Living the ground floor - Paolo Romanò, Giulia Rossari by Paolo Romanò

LIVING THE GROUND FLOOR

Paolo RomanÃ² Giulia Rossari

A STRATEGY OF REUSE IN THE MILANESE CONTEXT

Living the ground floor

A strategy of reuse in the Milanese context

Politecnico di Milano scuola di Architettura Urbanistica Ingegneria delle Costruzioni corso di Laurea Magistrale in Architettura relatore prof. Federico Zanfi correlatore prof.ssa Laura Daglio studente Paolo RomanĂ˛ 834370 studente Giulia Rossari 835048 A.A. 2015/2016

Index

Introduction. Context and purpose of the work

A rich and vast heritage

Changing forms of living

Obsolete technologies

The recycle option

Energy and seismic enhancement policies

Making space

Ground floor void spaces in the post-war Milanese context

Ground floor spaces: similarities and differences

The ground floor and its building: main features

Series of spaces in the urban context

Dossier /1 observed cases in Milano 2.

Contemporary living conditions. The demand of new spaces

A changing demographic context

The Milanese case: a growing demand

Property and rent

New spaces for new populations

Living the ground floor. A renovation strategy for the ground floor spaces

general strategy: giving value to the void ground floor space

management strategy: starting a virtuous process of construction, rent and management

design strategy: working on servant spaces to maximize the served ones

Application: testing the design strategy on the Lodovico il Moro neighborhood context 4. conclusions

Abstract The starting point of the research is the observation of a peculiar type of space, which is typical inside modern residential constructions from the post-war period in the Milanese context: the empty ground floor on pilotis. The function of this space appears today often uncertain or simply reduced to simple spaces of service for the housing block, in the form of entranceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cores to the building, while its form -the presence of the structural grid of columns, the amount of available free space- suggests a feasible reconsideration of its shape, with the possibility of hosting new possible uses. Therefore, the research suggests a general design strategy adaptable to the various observed contexts. From the management point of view, it is firstly identified a developer with both the ability of construction â&#x20AC;&#x201C; to transform the space- and administration -to manage the new functions through a policy of subsidized rent. This framework should assure a fair offer to the individuals in search for affordable living space, while guaranteeing an economical return to its owners. Moreover, the enhancing of the ground floor space could work on the whole building from the energetic and seismic point of view, considering an improvement of its technical performances that is encouraged by the current possible tax allowances and SLP earnings. On the formal and technical side, a design of standard but flexible elements is examined, with a grade of flexibility that would make them adaptable to the variable contexts of work and functions. Finally, the strategy is applied on the context, with a project located inside the neighborhood Restocco/Lodovico il Moro of Milano. Here, the ground floor spaces of seven buildings are reinvented as places for living and working, using the tools provided by the strategy and adapting them both to the program needs and the features of the place. The main themes of the project are the resolution of the transition between private and public realm and the check on the actual flexibility of use of the standard elements to create spaces with different forms, functions and uses. 7

0. Introduction

context and purpose of the work

A rich and vast heritage A large part of the building stock of contemporary cities in Italy was built during the post-second world war period. It is estimated to be around 10 million dwellings, with a medium increase of 1 million rooms per year during the 50s, and 1.6 million in the 60s (Zanfi, 2014). Great part of it consists today in residential dwellings of private property: this setting was achieved thanks to some ruling (Leggi Tupini of 1949 and Aldisio of 1950) that promoted private initiatives through fiscal benefits and to the gradual selling of the public housing stock. Today, this rich heritage is facing a general problem of obsolescence, particularly in two aspect that are the configuration of dwellings and the degradation of materials and technologies used for the buildings of that period. Changing forms of living The design of apartments during the post-war period followed the demographics of the times. It was shaped around the model of a family with several components and produced apartments of medium or big size, with several rooms and a clear functional division between spaces (living room, kitchen, corridor, bedrooms). Today the form of family units has changed, and innovative ways of living the housing space are appearing: studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s housing, hybrids between working and living space and co-housing are some of the new figures that we can find in Italian cities, and in particular in the case of Milano (Multiplicity.lab, 2007). For these reasons, the current situation is showing a big stock of built space that doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t respond usefully to the demand of its users, both present and potential ones: the owners are ageing inside oversized apartments in buildings often difficult to access for old or disabled people, while new potential residents have difficulties in accessing an offer not suited to their needs (as apartments are too big and 10

expensive for their purchasing power). Obsolete technologies Generally, it is possible to observe that the same technologies (construction methods, construction materials, machineries) were applied for the fabrication of both public housing buildings and private ones. Building statics relied on a structural scheme (the skeleton of beams and columns or structural walls, one directional slabs with only one longitudinal beam bearing) of reinforced concrete that appears today problematic, mostly from the seismic point of view. External closings didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t use any insulation material and often counted just on a double wall of masonry for the purpose, while windows were built with wooden or metallic materials with a single glazing. Moreover, heating plants used obsolete technologies and represent today a big energetic and economic (and also ecologic) waste for the current owners. The recycle option The various operational problems of the stock pose some questions about what approaches can be used in order to find solutions. An important subject that is nowadays still discussed is the choice between the idea of demolition and reconstruction and the strategy of re-use. As the first option would take on the problems of the building stock by erasing and replacing it with better functioning buildings, the second one suggest a subtler work inside the body of whatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s already there, working on focused changes while keeping some favorable features of the buildings. An example of the latter strategy is the theoretical and practical work of architects Lacaton&Vassal: their various projects of renovation of modern public housing blocks in France (Druot, Lacaton, Vas11

sal, 2007) are driven by an attitude that highlight the positive features of that heritage (firm structures, remarkable heights that results in good views) and enhances them through the architectural project. The choice between these strategies may also depend on the economic conditions of the context in which the stock is located. As Micelli (2014) explains, a reconstruction strategy may occur just in the cases in which a big financial interest has the resources to take on the expenses of its works, while the recycle of the existing could be a necessity in that places (the metropolitan periphery, the sprawl city) where the current conditions of market demand for low budget options. Energy and seismic enhancement policies Tax reduction policies have emerged in the last years with the goal of improving the conditions of the building stock in Italy: renovation works and energetic improvement interventions are rewarded with increases of GLA (gross leasable area) or money recover. The recent acknowledgment of the dangerous seismic condition of Italian territories -72% of Italian municipalities are situated in major risk areas (CRESME, 2014)- has lead also to financing policies for renovation works improving the stability of buildings. These policies, that in the period 1998-2015 have registered 12,5 million interventions (on the total of 31,2 Italian dwellings) (CRESME,2014), seem to have dealt well with the trend of renovation works importance and stimulated the market, but a limitation of their power can be noticed as they gave answers only the technical problematics of the building stock, while the social and formal ones are still unresolved (Zanfi, 2014). For this reason, it seems necessary today to find new ways to use these policies, combining them in an integrated strategy that would deal also with the social and management issues as they were previously described. 12

