year filled with discussion and compromising among different parties involved, the Jim Brooks Stabilization Act had been reworked and changed to such a point that very little of its original concepts remained.
Due to a lack of collected data by the city, it was not understood how bad the situation with housing in the city had become. This is because not all eviction notices are recorded by the Housing Court. Many citizens were unaware of their right to submit the eviction notice to court and rather promptly moved out of the property. Advocates voiced to require non-binding mediation between landlords and tenants during any point that the landlord desired to raise the rent more than 5%. It would also require landlords to notify the city when any eviction notice was given to a tenant for public record. In the end, the Council voted no on the issue.
Fig. 2.6-1: Above Flowchart shows the development of the Jim Brooks Stabilization Act that was attempted to be passed as a way to fight gentrified areas and eviction/displacement of residents in Boston. Boston Policy Time line of Jim Brooks Stabilization Act (Joseph Taglia, CC, BY-NC-SA)
FALL 2016
The Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act stated that landlords would still be required to notify the city on eviction notices to tenants. In addition, it set eviction guidelines that stated reasons that an eviction notice could be served by the landlord; unable to pay rent, damage to property, use of property for landlords family, etc. This latter statement received backlash from most Real Estate companies and individual landlords as they stated it would be difficult to evict tenants if there was suspicious activity involving violence or drug trafficking. However, the data at the time had proven that a majority of evictions where due to the inability to pay rent.
SPRING 2017
The final draft of the law left out much of the so-claimed rent control polices that stated reasons for eviction. The only original part of the law that was approved and remained in the final draft was that landlords would be required to report to the city that an eviction notice was served to the tenant.
WINTER 2018
Not all was lost though. This was an important step, as the city of Boston will be collecting data on eviction notices and can tract where a greater number of evictions are taking place, helping to tract possible locations of swift gentrification in neighborhoods.
Through the next few years, the law's wording changed as the city mayor, Martin J. Walsh, released five new bills to address concern from the citizens of Boston. One directly appealed to the concern of housing cost under the name of the Jim Brooks Community Stabilization Act. It stated that landlords would be required to notify the city of eviction notices, as there was lacking data to prove that there were true eviction issues in the city. Guidelines were set that prohibited a landlord from evicting tenants unless for certain issues such as inability to pay rent, damage to property, or need to house the landlord's family. Backlash was received by the real estate community since it would be difficult to evict tenants if there was hint of suspicious activity on the property but they were not able to prove it. Within the last year, the bill has been re-written and has finally passed, but with little of its intended original purpose. Rent control has had its history of debate and is certainly not the sole solution with dealing with the topic of displacement and gentrification.2
2. Meghan Chakrabarti and Jamie Bologna, “How Boston’s Big Attempt at Rental Law Reform Failed,” Radio Boston, WBUR 90.9, Boston, MA: WBUR, May 16, 2018 24 |
[2.7] ADAPTING ARCHITECTURE FOR FUTURE GROWTH Fig. 2.7-1: Left This chart explains how flexible design strategies help to allow buildings to have a longer lifespan before they become obsolete to the residents. Relationship between length of life of a system and its flexibility or rigidity. (Cristiana Cellucci and Michele Di Sivo, CC BY-NC-SA) Accessed 28 November 2018 http://www.davidpublisher. com/Public/uploads/Contribute/55b05a1883b83.pdf
W
ith the historical change in how cities are designed and function and in combination with the left over abandoned factory buildings that remain, it is not always the cheapest option for a neighborhood to bulldoze in order to rebuild their community. As we can see by walking down any American city downtown today, some of these offices and entertainment spaces have utilized the design of the early American factory warehouses by making them their new homes. Factory buildings carry a design that is almost universal for program. With their large open spaces and spans, structurally sound walls and large windows that allow for maximum lighting conditions, program from housing to restaurants to museums seem to be able to adapt the space to their needs, adding walls and doors where needed. As these factory buildings age though, maintenance will become more regularly needed. Looking forward, in a rapidly changing market with all parties involved, how can our buildings today be designed to be flexible in the coming years? Flexible design can help keep residents in place, no matter the market situation, keep local businesses within commercial areas for job access, while also economically being able to grow and adapt to the neighborhoods needs at the time. Many buildings today have static program; a school is a school, an office is an office. Flexible architecture will allow us to combat some of the negative effects brought with gentrification. Gentrification will happen, it's how we design to work with it that matters.
| 25
Flexible design strategies are not new to architecture. Homes have been flexible spaces from the days of nomadic people as they re-located and moved across the land. Their homes needed to be flexible to respond to constant movement, different seasons, and different landscapes and temperatures. With a more settled society in modern times, our homes have begun to lose the flexibility they once had. However, we can still adapt today's building techniques to include flexible design in order to help our homes react to its surroundings. For existing structures with a fixed square footage, re-designing the interior space can help. When rooms become similar in shape and size, they can easily be re-purposed for the owner's needs.1 For example, a working professional may take a dedicated office space and transform it into another bedroom to help split rising rent costs if the rooms are equally sized. This allows for flexible space management based on the needs of the resident. Existing structures can also benefit from allowing two accesses to the home. This option allows the owner to begin to section off parts of the home as needed and decrease the size of the space at any time.2 Similar to lock-off rooms in an inn, access to the private spaces in the home, such a the bedroom and living room, become accessible from a central hallway for personal access while the rooms all connect to shared service facility spaces such as a kitchen or bathroom. This allows flexibility of unit count as units can grow or shrink as the market fluctuates. Blurring the indication of spaces to be interior or exterior on existing structures can also add to the flexibility.3 What was once a front porch can be converted to an interior and rentable space, helping residents when prices rise. This new space can now add to the allotted rentable space inside. These are a series of solutions for existing structures in order to allow them to bend to outside forces that relate to displacement. Utilizing these as well as other strategies that can be implemented through new construction, will allow our neighborhoods to be resilient as neighborhoods grow and change. Residents will be able to adapt their homes to their affordability level while remaining in their homes. Landlords and developers will be able to redistribute their building layout and configuration allowing them to charge less per person while still bringing in more rent money with more individuals living in each house. 1. Cristiana Cellucci and Michele Di Sivo, "The Flexible Housing: Criteria and Strategies for Implementation of the Flexibility," Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture 9, (2015): 847 2. Cristiana Cellucci and Michele Di Sivo, "The Flexible Housing: Criteria and Strategies for Implementation of the Flexibility," Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture 9, (2015): 848 3. Cristiana Cellucci and Michele Di Sivo, "The Flexible Housing: Criteria and Strategies for Implementation of the Flexibility," Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture 9, (2015): 849 26 |
Fig. 2.7-2: Left A theoretical approach to how apartment walls could shift to allow flexibility of unit size. Flexible Wall Approach (Joseph Taglia, CC, BY-NC-SA )
| 27
[3] DESIGN FRAMEWORK [3.1] THE CASE FOR EAST BOSTON
F
or several reasons, East Boston is one location that is dealing with gentrification in the city of Boston. First of all, the location of East Boston to the downtown central business district of Boston is crucial to its changes. It is just across the harbor with direct public transportation linkage. The area also has prime waterfront land for development, giving residents skyline views of the city. As noted in the literature review, these are criteria that the “Urban Pioneers� of today seek as they enter new neighborhoods.
28 |
Source: Boston Planning and Development Agency
Source: Boston Planning and Development Agency
EAST BOSTON MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME: CITY OF BOSTON MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME:
$43,713 $82,380
Source: United States Census Survey
When further looking at East Boston’s demographic data, the set up for gentrification could not be more apparent. Other than the cities physical brick-and-mortar characteristics, the population breakdown can also tell a bit of why a neighborhood is gentrifying. East Boston's average household income, approximately $43,000, stands well below the total city average of about $82,000, giving insight that East Boston’s community is made up of mostly low-income residents. Low-income neighborhoods are targets for possible gentrified areas as higher-income individuals enter and begin to fix up the community. Examining East Boston’s education makeup is just as important as looking at income level. Higher education levels translate into higher-skilled employees which computes to higher salary. The median household income of East Boston is much lower than the city's average income, and the education of residents follows suit. East Boston's residents are statistically less educated than other areas of the city as seen in figure 3.1-1, creating the correlation between the two data points.
| 29
Fig. 3.1-1: Left These charts illustrate the educational background of the neighborhood versus the city of Boston as a whole.
Fig. 3.1-2: Right This chart shows the number of units built over time and the difference in market rate to affordable units.
Source: Boston Planning and Development Agency
Another trend to investigate is the development of residential units within the neighborhood of East Boston. This data depicts the type of units that are being constructed and hints at whether these units are affordable for the residents who currently live there. Knowing that East Boston is a mostly low-income area of the city, residents do not have as much to spend on rent per year as other areas of the city. Currently, the average East Boston market rate unit rents for $2,633 per month. Figure 3.1-2 illustrates how there has been a stark increase in market rate units in the neighborhood compared to the number of affordable units constructed. Landlords typically look for tenants who can afford to spend as much as 30% of their gross salary. That translates to the average East Boston household earning about $43,000 per year, spending nearly $12,900 on rent per year. However, with a market rate unit costing nearly $32,000 per year, and with the majority of new construction being market rate units, these new housing units are far from serving the current community, but rather the new influx of higher-income Bostonians to the neighborhood.
30 |
EAST BOSTON PARCEL PROXIMITY Parcel Proximity to MBTA Transit TO MBTA STATIONS (BUS & SUBWAY)
Stops (Bus & Subway) East Boston, MA
Fig. 3.1-3: Above
Less Transit Accessibility
Source: Analyzing the city, in the area of Eagle Hill which are highlighted in purple, theseMASS GIS Data Portal parcels have the most connecting to MBTA transit stops. Connection to Author: the downJoseph Taglia town area and surrounding neighborhoods ranks as high importances to gentrifiers, so targeting flexible design strategies here would be the ideal location. This proximity also adds to the increase of land value of these properties, an area for CTL's to help. (Made using ArcMap for "Introduction to ArcGIS" class assignment)
| 31
More Transit Accessibility
Fig. 3.1-4: Right This diagram explains how Community Land Trusts and developers work together in the purchase of property. By eliminating the land cost for a developer, the risk invested into the project is decreased while the community now has a say into the type of development to fit their needs.
With land value of the areas closer to the central business district, such as East Boston, continuing to rise, it has become more difficult than ever for developers and builders to construct new units at an affordable rate. Developers not only need to purchase the building that may exist, but also the outrageous land costs of the parcel. When a developing company does purchase both the land and building though, the company makes a profit by designing high-end units. This contributes to displacement of residents who once lived there, as well as those in surrounding units as their land values increase, driving up their rent prices. If the land cost could be eliminated from the equation, developers would be able to take less risk into a project, and this reduction in cost could trickle down to the tenant of such new units. Through the use of a Community Land Trust (CLT), this can be accomplished. A CLT is as it sounds; a community of individuals who come together as a non-profit organization to raise funds for purchase of neighborhood land. With this purchase, they now own the land as a community rather than a single individual or development company. Now, the community can decide how the land can best be developed to meet their needs rather than meeting the needs of outside forces such as foreign investors or gentrifiers. These investors are seen as profitable individuals by developers. The CLT can lease this land out to developers looking for projects in the area, usually with a generational length of time such as ninety-nine years. The community can now decide how they would like the land to be developed rather than depending on outside influences who don't truly understand their needs.
32 |
East Boston
East Boston
EAST BOSTON AVERAGE AVERAGE AGE OF RESIDENTS AGE OF RESIDENTS
East Boston, MA
Source: American Fact Finder Census Data Author: Joseph Taglia
Fig. 3.1-5: Above This map depicts the age of residents within the block groups of East Boston. Many of these people are young, meaning they are either just starting careers and are possibly looking for their first apartment with little savings. They also are most likely not yet living with a spouse and multiple children. (Made using ArcMap for "Introduction to ArcGIS" class assignment)
| 33
By analyzing the age of residents in the neighborhood, it becomes more clear as to who my design will effect. Through my data and research, I have found that a majority of East Boston residents reside between the ages of twenty-five to thirty-four. At such a young age, with few having college degrees, I can further see how these locals who grew up here are struggling to stay in their neighborhood. These young people cannot afford to move out from their family to rent an apartment with such astronomically high prices dominating the housing market here. My design strategies will focus themselves towards adapting living for these young residents to be able to stay in their local neighborhood. Residents at this age are still starting their careers, most without a professional education, contributing to lower pay. They also are at an age where many have not started a family, or if they have, then they have done so recently. Knowing the age of the majority of residents in the area can help with the formation of unit size and deviation as I begin to allow the units to become flexible to accommodate this generation of East Bostonians, but also to adapt as the neighborhood make-up changes in future years. That way, these homes that now serve a smaller group of younger residents can adapt when the neighborhood needs housing for larger units made for larger families. Flexible design will allow units to adapt, mitigating displacement, as gentrification occurs as well as bending to the needs of the community.