Making space The purpose of the research is to work on the stock of building that was briefly described: a vast heritage of space that needs to be reinvented in order to satisfy the contemporary needs of its users, both the current and the potential ones. In particular, the work suggest that this could be achieved focusing on a peculiar space that can be found in a part of the stock: the void ground floor. This space and its features are the key element of the research, that start with a description of its nature, realized by the observation of different case studies in the Milanese context. As a result of this examination, the research shows how it could be possible to introduce a strategy of enhancement of these spaces, intersecting the richness of the features that they already offer with the demand of a project that will deal with the general problematics of formal, technical and social renovation.

1. Ground floor empty spaces in the Milanese context

Ground floor spaces: similarities and differences The spaces considered by the research has some similar features that distinguish them from any other ground floor entrances of modern building. First feature is for them to be completely or almost empty, with columns and services cores as the only visible elements in the space. Almost every case observed, though, presents a disposition of small spaces built around the core of the elevator and stairs, hosting some facilities as a protected entrance, concierge services or simple technical rooms for garbage disposal and plants. The interior height is often smaller than the buildingsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; standard one by 30 or 40 centimeters. The lowest ones can arrive to 220 or 230 centimeters. In some cases, on the opposite, the height is raised to 4 or 5 meters in order to create a more scenic space for the entrance of the building. A specific difference between the observed cases is the presence of closing elements on the borders of the space. The typical materials used are transparent glass walls and fences, both giving privacy to the ground floor space while providing light to enter. In various cases these elements are not present: the space results to be completely open and permeable form the public realm of the street. In these cases, privacy is achieved with other strategies that can vary from the displacement of the building from the street border or simple advertising with no entry signs. All the variables observed follow a distinction that can be made inside the whole stock that was observed, which derives from the status of the building: in fact, while the design of private initiative buildings seems to have put more effort in enriching the space with various materials and closing solutions, the treatment of the same space was neglected by the project of economic buildings (such as popular housing ones) and results today in the most empty and ordinary of the cases observed. In the work â&#x20AC;&#x153;Atrii di

typical depth typical depth typical depth

plumbing postitions plumbing postitions plumbing postitions

grid of columns

grid of columns grid of columns

case” by Italian architect Carlo Perogalli (1960), this difference is observed and explained, as the project of the entrance had its importance in giving more market value to the building, value that financed housing didn’t need to achieve. The ground floor and its building: main features

typical height typical height typical height

service cores service cores service cores

While some similarities and differences have been noticed in the form and function of the ground floor space, it is consequentially possible to make some observations about the whole building. The structure in fact is the main element shaping the form of ground floors. Usually it consists in columns of 30/40 centimeters of size, arranged on three rows and aligned along the longitudinal size of the building. This alignment is caused by the presence of the beams, generally positioned in one direction, with no other structural transversal elements. This feature in particular is interesting, because the emptiness of a ground floor on a mono-directional structure of beams implicate a general seismic weakness for the whole building (a characteristic called “weak floor”). The depth of the building is between 10 and 12 meters, and the spacing between columns around 5 or 6 meters: this results in a geometrically fixed grid, interrupted by the cores of the elevator and stairs. Another element of the building that reflects on the shape of the ground floor is the presence of the machineries, which are hidden inside the masonries of upper floor walls: when passing through the ground floors, they are often hidden in the columns by increasing their thickness and creating technical spaces, or directly creating new technical columns shaped as the structural ones.

mono-directional beams mono-directional beams mono-directional beams

Series of spaces in the urban context As the building moves from the street alignment, is it possible to observe the emerging of new elements and spaces contributing to create a richer buffer zone between the public domain of the sidewalk and the privacy of the apartment. The main character of this transformation is a courtyard, often filled with small lawns, hedges, trees. A fence protects the space and small paths (in stone or bricks materials) lead the way from the street to the ground floor. Here, the space is left as a void, filled by the structural columns of the building. An entrance space is created around the elevators and stairs core: it’s a non-heated room, often closed by thin glass walls, hosting the collective services of the building, such as mailboxes, door phones, sometimes a concierge, and some technical spaces for garbage disposal and plants. The disposition of this elements (fence, courtyard, ground floor space, entrance, services’ core) creates a sequence of spaces that has been read as an “extended domestic space” (Bruzzese, 2011), as the relation between apartment and street is extended and intermediated. Consequentially, the quality of living in this type of buildings depends on the quality of this sequence. This chain of spaces is often composed in different ways, adding or losing some of the elements described: in the cases where buildings keep an alignment with the street, the transition between public and private is more immediate, often resolved by closing the ground floor with glass walls or fences. Other times the ground floor space is moved to a lower level than the street one, and linked with stairs or sloping paths. The quality of the courtyard can be different, as in some cases the green areas are substituted with asphalt and used as parking lots. The core spaces inside the ground floor are sometimes reduced to their minimum and other times enriched with high quality materials. 18

case /1 alignment on the street

case /2a buffer zone - same level

case /2b buffer zone - level -1

case /3 isolated object in the empty block 19

Dossier /1 Observed cases in Milano

r j o-p

h-i

e-m

k d

a f

a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k. l. m. n. o. p. q. r. s. t. u. v.