34 |
EAST BOSTON: RESIDENTIAL TYPOLOGY THE TRIPLE DECKER
THE MIRRORED DUPLEX
THE SINGLE FAMILY
THE EMPTY LOT
| 35
[3.2] UNDERSTANDING THE HOUSING TYPOLOGY
F
lexible design serves as a way to adapt our built environment throughout its lifetime as major changes occur within society. In the case of gentrification, residents can utilize the flexibility of their space to adapt to the needs and affordability of the area without being displaced due to rising rent costs or other negative effects that gentrification brings with it. These residents can stay within their community, retaining the culture on the streets and relationships made between neighbors. With East Boston being a majority Hispanic population, street culture remains a vital part of what makes up the community, with many local marts and food vendors selling traditional Spanish cuisine. With the removal and displacement of these residents, their small businesses will follow, leaving more vacant buildings and the ability for further gentrification. The tools that flexible architecture utilizes are vast. From the sliding walls of a traditional Japanese family home to the modularity and flexible tapioca spaces of dense city modular units, these tools are utilized in their specific typology of residential units. Looking at the situation in East Boston, there are a handful of housing typologies that need their own approach to comfortably adapt to both the existing structures as well as the few empty lot areas that the neighborhood has to offer. On the left are the typologies of residential units I have chosen to focus on. These three have been picked because they cover a majority of the style of housing in the area, with the last representing the few empty lots that exist between the buildings of East Boston. For each typology, I will take flexible approaches that could be taken based on their fixed square footages to adequately allow for flexible design as the neighborhood continues to change and evolve. Its important to remember that the goal is not to stop gentrification from occurring, but rather to allow it to happen while mitigating the negative effects of the process such as local families being displaced and neighborhood small businesses being removed.
36 |
[3.3] THE TRIPLE DECKER - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH
T
he triple decker is one of the most common housing typologies within East Boston. Sometimes, the entire city block is made up of rows upon rows of this typology. There are a variety of variations in this design, but a majority of the design elements stay consistent. First, as hinted in the name, the triple decker tends to be three stories tall, housing one unit per floor with two or three bedrooms. They are two bays wide, one bay holding the vertical circulation and the other with occasional bay windows or balconies. The triple decker may stand alone on a plot with the ability for windows along its side walls. If so, the buildings to its sides, most of the time other triple deckers, are usually still close together. Other times, the triple decker can be built against its neighboring buildings sharing a party wall between the two. In these cases only the front and back rooms receive natural daylight. These units have two means of egress; both a back staircase and front staircase each with their separate entries. These staircases usually hug a central wall that runs straight down the building for structural support. Flexible design can help the triple decker typology adapt as residents can no longer afford to stay in their homes. With changes to its interior program layout, the triple decker can become flexible and break down its unit count by subdividing and sharing communal spaces.
| 37
Flexible wall which can be put in place to sub-divide private space such as living room and bedroom areas.
Fig 3.3-1: Above This is a typical interior sized space for a triple decker floor plan. The centerline here represents the structural wall that must be respected as the unit is altered to become more flexible for the neighborhood. Currently this represents 1 unit within this typology with two bedrooms per floor.
Fig 3.3-3: Above The triple decker typology has three floors, with one unit per floor. You can see how these units go front to back and are static in their size. How can these units be able to become flexible to adapt to the affordability of the residents who live here?
Fig 3.3-2: Above With the movement of elements such as the kitchen and bathroom, which have the ability to be shared, towards one side of the center structural wall, the units can utilize the other half, allowing for the single unit to possibly become two units. Residents have a private bedroom as well as a private living space that could theoretically also be a second bedroom based on the spacial set up of the interior walls. Both units share a central kitchen and bathroom. The modular wall which can separate units can also open for a single unit.
Fig 3.3-4: Above Here, with the new arrangement of the interior, units can break into two on each floor. This allows for residents to adapt and mix and match each triple decker from a minimum of 3 units to a maximum of 6 units. This axon shows the most that a triple decker can break up into, but realistically some would be split while some would not.
38 |
[3.4] THE MIRRORED DUPLEX - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH
T
he mirrored duplex is a combination of two double story units. They mirror on a central axis down the center of the home. These homes are sometimes squished in between triple deckers and are less common than the triple decker. They also tend to have a bit more land surrounding their homes as they sit on larger plots. It is uncommon for this typology to share a party wall with another building. Due to the setup of a mirrored duplex, flexible design can begin to create a relationship between the two units next to one another.
The duplex offers alot of options in creating smaller units for smaller families rather than its original two unit size. Creating more dense units allows for more units within a fixed square footage, lowering the cost per person to live there. Keeping the main split down the center of the typology, the interior can change its unit layout to up to 4 separate units with a redesign of its floorplan. The smaller the units become, the more utilities that people must share. It becomes a trade off of sharing facilities like bathrooms and kitchens between units to allow the units to become smaller in their private spaces such as the living room and bedroom. Interestingly enough, the floor plan is able to stay static in its design, but the dedication of space between each unit is shifted in order to create different combinations of unit types in what was once a fixed two unit home. This is accomplished by moving the program space around inside the building in order to become flexible to what is needed by the residents for housing unit sizes.
| 39
Fig 3.5-1: Above Floor plan of a possible break up of the space in order to fit 4 units on one side within this typology.
Fig 3.5-2: Below Floor plan of a possible break up of the space in order to fit 1 unit on one side within this typology.
Fig 3.5-3: Above Floor plan of a possible break up of the space in order to fit 2 units on one side within this typology.
Fig 3.5-4: Below Floor plan of a possible break up of the space in order to fit 3 units on one side within this typology.
40 |
[3.5] THE SINGLE FAMILY - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH
T
he single family home, one of the more uncommon typologies in East Boston neighborhood, but still frequent enough to address, is usually one to two stories. Just as the mirror duplex, it sits on its own plot of land without sharing walls with its adjacent buildings. By manipulating the floor plate inside, the spacial arrangement can allow the single family home to break up into 4 separate units, allowing the building to densify the neighborhood even further. One strategy that this typology can utilize is adding multiple entries to the units from the main stair corridor. This allows the unit to break up and have its own separate entry to each unit when the owner rents out separate units to different tenants. This way, tenants do not need to walk though a shared space in order to enter their unit. They can access their own private space straight from the hall. When the unit is owned or rented by one person entirely, only one door can be used to enter the unit. The multiple entry strategy allows for the units to break up easily as needed.
| 41
Fig 3.5-1: Above Diagram showing how two entry doors allows flexibility to break off one unit from the other if needed by families.
Fig 3.5-2: Above Floor plan explaining the breakdown of the two unit typology for the residence.
Fig 3.5-3: Above
Fig 3.5-4: Above Exploded anxonometric drawing of the two unit typology for this residents type.
Fig 3.5-5: Above Exploded anxonometric drawing of the maximum four unit typology for this residents type.
Floor plan explaining the breakdown of the maximum four unit typology for the residence.
42 |
[3.6] THE EMPTY LOT - FLEXIBLE DESIGN APPROACH
T
he empty lot with no current structure is by far the most flexible. While other strategies need to bend to the will of the typology they are applied to, the open lot is flexible and can incorporate many of these strategies through the design process. Many of these lots are small and are situated in areas between existing housing within the neighborhood. This provides for new construction that can integrate its flexibility as needed as it does not need to adapt itself to the bound footprint of an existing structure.
Fig 3.6-1: Above The typical set up for an empty lot looks as above in East Boston. The close proximity of the residential buildings boxes in the lot. Moving forward, it will be interesting to see the feasibility of demolishing lots adjacent for a larger flexible housing complex is possible.
| 43
EAST BOSTON EMPTY LOT PROXIMITY TO MBTA STATIONS (BUS & SUBWAY)
cel Proximity to MBTA Transit ops (Bus & Subway) st Boston, MA
Less Transit Accessibility
More Transit Accessibility
Fig 3.2-1: Above The map above speaks to the proximity of empty parcel to transit stops. Through my Source: MASS GISfor Data Portal research, proximity to the downtown district tends to be a hot seller gentrifiers Author: Joseph Taglia coming into the neighborhood. The lots in the darkest shade of purple represent locations that have the greatest connectivity to downtown Boston. These are locations that I world suggest CLTs in East Boston snatch up before developers redevelop them as well as the plots surrounding them, displacing more residents. (Made using ArcMap for "Introduction to ArcGIS" class assignment)
44 |
Fig 3.2-2: Above This image illustrates a typical East Boston neighborhood block typology. The neighborhood is a series of the earlier three residential types explored in previous sections of this chapter. Looking at the density of the neighborhood, the buildings remain static in their unit count, unable to adjust their density to the market and residents affordability.
| 45
Fig 3.2-3: Below This image illustrates the new block typology utilizing existing structures with interior flexible floor plates. Here, the maximum number of units is shown, but the range is giving below, showing how flexible design strategies allows a neighborhood to breath in its density as different changes occur to the neighborhood.
[3.3] MOVING FORWARD WITH FLEXIBLE ARCHITECTURE
T
hrough the use of flexible space management of our existing built structures, neighborhoods can react to gentrification. When an area becomes gentrified, not every existing structure is demolished in order for luxury housing to take its place. For the buildings that stay and continue their lifespan, space management within their fixed square footage can help them adapt their unit size for the size of residents families in a neighborhood. Today many residents in the neighborhood are younger, as explained in the data earlier. Rather than being displaced for being unable to afford their rent for a larger rentable area, they now have the option to rent smaller areas of the building at a more affordable rate, keeping them within their community. As their families grow, they can adapt their unit, or move to a larger vacant unit that has opened up if their neighbor is unable to move. In 50 years, East Boston's age and family makeup may and probably will change, and these flexible unit typologies will be able to adapt for their larger families and bigger budget, with the ability to become small again. Moving forward, as I look at the possibility of new construction within the neighborhood, utilizing the lots that are vacant is something consider. It may be more feasible as a CLT organization to purchase parcels next to one another, as to create larger parcels for development. Through the demolition of the surrounding homes, the land can be re-purposed for flexible residential buildings that can act in a more efficient way due to the lack of fixed square footage within an existing building. Through the combination of these plots, architects can create a better functioning residential structure that can adapt in density and unit size to allow residents to stay within their neighborhood as areas such as Jeffery's Point continue to see further luxury condos being constructed. Adapting current structures is a possibility, but with that comes the issues of the unknown due to their age. Complications that may arise during the construction process of renovation may outweigh the cost of creating a flexible system for residents of all affordability levels. Therefore, it was important to look at current parcels that are empty for new construction. Through urban analysis of GIS data, the parcels with the closest MBTA connections were ranked on a map, showcasing the most valuable parcels in dark purple. Adapting one of these with a flexible system could help the neighborhood have one less non-connected luxury high rise built nearby.
46 |
2019
2029
Fig 4.1-1: Above Working in model, these two iterations work with designing a static exterior that eludes to a dynamic interior. Inside these boxes, spaces that overlap can become shared spaces, giving to one unit or another depending on the need of the individual.
2039
| 47
Fig 4.1-2: Left Digitally, these boxes are arranged to show a dynamic exterior with a static interior. Using time as a variable, this series of models depicts how the building mass can shift to create flexibility in housing options, changing and reacting to the resident's needs.
[4] DESIGN OUTCOMES [4.1] DEVELOPING A MODULAR SYSTEM Fig 4.1-3: Right Setting up a neighborhood of exterior flexibility to show the extent to which this system can make an impact within a community. White blocks represent static spaces that do not move, while orange and yellow blocks represent movable habitable spaces which can attach to different base units.
B
y developing a flexible system for residents using models and massing, these methods helped articulate the system that would be best to study further. Through these models, the system of a dynamic exterior with static interior showed potential to work best with mitigation of displacement and flexibility in design.
48 |
| 49
[4.2] DESIGN ITERATION 1.0
O
ne of the first design iterations working with flexible methods involved inhabiting the cubes from the design charrette with real spaces. Establishing a base unit which stayed static was critical as it would guide the criteria for the modules to attach and allow the units to change in size. Residents would then be able to add to their homes based on their needs. These sketches investigate module location and movement as well as building formation. With a sliding rail system as the method of moving modules, these initial ideas explored how the building would work and look with cubes sliding along the back of the static unit. This exploration was through the development of a townhouse style building mass and the relationship of circulation space to living space.
50 |
ADDITIONAL UNIT GROWTH SPACE
Fig 4.2-1: Above Section cut through the base unit, showing its compact FLEXIBLE SPACES FOR UNIT GROWTH FLEXIBLE FLEXIBLE SPACES FOR FOR UNITUNIT GROWTH size as well asSPACES lofted bedroom withGROWTH stair access. Mod1/4” = 1’-0” SECOND FLOOR ADDITIONS GROUND GROUND FLOOR FLOOR ADDITIONS ADDITIONS ules could attach to the back of the unit via a door.
SECTION THROUGH STATIC UNIT
The Home The Office Home- Office Working- Working Professional Professional 1/4" = 1'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0"
The CHILDS ROOM - SMALL FAMILIES The Entertainment The Entertainment ROOM - The ROOMHost - The Host 1/4" = 1'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0" 1/4" = 1'-0"
Fig 4.2-2: Above Module types that would be added to the base unit. Each type is designed with a different use in mind for residents.
| 51
Fig 4.2-3: Above Axonometric drawing depicting the process FLEXIBLE SPACES FOR UNIT GRO of adding modules to the base unit cube.