Via Luigi Anelli 15 Via Ambrogio Campiglio 4 Quartiere Chiesa Rossa Via Teobaldo Ciconi 6/8 Via Tranquillo Cremona 12 Via Carlo Crivelli 20 Via Domenichino 12 Via Domenichino 29 Via Domenichino 50 Via Esopo 3/5/7/9 Quartiere Forze Armate Quartiere Gallaratese G1 Via Giacomo Griziotti 1 Quartiere Lodovico il Moro/Lotto 6 Via Monte Rotondo 8/10 Via Monte Rotondo 17 Via Felice Poggi 14 Quartiere Via Ponale Via Giuseppe Ponzio 18 Piazza Santâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Erasmo 5 Via Filippo Turati 7 Quartiere Vercellese

edificio per abitazioni Via Luigi Anelli 15 Guido Maffezzoli, Gianfranco Pellegrini 1954/55

edificio per abitazioni Via Antonio Campiglio 6

edificio per abitazioni quartiere Chiesa Rossa Cesare Blasi 1960/66

edificio per abitazioni via Teobaldo Ciconi 6/8

edificio per abitazioni via Tranquillo Cremona 12

edificio per abitazioni via Carlo Crivelli 20 Vittorio Morasso

edificio per abitazioni via Domenichino 12

edificio per abitazioni via Domenichino 29

edificio per abitazioni via Domenichino 50

edificio per abitazioni via Esopo 3

edifici per abitazioni quartiere Forze Armate

edifici per abitazioni quartiere Gallaratese G1 ufficio tecnico IACP 1953

edificio per abitazioni via Giacomo Griziotti 1

edifici per abitazioni quartiere Lodovico il Moro/Lotto 6 Vittorio Gandolfi 1972

edifici per abitazioni via Monte Rotondo 8/10

edifici per abitazioni via Monte Rotondo 17

edifici per abitazioni via Felice Poggi 14

edifici per abitazioni quartiere Via Ponale V.Magistretti, Ufficio Tecnico MBM 1973/75

edificio per abitazioni via Giuseppe Ponzio 18

edificio per abitazioni piazza Santâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Erasmo 5 BBPR 1947/48

edificio per abitazioni e uffici via Filippo Turati 7 Vito e Gustavo Latis 1953/56

edifici per abitazioni quartiere Vercellese

2. Contemporary living conditions the demand of new spaces

A changing demographic context Nowadays, the traditional idea of family, that distinguished the post-war years and shaped the ways in which houses were built, is facing radical changes. These changes include the reduced number of household’s components (e.g. couples with no children were 13,4% of the total in 1961, and reached 30,9% in 2011 [Zanfi, 2014]), as well as the diversification of households’ model, shifting from the traditional idea of family to various structures such as single people, divorced parents with children and single elderly people (e.g. according to 2015 ISTAT data, the Italian households were approximately 25 millions of which 31,3% were composed by 1 person and only 1,6% composed by 6 persons or more). Moreover, new types of living and co-habiting that go beyond the family ties, emerged for work or studying reasons. Over the years, this exponential households’ diversification and fragmentation led to a weakening of the economic and social support role played by family relations in the last decades, a support role often crucial in time of need [Vicari Haddock, 2004], exposing certain layers of the society to higher risks in case of a job loss and the like. On top of the before-mentioned sociological shift, we should factor in the progressive ageing of population and consequent increase of elderly people, often, living alone. Nowadays the life expectancy for men is 77 years and 83 years for women with the number births continuously shrinking in developed countries, resulting in an expansion of the older part of population. Indeed, in the decade between 2010 and 2020 there will be 1.172.000 more elderly people in Italy, and a consequent increase in the population average age, moving from 43.9 years as of today to 45,7 years in 2020. (Campelli – CRESME - 2016). Elderly people, who lived in a period when the real estate deve70

lopment was focused on the expanding middle class that demanded large houses, still live in these spaces and face a twofold challenge: living often alone in houses with high maintenance costs Households’ disposable income, one of the main element driving the real estate market, has decreased and the under 50 category, the most attractive for the real estate development industry, has been the one experiencing the highest degree of impoverishment (Ricci – 2011). The new generations are those who live more than others these changing dynamics particularly the socio-economic aspects. Thus, the new generation is obliged to live on the expense of the previous ones due to these economic and sociological elements, even with a stable employment since it does not necessarily entail a full economic independence (Ranzini, 2013). Moreover, the mushrooming of new and atypical job conditions led the new generations to adopt different strategies to reach their professional achievements: unpaid jobs, part-time positions, casual and or unqualified jobs. The achievement of future professional goals is thus linked to professional personal instability, especially in big cities where new jobs require strong dynamism and adaptability to a continuously changing environment leading to a long-lasting limbo of instability. Independence and personal choices are postponed (Bertolini – 2011). The Milanese case: a growing demand Milan, in the last few years, is experiencing a transformation of social geographies within the city and exponential demographic growth with approximately one million and four hundred thousand inhabitants nowadays, the highest figure in the last decade. Per the latest CRESME report (“Centro ricerche economche e sociali del mercato dell’edilizia”), the city grows in number of inhabitants and changed the demographic mix with a younger 71

photo form the research “Abitare San Donato” (G.Hanninen, from the research by M.Bricocoli, P.Savoldi, S.Sabatinelli, DASTU Politecnico di Milano, 2017)

population.. In fact, the forecast shows that in a few years the average age of the city of Milan, now 45, will drop to 42. This phenomenon is due mainly to the young people between 25 and 29 years that after having completed their studies, they stop in the city looking for a job. Per the CRESME report we are witnessing a real regeneration due to the influx of young Italians and foreigners. Yet, the availability of traditional residential and commercial spaces offered by the city it is still a step behind, unable to cope with the rapid demographic changes that are occurring. The growing number of people that flocks to the in search of opportunities, needs new spaces, very different from those existing and economically more accessible, reflecting the dynamism, mobility and temporariness of the new society. The city ecosystem, however, does not stand still in front of these changes and new, unusual spaces arise: shops become flats, underroof spaces became lofts and basements temporary lodges (Boeri – 2007). People’s need of living spaces anticipate the changes before than the traditional means. Migratory flows led to the mushrooming of rooms sublet in private houses as temporary solutions as well as to the ethnic diversification of buildings and entire blocks.. The need for open spaces with a diverse set of configurations where the boundary between private and professional life was less defined, determine the spread of lofts, and hybrid spaces where private and professional needs coexists. From these observations, may appear as projects should be developed to deal with new forms of inhabiting, working and living the space, considering the present economic and employment precarious conditions, and how these new forms of living the space can put into play that part of the population already inhabits, works and lives spaces in the city.