AXON OF STA
SECOND FLOOR NTS ADDITIONS
THE GROWING FAMILY - LARGE FAMILIES 1/4" = 1'-0"
The CHILDS ROOM - SMALL FAMILIES 1/4" = 1'-0"
STATIC UNIT - 1 BEDROOM Approx. 560UNIT SF STATIC - 1 BEDROOM 1/4” = 1’-0” Approx. 560 SF 1/4” = 1’-0”
standardized door for additional standardized expansion door for additional expansion
SECOND floor SECOND floor STANDardIZED Back door for additional expansion STANDardIZED Back door for additional expansion
first floor first floor
Fig 4.2-4: Above Axonometric view of Design Iteration I showing the static versus dynamic modules along the back of the building.
Fig 4.2-5: Above Floor plans of the base unit with call-outs for the areas where modules would attach.
In order to understand the scale of these units while making quick iterations and adjustments, applying my sketches and ideas to real-world measurements helped to understand size and proportions. This form responded to the surrounding triple decker neighborhood on Paris Street, located in an empty parking lot. This iteration developed a static one bedroom loft unit where dynamic modules could attach to each unit depending on the need of the resident.
Fig 4.2-6: Below Axonometric view looking inside the base module space.
Key Take-Aways: ADDITIONAL UNIT
GROWTH SPACE [1] Static unit should start as small as possible for maximum growth. [2] Lofting unit allows for two modules to attach rather than one. [3] The more units, the more families who can stay in the community. [4] Connection doors need to be more standardized for greater flexibility. SECTION STATIC UNIT [5] Break out from the 20'x20' cube THROUGH while still retaining a systematic size. 1/4” = 1’-0”
AXON OF STATIC UNIT NTS
52 |
| 53
[4.3] DESIGN ITERATION 2.0
T
hrough the lessons learned from the first design test, allowing for greater flexibility and density was needed to push flexible architecture ideas to their full potential. Even though iteration one had been informative helping define design criteria, iteration two pushed these methods to their limits. New criteria needed to be established for a larger building to achieve a similar goal. These sketches investigated what may happen to the first iteration's criteria when building scale increased. Some of the original ideas for systems and form needed to adapt as the building grew. This created more challenges but opened the door for more possibilities on how the flexible system could work. With the use of interlocking units, each unit could have both static and dynamic walls of the building.
54 |
AXONOMETIC VIEW
1/16” = 1’-0”
STATIC AND AND DYNAMIC DYNAMIC STATIC
UNITS UNITS AND AND CIRCULATION CIRCULATION
NORTH ELEVATION
1/16” = = 1’-0” 1’-0” 1/16”
1/16” 1/16” = = 1’-0” 1’-0”
Fig 4.3-1: Above Massing experimenting with a larger scale building which has modules hanging off the sides of each facade. GROUND FLOOR PERSPECTIVE
Fig 4.3-2: Above Perspective depicting the modules hanging off the static units in the center of the building.
NORTH ELEVATION
1/16” = 1’-0”
GROUND FLOOR PERSPECTIVE
| 55
AXONOMETIC VIEW
Fig 4.3-3: Above Diagramming circulation/base unit as well as modules/base unit.
AXONOMETIC VIEW
Fig 4.3-4: Below Elevation depicting units with modules attached
2ND FLOOR PLAN
FIRST FLOOR PLAN
1/16” = 1’-0”
1/16” = 1’-0”
Fig 4.3-5: Above Axonometric view of building mass with module attachment across the facade.
With a larger building, the site along Paris Street had become obsolete. Not only was the parcel itself too small for a building of this scale to fit, but the scale in regards to the surrounding structures was out of place. With a new site location in East Boston to be determined, this design method tested main ideas from the previous iteration at a larger form. The base units themselves interlock, creating units with two sides of window space. This allowed some windows to be static and permanent for spaces such as living rooms and bedrooms.
Key Take-Aways: [1] Each unit needs a window which is static and cannot be replaced for living/bedroom space. [2] Circulation cores and units alternate, but can circulation choices help form density within the building? [3] How do these modules move? Can they move on a rail system to which they clip into? [4] Modules should vary in their size and seem too large compared to the base unit square footage. [5] Allowing for multi side flexibility gives greater range of possibilities
Fig 4.3-6: Above Building floor plan showing the numerous stair cores and unit interlocking method for module attachment on each facade.
56 |
| 57
[4.4] DESIGN ITERATION 3.0
W
ith a larger building form developing, the project's attention turned towards the movable modules themselves. Iteration two was received well regarding its shift in building scale, although the major comments received had revolved around the module size, allowing them to become more flexible in regard to what options they could give residents. By breaking out of the standard module size that served all activities, and letting the modules change in scale, these design decisions helped address different types of uses, such as a small office space versus a large bedroom for a couple to share.
18' - 0" 8" 20'
14' - 8" 16' - 0"
11' - 0"
9' - 8"
14' - 8"
14' - 8"
10' - 6"
9' - 8"
20' - 0"
9' - 2"
18' - 8"
11' - 0"
9' - 2"
THE HOST’S DINING ROOM
16' - 0"
14' - 8"
9' - 2"
14' - 8"
THE PLAYROOM/DEN
THE LIVING/DINING COMBO
Level 2 1 1/4" = 1'-0"
Project Name
EXAMPLE USE #2
Author
Enter address here
1
Level 2 Level 2 1 1/4" = 1'-0"1/4" = 1'-0"
1
Level 2 1/4" = 1'-0"
1
Level 2 1/4" = 1'-0"
Unnamed Project Project Name Name Project Name
1
Level 2 1/4" = 1'-0"
1
Level 2 1/4" = 1'-0"
1
Level 2 1/4" = 1'-0"
Project Name Project Name
THE COUPLES BEDROOM (S)
AuthorAuthor
Author
Enter address Enter here address here
Enter address here
Author
Enter address here
A101
Unnamed Unnamed
EXAMPLE USE #3
1
Level 2 1/4" = 1'-0"
1
Level 2 1/4" = 1'-0"
Author
Enter address here
Unnamed
Project Name
Unnamed
A101 A101
A101
Unnamed Author
A101
Enter address here
A101
Unnamed
Level 2 1 1/4" = 1'-0"
Project Name Creating a matrix helping determine module size and use was the first step in discovering the criteria for how the modules themselves Author A101 would work. With varying modules sizes, residents can add two separate small modules or one large module unit to their space. Enter address here
Project Name Author
Enter address here
Unnamed
16' - 0"
14' - 8"
18' - 8"
10' - 6"
16' - 0"
9' - 8"
9' - 2"
10' - 6"
14' - 8"
11' - 0"
10' - 6"
9' - 2" 9' - 2"
9' - 4"
9' - 2"
14' - 8" 8' - 8" 16' - 0" 9' - 4"
10' - 6"
16' - 0"
8' - 8"
10' - 6"
10' - 6"
11' - 10" 11' - 10"
10' - 6" 10' - 6"
THE COUPLE’S BEDROOM (L)
10' - 6"
11' - 0"
10' - 6"
20' - 0"
8' - 8"
18' - 8" 16' - 0"
16' - 0"
9' - 4"
8' - 8"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
9' - 8"
9' - 2"
10' - 6"
8' - 8"
9' - 2"
10' - 0"
10' - 6"
9' - 8"
11' - 0"
14' - 8"
10' - 0"
18' - 8"
11' - 0"
14' - 8" 16' - 0"
9' - 2"
8' - 8"
10' - 6" 9' - 2"
10' - 0"
10' - 6"
11' - 0"
9' - 8"
9' - 8"
9' - 8"
11' - 0"
16' - 0"
14' - 8"
8' - 8"
20' - 0"
16' - 0"
9' - 2"
THE PERSONAL HOME OFFICE
8' - 8" 10' - 0"
18' - 8"
18' - 8"
8' - 8"
11' - 10"
8' - 8" 9' - 8"
11' - 0"
18' -- 0" 8" 20'
10' - 0"
20' - 0"
18' - 8"
10' - 6"
11' - 10"
18' - 8"
THE SINGLE BEDROOM
20' - 0"
8' - 8"
18' - 0" 8" 20'
9' - 4"
10' - 6"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
9' - 4"
20' - 0"
10' - 6"
11' - 10"
10' - 0"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
20' - 0"
9' - 8"
EXAMPLE USE #1
20' - 0"
9' - 4"
180 SF MODULE 18’-8” x 9’-8”
14' - 8"
8' - 8"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
8' - 8"
THE ARTIST’S RETREAT
9' - 8" 8' - 8"
135 SF MODULE 14’-8” x 9’-2”
18' - 8"
9' - 8"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
11' - 0"
10' - 6"
8' - 8"
9' - 4"
8' - 8" 9' - 4"
10' - 6" 11' - 0"
8' - 8"
11' - 10"
8' - 8" 9' - 4"
10' - 6"
11' - 10"
8' - 8" 10' - 0"
10' - 6"
9' - 4"
11' - 10"
9' - 4"
11' - 10"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
10' - 6"
10' - 0"
11' - 10" 8' - 8"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
8' - 8" 10' - 0"
11' - 10" 8' - 8"
10' - 0"
8' - 8"
10' - 0" 8' - 8"
8' - 8"
8' - 8"
8' - 8"
10' - 0"
BASE MODULE
10' - 0"
10' - 0"
8' - 8"
16' - 0"
20' - 0"
91 SF MODULE 10’-6” x 8’-8”
10' - 6"
75 SF MODULE 8’-8” x 8’-8” 10' - 0"
1/8” = 1’-0”
9' - 4"
11' - 0"
10' - 0"
11' - 10"
MATRIX OF POSSIBLE MODULES FOR UNIT GROWTH
Unnamed
A101
A101
58 |
Fig 4.4-1: Left Preliminary concept section with modules attached to the building shows the varying unit sizes available to residents. Outdoor deck space is possible by utilizing the roof of the module below.
Fig 4.4-2: Below Methodology of how the door/window replacement process would work. As modules attach, the glass of the window could be replaced with a door for access to module spaces.
REPLACEABLE WINDOW/DOOR SYSTEM 1
2
Module attaches to unit exterior wall
Window pane is removed from opening
ONE BEDROOM UNIT (2 PER FLOOR)
THREE MODULES FOR BASE ONE BDRM
| 59
3
Window is stored away, opening ready for door if needed
STUDIO UNIT (6 PER FLOOR)
TWO MODULES FOR BASE STUDIO
4
Door is attached in place of window pane
MODULES ATTACH TO SIDE OF UNIT
5
Module is connected and is accessible
Fig 4.4-3: Below Building floor plan highlighting module placement and base module boundary. Each room has window access on both sides of the building as one remains static while the other is dynamic for module attachment.
Facade Example A
Facade Example B
Fig 4.4-4: Above Axonometric view of building mass with module attachment across the facade.
Fig 4.4-5: Above As time goes on, the facade of the building will adapt to the needs of the residents, creating an ever changing view of each side of the building.
With a larger building, both the modules and base units changed to meet new criteria established. Refining the modules and tackling some of the technical aspects were the primary goals of this iteration. With the form shown here, the building had four vertical cores with one elevator in each core. This highly inefficient circulation method needed to be addressed in the following design iteration in order to lessen overall elevator and stair count for the number of people they would serve.
Key Take-Aways: [1] Modules window placement is random and should have a similar language in their style [2] Currently, the modules attach via a rail system that has not been explained yet. Can this be realized, or will they move in a different way? [3] Four vertical circulation cores are inefficient and need consolidating [4] A double loaded corridor could best serve the idea of having a densely packed building [5] Modules should be able to attach anywhere with a universal connection.
60 |
Fig 4.5-1: Left & Above Through shifting and extruding the hall space, a simple double loaded corridor can be adapted to have social spaces integrated within its form.
| 61
[4.5] DESIGN ITERATION 4.0
A
s a building designed with the idea in mind to foster community and strengthen neighborhoods, at this point of development, there was very little communal space within the design. With a new site at an open parcel in East Boston next to LoPresti park, it was wonderful to have a site next to an already existing and active community space. However, further extending the community spaces from the outside into the building and even throughout its floors remained to be realized.
These sketches investigate ways to create social spaces within the building. The concept was to create social spaces that could start to activate the hallway, which is normally dead space and solely for circulation. Through the shifting of the long double loaded corridor, the hall not only seems shorter but also creates pockets of spaces that residents will walk through on a typical trip to and from their personal units.
62 |
Fig 4.5-2: Left With a shifting hall, the number of unit types grew but each unit remained small with one or two modules spots for future module growth
Fig 4.5-3: Below The facade of the building reads as one with communal spaces reading as modules attached to the building despite their fixed appearance.
| 63
Fig 4.5-4: Left Modules move using the free space between units that make up the static window portion of the facade. These modules slide on a rail system to allow free movement.
Fig 4.5-5: Right The locations of these communal spaces per floor happens when the hallway shifts. Its shift is the space where people can meet and congregate as needed.
With a larger building, the units grew in size as did the modules. Refining the modules themselves and beginning to tackle their technical aspects stood as the primary goal of this iteration. With the current organization, the building has four vertical cores with one elevator in each core. This highly inefficient circulation method should be addressed in the following design iteration in order to lessen overall elevator and stair count.
Key Take-Aways: [1] Rail system needs to be developed or scrapped and replaced [2] Current modules can only move on one side of the building [3] Where do modules dock when they are not being leased? [4] Do the communal spaces want to read as important as modules?