Property and rent In Italy for decades, owning a residential estate has been seen as an indicator of social stability and prestige, especially between 1975-1995, when the rate of households owning a property rose from 40% to 79%. (Vicari Haddock, 2004). For a young family or for young professionals, nowadays it becomes difficult to separate from the ownership model, still very rooted in our society, which promises future economic certainty. Since the 70’, the number of residential units to rent has progressively shrunk. On top of this we should consider the reduced control on prices, worsen in the 1992 with the abolition of the introduced in 1978. Thus, today both residential and commercial rents are high and difficult to maintain in the long run. This issue is not only due to the rise of rents but also to the gap between households’ income and house costs, more than doubled for the renting (Zanfi – 2014). Many people see renting as an option that leads to freedom from the constraints that the property would impose. People always moving and looking for new experiences, which associated to the house a short-term planning considering the latter more as a mean rather than a goal to be achieved. In other cases, people whose choice of the rent is not connected to limited economic resources, prefer to use the financial resources for other purposes, generally related to the profession (Bolis – 2010). The matter is to identify and define new urban policies that, in a transparent and proactive manner, tackle these challenges by increasing the supply of spaces in a more flexible and certain fashion.

New spaces for new populations The transformation of the population lifestyles, especially of the younger layers, the cultural changes and new forms and approaches to work, gave a push to the dissemination of new practices of living the space, expanding the meaning and uses of space (Tosi â&#x20AC;&#x201C; 2004). Formerly, the classification of space was much more pronounced, the house as intimate and private place, public space defined and for public relation, the place of work outside the domestic walls. Today the spaces in the city have been contaminated and no longer neatly categorized. Many spaces, before private, have become hybrids and places of interactions. At one time the house had a room designated for each activity, nowadays the domestic space is lived in different times and for different uses, with spaces that are redefined per the situations, places where private life and work often are mixed creating new ways of living space. New activities are inserted in home environments, from single house to the entire condominiums, changing the relations and links between people, bringing back to light the idea of shared space, giving rise to collaborative processes and moments of sharing among the inhabitants. Where once the choice of a shared space for living or work stemmed from economic obligations, nowadays arises spontaneously, thanks to the forms of interaction that are created between people and creating cooperation of time and resources. In a residential area, can be reflected in cost savings and easier management of domestic life, in the workplace are often the source of new professional exchanges and interactions. You can take as an example the simplest forms of sharing spaces as occurs in cohabitation between students or workers. An example is the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Prendi in casa uno studenteâ&#x20AC;? project sprad out in Milan. The goal of the project is to match the need of elderly people daily support and extra money, living alone and with available ro75

oms, with the need of students for affordable living spaces. Lately this project has been adopted also by young professionals, today almost 20% of total applicants. Other common and diffused forms of shared spaces are for example cohousing, born in Northern Europe in response to the crisis of the traditional family, or coworking in the professional world. In Milan there are spreading out many social projects, where the recycling of spaces for residences it is associated with projects that try to enhance places for sharing and social relationships. For example the project Foyer Sant’Ambrogio, focus on young people who are struggling to achieve economic stability and independence, which imagined the re-use of 19 unused gatehouses in Sant’Ambrogio neighborhood, for temporary housing and communal services dedicated to students and workers. An other examples are the projects Abito Dateo or Maison du Monde 36, both of them not only have dealt with the recovery of a buildings and residences but also have planned spaces used to host communal activities and mutual aid practices. In those project the supply of some small services, also aimed at free time, it is directed in particular to the search of free association and activation of the inhabitants. Nowadays these kinde of projects are quickly propagate and turning into a new ways of living space. Places that reflect the dynamism of contemporary society, temporary space for fast and intense uses, which can be experienced for short periods and that adapt to the uses and diversified activities. Social sharing places, where it is rediscovered the potential and the advantages of relations. Sharing is also developed in forms and spaces that take place outside the domestic space, giving life to practices of mutual collaboration in which they are distributed weights and benefits in a game of exchanges of time and resources (Sampieri 2011). photo form the research “Milano.Cronache dell’abitare” (P.Dolo, from the part “Abitare in una casa negozio” by G.La Varra) 77

3. Living the ground floor a renovation strategy

general strategy: giving value to the void ground floor space From the observation of the variety and amount of ground floor spaces in modern residential buildings comes the idea of their transformation and use, mostly in the observed cases where the space seems to be really unused and available for a project of renovation. The report of chapter 2, showing a strong demand of space coming from certain kind of populations in our cities, suggest that the renovation of ground floor spaces could be realized through a strategy of economic housing. The idea is to start from what is there -the structural grid, floor and ceiling- and work on partitioning the space with light elements, creating different setting open to various functions, from the studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s co-housing to the apartment for elderly or disabled people, or the hybrid working/living space. The new tenants should bring new life to the space not just on the interior: the new functions will engage in a strong relation with the exterior, expanding the living space on the outside and creating innovative ways of perceiving and using the standard typical courtyards. management strategy: starting a virtuous process of construction, rent and management How to build and manage the new functions at the ground floor? The proposition is to create a general managing institution who has the ability of integrating the technological and constructive dimension with the management and social one, with the task of finding new tenants for the spaces and acting as and intermediate between the latter and the owners of the building. The work of the managing institution is divided in three phases. In the first phase the institution works on finding a core of potential tenants, interested in the offer of living in the ground floor 80