64 |
Fig 4.6-1: Above A perspective view looking along the facade and down to Boston Harbor along the park.
| 65
[4.6] DESIGN ITERATION 5.0
T
his design iteration focused on designing a method to allow the large modules hanging off the facade to move around as needed. Prior to this iteration, the modules were thought to autonomously move on a theoretical rail system to meet requests placed by those living there. This system, however, became more complex and improbable as the technical details of the modules became more clear. Implementing a crane system had been a background concept but the thought of having a construction crane on site was not a pleasant idea aesthetically speaking.
Taking into account the history of East Boston along the harbor as a port and shipping area, the idea of an integrated gantry crane started to evolve. The crane itself is built as an extension of the building structure, allowing it to seamlessly fit into the building more aesthetically than a construction site crane being assembled when needed.
66 |
Fig 4.6-2: Above With the hallway shifting, there are numerous unit types which are littered throughout the building
Fig 4.6-3: Right A perspective view of the proposed module marketplace to allow visitors to interact with the modules on the ground level.
Fig 4.6-4: Left The ground floor plan of the building, depicting retail, parking, and lobby space as well as the modules situated along the waterfront for people to interact with. RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL LOBBY RETAIL
| 67
RETAIL
RETAIL
Fig 4.6-5: Above With an implemented crane system, modules move through being picked up and placed on the building. The diagram shows how a family can adapt the home as needed with this system.
With a building mass and system coming together, the effects at which the architecture interacts with residents began to take form. Using a crane system, modules can be placed on the building according to the needs of those who live there. The chart above shows how the unit can be adapted as the family cannot find a larger home in the area within their price range.
Key Take-Aways: [1] Assign program to the module marketplace and design the space [2] Community spaces on facade read too similarly to modules [3] Create a narrative to explain how these modules affect a family living there [4] By exploring details of construction, modules can start to read as separate than the building which is static.
68 |
| 69
[5] FINAL DESIGN ITERATION [5.1] MODULARITY AS FLEXIBILITY
T
he final design was a culmination of developed ideas which had evolved over the previous year of development. The building became a system in itself, reacting to the community over time with its dynamic facades and ever-changing units. The view above is of the lobby space for residents to use, with a hinting view of how social and circulation spaces begin to mix together starting at the ground floor. w
70 |
| 71
Fig 5.1-1: Left The site plan orients the position of the building in relation to LoPresti Park in East Boston. As the park is existing, the building faces it with a strong presence. Its new boardwalk entry way from the street brings visitors and residents to the water edge where they can overlook the city across the harbor.
Fig 5.1-2: Above This rendering shows the module marketplace and its possible programming as residents tour through the space. Being along the water and in proximity to the beautiful harbor walk that East Boston has improved and implemented over the years, the market place can start to have programming that relates to exercise and food, giving space for local businesses such as food trucks or local artists to sell their products.
72 |
2020
2028
2035
2042
2050
+ Couple in serious relationship + Low incomes at the start of their careers + Small studio unit sized for family of two
Roof Plan
+ Allen & Kristen are now married + Kristen has given birth to their new son, David. + Family is unable to find any apartment they can afford in the area. + Lease and add a small module room as David’s bedroom.
Seventh Floor
+ Higher incomes allows for a module for bedroom. + Former bedroom converted to living room. + David has grown and his module has been swapped. + The neighbors down the hall were in need of a child’s bedroom space.
Sixth Floor
+ David moved out to attend college and the couple decided not to renew their lease on his bedroom. + Allen has health complications that has made it difficult to commute so the two lease an office module for Allen in place of David’s bedroom.
Fifth Floor
+ Allen & Kristen have retired and downsized as they are spending retirement traveling and do not need a large apartment. + The two are part of major community organizations due to being able to lives in the same community without being forced to continually move.
Fig 5.1-3: Above This narrative covers the time-line over thirty years, in eight year increments, of how a family can use this method of flexible architecture to their advantage, keeping them from having to move out to find a better home that suits their needs.
Fourth Floor
Fig 5.1-4: Right Building floor plans showing the outline of how units are arranged per floor.
Third Floor
UNIT A
UNIT D
UNIT B
UNIT E
UNIT C
UNIT F
Second Floor
Ground Floor | 73
Fig 5.1-5: Right Modules and their example layouts that residents can begin to customize their homes with over their time living in the building.
Fig 5.1-6: Right Different unit types showing area where modules would attach highlighted in orange. The top four units are studio apartments while the bottom two are one bedroom units.
74 |
| 75
LARGE COMMON SPACES + Spacious for active programing + Double height for multi-floor use + Open to hallway for social interaction
SMALL COMMON SPACES + Smaller for more quiet programming + Single height for more personal feel + Enclosed from hallway for privacy
Fig 5.1-8: Left Circulation happens not only in the egress stair but through the social spaces set up. Residents can move up or down through the building solely through the social spaces. The 7th floor is not connect through this linkage due to its program being for short term module lease. Residents having guests can lease a module which is being unused by others at the time for additional purposes. This floor has shared amenity spaces.
Fig 5.1-9: Above This diagram illustrates the two different type of social spaces through the building and their different types of uses associated with the design choices made.
Fig 5.1-7: Left These two perspectives show both upstairs and downstairs activity happening in the larger common spaces along the hallway. With open space to the rest of the hall, movement and noise can carry through the building provoking interest to other residents as to what is happening in these spaces.
76 |
Fig 5.1-10: Left A detail section of the building acted as an investigation of the construction methods for the modules versus the static base units. The modules are anchored through the wall that touches the main building wall, and uses cross bracing within the walls to promote stabilization of the modules as they move with the help of the crane.
| 77
Fig 5.1-11: Above Elevation showing the modules and community spaces pushing out of the building facade with the crane system moving a module across the facade.
Fig 5.1-12: Below Section cut through the building showing how modules expand the size of the base unit. The community space spanning two floors can also be seen, linking two floors together with activity.