spaces of new construction. The individual they refer to are “social” categories of people having trouble in finding living space in the contemporary offer of the city: university students looking for cohousing solutions, young people looking for modern and congenial working spaces, old people or disabled people in search of accessible and liveable flats. Here the managing institution works like a non-profit housing agency, collaborating with the public institutions for the selection and management of the tenants. Ah interest from the public authority is essential in this phase in order to create the best working conditions: ground floor spaces, in fact, often need an adjustment of the strict rules for construction (minimum heights, minimum surfaces, “oneri di urbanizzazione”). In this phase, the managing institution also needs to pledge an agreement with the owners of the spaces: it guarantees the personal financing of the construction works, with no request of investment; it asks, for change, to receive the future loans for a period of 15 years, to recover its initial expenses. During the 15 years’ period, the owners will receive just a part of the loans, in the form of savings on the condominium fees. After this period, the loans would go entirely to the owners (with a minimal part kept by the institution to cover the management expenses). In the second phase the managing institution realize the new functions at the ground floor: in order to do so, it manages the construction through a personal production chain that involves various actors, from the designer to the construction companies. This chain is simplified by a project made of standard materials and construction techniques (see next paragraph). During this phase, the managing institution finance its own works, without asking any involvement of the owners. After construction works are done, there is the management phase: the institution keeps its role of intermediate between owners and new tenants, receiving the rents for 15 years until the covering of its expenses. After this period, it receives just the necessary amount to cover the expenses 82

Design strategy 1 defined ceiling’s height and existing fixed grid 2 direct relation with exterior space 3 creation of neutral, versatile and reversible space

defined ceiling's height existing fixed grid

eiling's height g fixed grid

direct relation with exterior space

base | CFS structure

creation of neut and reversib technologic

partition | light

equipment | installations

lation with or space

creation of neutral, versatile and reversible space technological element

equipment box | bathroom partition | light

equipment | installations

equipment box | kitchen

equipment | kitchen

light box | gree

equipment | bathroom

ical element

direct rel exterio

equipment box | kitchen

light box | greenhouse

energetic and seismic interven

for its managing work. The presence of the managing institution is necessary also after work completion as a warrantor to avoid the possibility of the owners selling the space to a private subject, invalidating the whole social purpose of the project. design strategy: working on servant spaces to maximize the served ones The architectural project for the construction of new spaces at the ground floor starts from three principal themes: the presence of a structural grid of columns and beams, plus existing floor and ceiling; the direct connection with the exterior; the necessity of building spaces adaptable to different functions (living, working, services). For this, the decision is to limit the design to the servant spaces, maximizing their functionality and minimizing their surface, reaching the elimination of spatial elements as corridors and hallways and the creation of a void and free space, adaptable to different functions and to the desires of its users. These service spaces are designed as furnished partitions of different thicknesses and functions: bathroom, kitchen, furniture, greenhouse. The basic structure is assembled with standard elements to optimize its production chain: starting from a frame of CFS (cold-formed steel) it is possible to plug to the structure light walls for kitchen and bathroom plants, wardrobe structures or shelves, external finishings with thermic and seismic insulation. The result is a performing light wall plugged on the existing pavement and ceiling, cutting the cost and timing of construction for eventual new structures. The furnished partitions can be used in two spatial form that have been designed: the line and the box. The line can be used for the interiors, as a dividing wall between two spaces or two functions, or as a external partition. The box 84

Technological elements 1 base - CFS structure 2 partition - light 3 equipment - installations 4 equipment - kitchen 5 equipment - bathroom 6 equipment - kitchen 7 partition - exterior 8 partition - dissipative bracing system

equipment | kitchen

equipment | bathroom 2

technological element

partition | exterior equipment | kitchen equipment kitchenequipment box | bathroom equipment | bathroom equipment box || bathroom equipment box | equipment bathroom box | kitchen equipment box | kitchen equipment light box | box kitchen | greenhouse light box | greenhouse lig

ions

ed space

equipme

energetic and seismic intervention

light box | greenhouse

interior 1,8 cm OSB panels 9 cm rock wool inserted in the cavity of CFS supporting structure 1,8 cm OSB panels 6 cm EPS panels + 2 cm lightweight concrete panels exterior

energetic and seismic intervention 4

light line | greenhouse

T = 0,232 < 0,26 W/m2K

energetic and seismic intervention

light box | greenhouse

partition | dissipative bracing system

partition | exterior

partition | exterior

interior 1,8 cm OSB panels 9 cm rock wool inserted in the cavity of CFS supporting structure 1,8 cm OSB panels 6 cm EPS panels + 2 cm lightweight concrete panels exterior

1,8 cm OSB panels 9 cm of interspace for the support structure in EPS for the installations 1,8 cm OSB panels 2 cm mineralized wood fibers panels variable thickness of cavity between pillars - space for dissipative bracing system T = 0,232 < 0,26 W/m2K 85 interior 1,8 cm OSB panels 9 cm rock wool inserted in the cavity of CFS supporting stable system for horizontal actions structure 1,8 cm OSB panels

could be used also outside the building border, with an extrusion of 1.5 meters (the maximum possible length to hang a cantilevering element without building new structures). The box can be opaque, hosting functions as bathroom and kitchen, or transparent and light, creating a “greenhouse” space that creates a filter between exterior and interior. Other two elements of the project are the energetic and seismic efficiency, which provide benefits not only to the ground floor space but to the whole building. The furnished partitions are in fact designed to be finished with insulation materials, and the insulated environment they produce results in an energetic gain also for the first floor of the building. From the seismic point of view, the partitions contribute in providing more stiffness to the “weak floor”; moreover, they are designed to be eventually paired with bigger steel elements of bracing for the whole building.