78 |
[5.2] A REFLECTION ON THE THESIS PROCESS Looking back at my thesis process over the past eight months, my initial interest in the housing crisis and affordability issues that our cities are facing regarding the topic of gentrification had translated into architecture that is flexible in its use and design. This shift happened in response to my research into what gentrification really means for neighborhoods and their residents. Gentrification, as I learned, is not a fully negative process to communities. Important upgrades to space quality, safety, and education are just a few of the positive impacts that gentrification to a neighborhood brings. The side effects of this process, as my research eluded to, can be devastating to residents of the area as their land value rises and their rents increase. The biggest factor to why residents cannot adapt to this change is time. These increases can happen rapidly and sometimes unexpectedly, not allowing for people to keep up in their affordability. For example, if a person gets an annual raise at their job, the rent increase is happening twice as fast, making it difficult for residents to keep up with the rapidly growing real-estate prices. It is then that these people find their only solution to be to move, leaving behind their community in search for a home that better meets their needs. It was through this research that I also made the connection that people may not only move and leave neighborhoods for affordability issues, but also as their family grows and their lifestyle choices change. Gentrification research had opened my eyes to the situations that people are dealing with today, but also made me think deeper about other factors that contribute to the feeling of a broken community. In response to this realization, I began to wonder if changing the way in which we rent and distribute space to tenants could help our structures adapt to these issues. If our existing structures could shift their rentable square footage to accommodate the situation of those who live there, would it be possible to abolish the static format of the one-bedroom, two-bedroom, or three-bedroom unit? If the market called for more one-bedrooms at one point in history, but later called for more three-bedroom sized spaces, can our homes grow and shrink to meet those demands? These questions had me start to analyze the existing structure typology of a Boston neighborhood struggling with displacement of residents and gentrification, East Boston. My study showed that a typical East Boston neighborhood of 30 units could fluctuate to over double its density with the rearranging of the interior layout of the units inside. If this could be done at a small scale of individual buildings, could it also be adapted to larger apartment buildings which are built in downtown spaces of urban areas? Using flexibility in design was starting to prove as a possible solution to allow people to adapt their homes in order to release pressures by outside factors that architects cannot necessarily control. I had stopped trying to attack the problem at its roots but accept these problems as part of society and formulate how design can work with them rather than against them. Throughout the second half of this process, my interest and belief that flexible spaces can ease pressures put on residents began to grow as I started to formulate a system that allowed people to give and take away their rented space as needed. I had done some research on ways that interior spaces, with the help of moving walls, can help, but in my opinion, this was not doing enough to solve or at least mitigate the break| 79
down of communities. A building needed to adapt fully and not only shift its fixed and static total square footage from one unit to the next. Instead, it needed to add and subtract from that square footage total. I started to test this idea with the addition and subtraction of cube-like modules to a unit. This way the buildings square footage would always be different as these modules attached and detached from the unit entirely, different than just moving a wall to give your neighbor the permanent square footage that you didn’t need. As my ideas developed with modules moving around the facade of the building, the technical details lacked in their understanding. To have non-permanent structures hanging up to ten feet off the side of a building is no easy feat and would require a complex understanding of structural and connection systems. My focus throughout the design tackled multiple spatial quality issues to enhance community and unfortunately, this led to a less developed grasp on the technical aspect of these modules. I tend not to be as interested in the small details in projects despite their importance and feel that this may have affected my ability to dig deeper into this part of the project. I had spoken over the semester about a more futuristic idea of an autonomous rail system on the facade which would robotically slide the spaces around on a grid track. As my design became clearer, I realized that this system would not only be hard to sell to critics as a method of movement, but also I had little experience with what moving parts would be needed to make this idea more realistic. This realization had happened later than I would have liked during the semester and some of my design ideas that were related to the rail system are still evident in the final design even though the movement method had changed. It would have been wonderful to dive deeper into the technical aspect sooner in order to adapt the building in its design away from the idea of the rail system. Modules still have ample space between them on the facade for where they would have slid on such rails avoiding other modules already docked. With a crane system, this design intent would not be needed and nearly not as strict in its organization across the facade. Being next to LoPresti Park was also helpful in embodying the idea of community. As an active social outdoor space, I was already given a surrounding context that embraced the idea of coming together to socialize. I feel that I was relatively successful in my social space idea within the building. If I was able to continue this process further, I would have loved to explore ways that these spaces could also adapt to the needs of the community rather than being fixed in place as part of the static core of the structure. This way not only does the building respond to the needs of the individual family, but also the entire floors needs for space or even the entire buildings needs for space to congregate. This process of thesis has been an amazing run and my project has taught me so much about developing and making a stance on an issue using architecture. In some way, I feel successful in my outcome but understand that it is only the start of a possible solution to the ways our neighborhoods and their residents are affected by outside forces beyond design. Knowing that design can start to mingle with and react to these forces is promising that there is a solution out there to be discovered and that architecture can play a role in saving out communities. 80 |
| 81
82 |
| 83
LITERATURE SOURCES Beaurgard, Robert. “The Chaos and Complexity of Gentrification.” Gentrification of the City, edited by Neil Smith and Peter Williams, 35-55. London: Allen & Unwin, 1986. Cellucci, Cristiana and Michele Di Sivo. "The Flexible Housing: Criteria and Strategies for Implementation of the Flexibility." Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture 9. (2015): 845-852. Chakrabarti, Meghna and Jamie Bologna. “How Boston’s Big Attempt at Rental Law Reform Failed.” Radio Boston. WBUR 90.9. Boston: WBUR, May 16, 2018. http://www.davidpublisher.com/Public/uploads/Contrib ute/55b05a1883b83.pdf Hyra, Derek. The New Urban Renewal. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2008. Governing. “Boston Gentrification Maps and Data”, Governing, The States and Localities, accessed October 10, 2018, http://www.governing.com/govdata/boston-gentrification-maps-demographic-data.html. Jennings, James. “Gentrification as Anti-Local Economic Development: The Case of Boston, Massachusetts.” Trotter Review, Issue 1: A place in the Neighborhood: Pushed Out, Pushing Back, No. 23 (2016). Kanegawa, Alex. “Gentrification 101: Out of Sight, Out of Mind.” Annenberg Media Center, October 6, 2014. http://www.neontommy.com/news/2014/10/gentrification-101-out-sight-out-mind.html. Lewis, Geoff and John Avault and Jim Vrabel. “History of Boston’s Economy: Growth and Transition 1970-1998," Boston Redevelopment Authority. November, 1999. Palen, John and Bruce London, “Through the Glass Darkly: Gentrification, Revitalization and the Neighborhood.” Gentrification, Displacement, and Neighborhood Revitalization, edited by J. John Palen & Bruce London. New York: State University of New York, 1984. Rothstein, Richard. “The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America”. Filmed March 2018. YouTube video, 1:33:24. Posted March 2018. https://www.youtube.com/watch?r load=9&v=zKsDq6DOOdY . Rubin, James E. Insuring the City: The Prudential Center and the Reshaping of Boston. Berkeley: University of California Transportation Center, 2009. Smith, Neil and Peter Williams. “Alternative to Orthodoxy: Invitation to a Debate.” Gentrification of the City, edited by Neil Smith and Peter Williams, 1-14. London: Allen & Unwin, 1986. Smith, Neil and Michale Lefaiver. “Revitalization in a Working Class Neighborhood,” Gentrification, Displacement, and Neighborhood Revitalization, edited by J. John Palen and Bruce London. 128-40. New York: State University of New York, 1984. U.S. Congress, House. An Act The Jim Brooks Stabilization Act of 2018. H.4142. 190th General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. https://malegislature.gov/Bills/190/H4142
84 |