Technological elements 1 equipment box - bathroom 2 equipment box - kitchen 3 light box - greenhouse 4 equipment line - bathroom 5 equipment line - kitchen 6 light line - greenhouse 86

equipment box | bathroom

equipment box | kitchen

light box | greenhouse

equipment box | bathroom

equipment box | kitchen

light box | greenhouse

equipment box | bathroom

equipment box | kitchen

light box | greenhouse

equipment box | bathroom

equipment box | kitchen

light box | greenhouse

equipment line | bathroom

equipment line | kitchen

light line | greenhouse

equipment line | bathroom

equipment line | kitchen

light line | greenhouse

equipment line | bathroom

equipment line | kitchen

light line | greenhouse

separation in/out

gain no-heated space

separation in/out 4

gain space and separation in/out

separation in/out

gain no-heated space separation between apartments

gain space and separation in/out separation in/out gain space and separation in/out

gain no-heated space between separation apartments

gain no-heated space separation between apartments internal encolsed space

gain space and separation in/out

87 gain space and separation in/out

Application

testing the design strategy on the Lodovico il Moro neighborhood context

b95

b47

uildings

The project site consist in an area of 7 buildings inside the Lodovico il Moro complex, located in the South-West part of Milano, in the “Restocco” zone, between the Naviglio Grande and Barona neighborhood. The complex was designed by a group led by architect Vittorio Gandolfi and built between 1963 and 1968 by IACP Milano with GESCAL financement. It is composed of 17 buildings, each one of 9 floors + ground floor, built on a structure of beams and columns with masonry finishing on the exterior. The selected project site consist in a total area of 24000 sqm, divided in 3375 sqm of building surface and 20620 sqm od open space (4754 artificial and 15866 permeable).

main services commercial facilities sport facilities

public park

facilities

Parco Agricolo Sud

ies

orti Via Chiodi

ark

public transport / bus

gricolo Sud

public transport / tramway

Chiodi

bike lane

The main goal of the application in a selected project site is to use and adapt the strategic standard elements designed. In this particular case, the theme of the relation of the exterior requested different solutions. In fact, the complex presents a double nature: the south elevations present their front on the public space of a street, while on the opposite side they open on a more private, enclosed and green space. The solution is to create different funpublic park public transport / bus ctions that would adapt to this double-face theme: some apparteParco Agricolo / tramway mentsSud are designed topublic opentransport on the green space with transparent bike lane framings and close from the other side using opaque walls. In orti Via Chiodi the central square, a atypical kind of living+working space in proposed, opening his glazings on the public space. The central building/ isbus designed to accept services’ functions such as a day public transport care for children and a common area for the whole complex and public transport / tramway function as a central element of reference for the inhabitants. bike lane

The open space of the whole area is lightly modified, working just on a new paving for the central square and the redefinition of of lenght and width of some paths inside the green areas and around the buildings.

tot gross floor surface

488

606

566

606

304

715

488

service cores surface buildings 36

54 main 36 services 54

54 36 public park

columns surface

15 commercial 16 15 facilities

20 17 Parco Agricolo Sud

net area

435

537 sport514 537 facilities

276

641 435 orti Via Chiodi

public transport / bus public transport / tramway

3375 sqm

tot

bike lane

proj

d c

f b

section AA

tot gross floor surface

488

606

566

606

304

715

488

service cores surface

columns surface

net area

435

537

514

537

276

641

435

3375 sqm

p section B-B

section BB

Total= 206 mq

B B Double studio apartment Double studio Service B space = 43 mq 6 locals = 78apartment mq 6 locals = 78 mq Total= 468 mq Total= 468 mq B BService space = 150 mq Service space = 150 mq Double apartment Double 6 localsstudio = 78 mq B 6 localsstudio = 78 apartment mq Total= 468 mq Total= 468 mq F B F BService Service space = 150 mq space = 150 mq B 2 locals = 65 mq 2 locals = 65 6 locals = 78 mq mq 6 locals = 78 apartment mq Double studio studio =apartment 4 locals = 62B mqstudio apartmentDouble 4 locals 62 mq Double Total= mq FTotal= 468 mq FTotal=468 378 mq Total= 378 mq Service space = 150 mq B Service = 150 mq = 65 mq locals space =space 65 mq B2Service B 2 locals = 138 mq Service space = 138 mq 4 locals = 62 4 locals = 62 mq 6 locals = 78 mq 6 locals = 78 mqmq F B F Total= 378 mq Total= 378 mq 468 mq Total= 468= mq BTotal= 2 locals 65 mq 2 locals = 65 mq Service space = 138 Service space = 138 mq 6 space locals Service = 150=mq78 mq Service space 150 mqmq 4 locals = 62=mq 4 locals = 62 mq Total= 378 mq Total= 468 mq FTotal= 378 mq F Service space = 138 mq Service space = 138 mq B 2 locals = 65 mq space = 150 mq2 locals = 65 mq Service 4 locals = 62 mq 4 locals = 62 mq Total= 378 mq Total= 378 mq Service mq Service space = 138 mq F space = 138facilities Common

B B B

B B

F B

Common facilities C C Common 2 localsfacilities = 103 mq C Total= 206 mq CService space = 43 mq Common facilities 2 locals = 103 mq facilities Common C Total= 206 mq CService space = 43 mq 2 locals = 103 mq CommonC facilities Total= 206 mqC = 43=mq103 mq 2 space locals CService 2 locals = 103 mq 206 mq Total= C Total= 206 mq Service = 43 Service space = 43space mq

C C

Working + Living apartments

D 6 locals = 30 + 30 mq Total= 360 mq Service space = 94 mq

E 2 locals = 32 + 44 mq Common 2 localsfacilities = 62 mq Total= 354 mq CService space = 76 mq 2 locals = 103 mq Total= 206 mq Service space = 43 mq

D D E

D D

DD D

Common facilities C Common facilities 2 locals = 103 mq Total= 206 mq C Service space = 43 mq Common 2 locals facilities = 103 mq Total= 206 mq C Service space = 43 mq 2 locals = 103 mq Common Total=facilities 206 mq Service space = 43 mq C 2 locals = 103 mq Total= 206 mq mq Service space = 43 mq

2 F locals = 65 mq C4 locals = 62 mq mqmq 2Total= locals378 = 103 Service206 space Total= mq = 138 mq Service space = 43 mq

Working + Living apartments Working + Living apartments D D D Working + Living apartments Working + =Living apartments Working +mqLiving apartments 6 locals 30 +D30 6 locals = 30 + 30 mq Total= 360 mq Total= 360 mq D DService space = 94 mq Service spaceapartments = 94 mq Working Working apartments 6 locals += Living 30 + 30 mq 6 locals 30 + D30 mq D += Living Total= 360 mq Total= 360 mq E E D DService 6 locals Service space = 94 mq 94=mq mq30 + 30 mq 2 localsspace = 32 += 44 2 locals = 32 + 44 6 locals = 30 + 30 mq mq 6 locals+=Living 30 + 30 mq Working apartments Working + Living apartments 2 locals = 62 mq 2 locals = 62 mq Total= Total= mqD 360 mq ETotal= 360 mq ETotal=360 354 mq Total= 354 = mq94 mq space 94space mq locals space = 32 + 44 mq Service = 94 mqD 2Service 2Service locals =space 32 +=44 mq DService = 76 mq Service space = 76 mq 2 locals = 62 mq mq locals==30 62+mq 62locals 30 mq 6 locals = 30 + 30 E ETotal=360 Total= 354 mq 354mq mq Total= Total= 360 2 locals =mq 32 +=44 mq 2Service locals = 32 +==44 Service space 76mq mq space 76mq mq E space Service 94 mq Service space = 94 2 locals = 62 mq 2 locals = 62 mq 2 locals = 32 + 44 mq E Total= 354 mq ETotal= 354 mq Service space = 76 mq 2Service locals 32 + =4476mq 2 locals = 32 + 44 mq 2 =space locals =mq62 mq 2 locals = 62 mq 2 locals = 62 mq E Total=Total= 354 mq 354 mq Total= 354 mq Service space = 76space mq Service = 76 mq Service space = 76 mq

Working + Living apartments

D E

D 6 locals = 30 + 30 mq Total= 360 mq Service space = 94 mq E

Studio apartment Studio apartment A= 32 + 44 mq A 2 locals = 62 mq A Studio apartment Studio apartment 2 locals = 33 mq 2 locals = 33 mq A Total= 354 mq A = 37 mq 2 locals 2 locals = 37 mq A A2 locals = 50 mq space 2 locals = 50 mq Service = 76 mq 2 locals = 33 mq Studio Studio apartment 2 localsapartment = 33 mq 22locals A locals==33 53mq mq 2 locals = 53 mq 2 locals = 37 mq 2Total= locals = 37 mq mq = 37 mq 2 locals 344 Total= 344 mq A A2 locals = 50 mq 2 locals = 50 mq Service space = 90 mq Service space = 90 mq 2 locals = 2 locals = 50 mq 22 locals == 33 2 locals = 33 53 mq mq locals 53 mq mq Studio apartment Studio apartment 2 locals = 37mq mq 2Total= locals locals = 37mq Total= 344 Amq = 53 mq G 2 344 G 2 locals = 50 mq locals = 50 mq Service space = 90 mq = 90 mq A2Service A2 4 localsspace = 50 mq 4 locals = mq 50 mq locals = 53 Total= locals = 53 mq 344 mq 222locals 2 locals =344 33 =mq locals= =3331mq mq 2 locals 31 mq Total= mq 344 mq G G2locals 2Total= = =3734 mqmq space = 90 mq 2 locals = space 37 =mq34 Service locals 2 locals mq mq Service = 90 = 90+mqLiving apartments 4 locals = 50 Working 4Total= locals =50 50mq mq 2Service locals =space 2 locals = 50 mqmq 330 Total= 330 mq 2 locals = 31mqmq locals==space 31 mq mq= 90 mq 22Service locals 53 2 locals = 53 Service space = 90 mq G locals G2 locals 2 = mq 34 mq = 34 Total= 344 mqmq Total= 344 G 4 locals330 = 50 4Total= locals = 50mqmq Total= mqmq D 330 Service space = 90 mq Service space 90 mq 2 locals = 31 =mq 2Service locals =locals 31 mq= 90=mq50 mq Service space = 90 mq space 64 locals = 34 mq = 30 + 30 mq G 2 locals = 34 mq G2 locals 2330 locals = 31 mq Total= 330 mq Total= 4Total= locals = 50mqmq 360 mq 4 Service locals = space 50 mq = 90 mq 2 locals 2Service locals =space 31 mq= 90=mq34 mq 2 locals = 31 mq Service space = 94 mq 2 locals = 34 mq 2 locals = 34 mq Total= 330 mq Total= 330 mq Total= 330 mq Service space = 90space mq Service = 90 mq Service space = 90 mq

AA A

Studio 2 apartment locals

A A

D A

A G

D G E

E 2Studio localsapartment = 32 + 44 mq 2 locals = 62 mq A Total= 354 mq 2 locals space = 33 mq Service = 76 mq 2 locals = 37 mq 2 locals = 50 mq 2 locals = 53 mq Total= 344 mq Service space = 90 mq G 4 locals = 50 mq 2 locals = 31 mq

Studio apartment 98

Working + Living 99

Common facilities 100

101

102

103

104

105

4. Conclusions The research investigated the possibility of a renovation project for the peculiar space of the modern ground floor in the milanese context. The exposition through images of some observed cases helped creating a core of case studies, while the investigation of contemporary living conditions in Milano showed the need of finding new living spaces inside the body of our city. The strategy of creating new spaces through the renovation of the ground floors has met some critical aspects, mostly on the normative and technic side, ma it seems in conclusion actually capable of giving an answer to the demand of a light contemporary way of living, adaptable to different needs and uses. Particular attention has been given to the process of fabrication and management of the space and to the social importance of the project, always taking in account the needs of the different actor on the work field, form the owners to the new possible users. The architectural design focused on the theme of the servant spaces and of spatial flexibility, intgrating a light system of easy and quick assemble with the demand of spaces with various functions and dimensions. The application in a Milanese context permitted to verify the actual adaptability of the designed elements and the operation of the general strategy, and posed punctual questions from the point of view of interior/extrior relation, the connection with the public space and the formal exchange with the existing fabric.

106

107

Bibliography

S. Annunziata, A quale titolo (di godimento)?, in “G.Calafati (a cura di), città tra sviluppo e declino, 2014, Roma, Donzelli” A+t. Reclaim. Domestic Actions, 2014 Atelier Bow-Wow, Graphic Anatomy, 2007, Tokyo, TOTO P. Baldi, Qualità dell’architettura, riciclo del paesaggio, in “P.Ciorra, S.Marini, Re-Cycle, 2011, Milano, Mondadori Bello E., Stasi B., Vitale Brovarone E. (a cura di) per SIU, Abitare l’Italia: territori,economie, diseguaglianze , XIV Conferenza Società italiana degli urbanisti, 2012, Milano, Franco Angeli L. Berni, S.B. Calzoni (a cura di), Galateo in città. Linea errante nei sottotetti milanesi, 2012, Milano, Franco Angeli S. Bertolini, Flessibilizzazione del mercato del lavoro e scelte familiari dei giovani in Italia , in Sociologia del Lavoro n 124/2011, Milano, Franco Angeli M. Bolis, Giovani coppie e modi di abitare , 2010, Milano, Franco Angeli M.Bricocoli, S.Sabatinelli, House sharing amongst young adults in the context of Mediterranean welfare: the case of Milan, in “International journal of Housing policy, 2016, Routledge A.Bruzzese, Spazi domestici. L’alloggio entro una sequenza di spazi abitabili. In “F.Infussi (a cura di), Dal recinto al territorio. 2011, Milano, Bruno Mondadori”

108

E.Cambi, M. Di Sivo, G. B. Steiner, Tipologie residenziali in linea, 1984, Milano, BE-MA G. Caramellino, F. Zanfi, Post-war middle-class housing, 2015, Berna, Peter Lang P. Ciorra, S. Marini, RE-CYCLE, 2011, Milano, Electa F. De Pieri, Bonomo, G. Caramellino, F. Zanfi, Storie di case. Abitare l’Italia del boom, 2013, Roma, Donzelli L. Diappi, Rigenerazione urbana e ricambio sociale: gentrification in atto nei quartieri storici italiani , 2009, Milano, Franco Angeli I. Diotallevi, F.Marescotti, Particolari costruttivi d’architettura, 1944, Milano, Domus F. Druot, A. Lacaton, J.-P.Vassal, Plus, 2007, Barcellona, Gustavo Gili El Croquis 177-178: Lacaton&Vassal 1993-2015 M.Gausa, Housing. New alternatives - new systems, 1998, Barcellona, Actar Publishers P. Giambartolomei, Al piede dell’architettura, 1999, Roma, Officina E.Ginelli (a cura di), l’intervento sul costruito. Problemi e orientamenti, 2002, Milano, FrancoAngeli

109

F.Infussi (a cura di), Dal recinto al territorio. 2011, Milano, Bruno Mondadori Lanzani, Granata, Novak, Inti, Cologna, esperienze e paesaggi dell’abitare, 2006, Milano, Segesta M. Lietaert (a cura di), Cohousing e condomini solidali, Firenze, Aam Terrra Nuova Edizioni A.Merlini, F. Zanfi, the family house and its territories in contemporary Italy, in “Journal of Urbanism, 2014” E. Micelli, il recycle come opzione e come necessità, in “Marini, S., & Roselli, S. (a cura di). (2014). Re-Cycle Op.Positions I. 2014, Roma, Aracne” Multiplicity.lab (a cura di), Milano cronache dell’abitare, 2007, Milano, Bruno Mondadori M.Palamini, P.Pezzani, Subversion and indifference: the architectural strategies of Lacaton&Vassal, in “San Rocco, n.7, 2013” P. Panerai, J. Castex, J.C. Depaule, Isolato urbano e città contemporanea, 2008, Novara, Città Studi A.Ranzini, Percorsi in cerca di casa, profili, pratiche e progetti dell’abitare giovane a milano, tesi di laurea magistrale in oianificazione urbana e politiche territoriali, 2013, Politecnico di Milano Regione Lombardia Bollettino Ufficiale, Supplemento Lunedì 13 marzo 2017, Legge regionale 10 marzo 2017 – n.7 , Recupero dei vani e locali seminterrati esistenti 110

Regolamento Edilizio del Comune di Milano 2016 M.Ricci, nuovi paradigm: ridurre riusare riciclare la città, in “P.Ciorra, S.Marini, RE-CYCLE, 2011, Milano, Electa” Sampieri A. a cura di, L’abitare collettivo , 2011, Milano, Franco Angeli Servizio Studi Dipartimento Ambiente - CRESME, Il recupero e la riqualificazione energetica del patrimonio edilizio, 2013, Roma, Camera dei Deputati A.Tosi, Case, quartieri, abitanti, politiche, 2004, Milano, Libreria Clup P.Viganò, Riciclare città, in “P.Ciorra, S.Marini, RE-CYCLE, 2011, Milano, Electa” G.Tachieva, sprawl repair manual, 2010, Washington DC, Island Press F.Zanfi, Convenzioni urbanistiche e nuovo paesaggio residenziali per i ceti medi a Milano tra gli anni ’50 e ’70, Territorio n64, 2013 F.Zanfi, Le case del boom nella città contemporanea, in “G.Calafati (a cura di), città tra sviluppo e declino, 2014, Roma, Donzelli”, pp. 371-399

111

Sitography

http://www.cresme.it/it/articoli/4/invecchiamento-della-struttura-demografica-e-domanda-abitativa-degli-anziani.aspx http://www.ediltecnico.it/adeguamento-sismico-detrazione-65-mappa-comuni-italiani/ https://www.istat.it/it/archivio/196689 http://www.istat.it/infografiche/numerocomponenti/ http://www.meglio.milano.it http://www.milanoabitare.org http://www.sigest.it/it/news/a-milano-aumenta-la-popolazione-ed-e-under-40

112

Case studies

Lacaton&Vassal, Tour bois le pretre, 2011

Shift architecture, open house, 2014

VORA, Juanâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s apartment, 2011

Schemata Architects, Sayama Flats, 2012

Office KGDVS, Summer house, 2007

Jordi Adell, casa en patio, 2010

Adam Khan, Ellebo garden room

A Practice, Refurbishment of a small house, 2011 H Arquitectes, refurbishment of a school in Sabadell, 2014

H Arquitectes, house 1105, 2015

113