The café, equipped with a podium and dance floor, was constructed in a space on the ground floor, and later expanded by cutting a large hole make a connection with the former basement and bike shed.Ground floor — Café
Prices rise and distort the market and housing shortages worsen to the detriment of inhabitants of cities, who are pushed into the conditions of precarity, while the processes of unequal access and accumulation of capital among the population proliferate. It has been market-driven policies, the economic and political pressures, that have pushed people to rely on their own means and on infrastructures of commonality. This has manifested in the construction of alternative forms of collectivity, and new civic agency. By inhabiting vacant premises and imagining other models of family and ownership, the squatting movement has set up infrastructures of domestic solidarity. Across Europe, squatters have opened spaces for diverse and multigenerational habitation for those who advocate collective living. Through the appropriation and maintenance of industrial, historic, empty and abandoned structures, the inhabitants are at the same time activists, builders and architects who design the architectures of new forms of belonging, and new ways of being together. The aim of this research is to reflect on a series of Squatter Communes- their models for creating welcoming, inclusive, affordable housing. Through the implementation of sharing at various scales, in a number forms and means, squatter communes have developed new models of co-ownership as a means of liberating the commons from economic and political systems. Through participation and agency, they have extended the ideals of collectively and commune by directly intervening in and appropriating conventional architecture. By centralizing domestic labor, they have disrupted normative forms of domestic inhabitation and patriarchal structures.
Keywords: Squatting, Communes, Alternative Domesticities, Participation, Co-ownership
Architecture of Appropriation - Squatting as a Spatial Practice, Eds. Truijen, Boer, Otero Verzier (2019) Architecture of Appropriation - Squatting as a Spatial Practice, Eds. Truijen, Boer, Otero Verzier (2019)The significance of Squatter communes must first be placed in the context of the larger discourse of co-living and the various conventionional typologies. Specifically, why makes squatter communes significantly unique in comparison to conventional co-living models. The diagrammatic graphic on page 4 shows very simply the scales of sharing that are relevant to this research. Stretching to the left, we have the larger, less intimate scale of sharing, the sharing of the physical fabric of the city being the least intimate. To right, the sharing of the most intimate elements of co-living- the sharing of personal objects, belongings, furniture, tools. What makes squatting communes valuable from this perspective is the manner in which they are established as fluid, unregulated mechanisms which integrate informally into cities and neighborhoods while remaining outside of economic and political systems, while still sharing the spatial and social fabric of the city. At the same time, their circumstances extend the ideology of the internal commons to the most intimate levels of sharing- the sharing of personal belongings, furniture, tools, etc. Thus, it is perhaps in these more intimate conditions of sharing that squatter communes provide the most significant opportunity for reflection on the future of co-living. The 4 following case studies were chosen and researched from a number of sources with available spatial data in the form of plans and axonometrics. These were studied and then compared based on a series of significant issues and topics relevant to the future of coliving.
From this, we can extract significant conclusions about how squatter communes may influence future co-living models by allowing the liberation of the commons from economic and political systems, allowing participation and agency by resident and inhabitant, allowing for the rethinking centralized domestic labor and disrupting normative forms of domestic inhibition and patriarchal structures. We can compare them several distinct themes:
1. Co-ownership and the liberated (independent) Commons
2. Participation and agency
3. Centralization of domestic labor
Contrary to alternative forms of co-living models, the careful management of these selforganized and self-built spaces is fundamental for accommodating individual desires within the common good. The administration of a squat demands trust, commitment, time, and energy from its inhabitants. Successful, long-lasting squats learned to creatively organize communal living by destabilizing hierarchies, shifting roles, and using democratic committee meetings to make decisions. In addition, squats often align with and are supported by unconventional approaches to economic and cultural exchanges, forms of collective care, and more equitable and inclusive social, political, and technical systems.
All Squatter communes researched exhibited significant Ideological differences from conventional co-living models regarding co-ownership and the manifestation of the commons. They emphasize the significance of sharing communal spaces through direct engagement- such that squatters are active participants in the all social and creative processes of the squat. There are two key principles that define this engagement (page 41, Plantage Dok). Firstly, every able-bodied squatter participates in constructing the
necessary communal and civic spaces of a Squat as determined by a democratic process. In the Plantage Dok in the Netherlands, for instance, the main structure, and the ground floor had been totally rearranged to create shared spaces, workshops, artist studios and music studios by the squatters (Plan pg 33, image 36). In the Landbouwbelang in Austria, the communal programs such as the kitchen and garden, the shared bathrooms and toilets are constructed in people’s preferred places throughout the building, spreading the community throughout the entire complex (page 89, plan).
Secondly, the very first act after surveying the premises of the vacant structure is to carve out and determine communal spaces and facilities necessary for the collective. Inverting the relationships between most conventional co-living spaces today, the Communal spaces in squats have utmost priority over the private, individual spaces. As such, individual and private spaces tend to be formed in clusters around the primary communal spaces. In the Poortgebouw Squat in Georgia, shared kitchens, communal living room, and the library occupy key positions inside the building and are used for monthly house meetings (pg 131).
This idea is extended by the presence of unique program typologies aimed at directly connecting inhabitant squatters to each other through shared infrastructures. Tool sharing rooms, communal gardens, and item exchange rooms (such as books, clothes, and toys) indicated communal use of available resources, while the shared responsibility of managing and maintaining gardens for agricultural production establishes the utilitarian aspect of the commons. These two programs are foundational to every squat, as accumulation of tools for communal use for purposes of modifying the vacant structure is as significant as the structure itself (page 124, Poortgebouw). Just as significant, gardens are significant agricultural infrastructure for the producing ingredients for communal food production (page 24, Poortgebouw). Finally, atypical books, clothes, and other possession sharing programs are significant in establishing a healthy social fabric despite the precarious circumstances of the squats (Poortagebouw, pg 123).
The squats presented in this are organized around open-ended structures capable of housing diverse communities and programs. Squatters Inherently maintain a dynamism in the way in which they understand buildings as non-static adaptable structures different from inhabitants of conventional co-living models. This allows them a great degree of flexibility in the tactics they employ in order to appropriate buildings and develop them into environments suitable for a commune- into environments of extreme spatial diversity and extreme communal engagement. Collectively, they subdivide existing structure to form clusters of living spaces for individuals and groups. For instance, the high ceilings of the former office building, Poortgebouw, allowed for the insertion of mezzanines into almost all of the bedrooms, typically with living space below and sleeping area above. Multiple inhabitants were then able to occupy each of these clusters of more private living spaces. Ambiguous thresholds between private and public, independent and communal spaces. On the other hand,
1209
The monastery of the Order of St. Anthony is founded along the Maas river in Maastricht, on the site of the current Landbouwbelang.
1872
Construction of the Plantagekerk church on the Plantage Doklaan in Amsterdam (fig. 1, 2)
1793
Plantagekerk Church Amsterdam, Netherlands
Original Function: Church
The monastery is partially destroyed during a siege by French troops.
1848
The monastery is demolished in its entirety.
1914
Vereeniging Landbouwbelang, an association for collective agricultural sales and purchases, was founded in Roermond.
to transform the building resistance. After lying was squatted in 1980. building, carried out made it fit for living. added living spaces, wood workshop, a space and a stage. renowned venue in the city’s squat was legalized, and building from the municipality, Today Poortgebouw
The Landbouwbelang association builds a series of warehouse complexes on another location along the Maas.
well as a give-away store, performance night.
give-away store, a people’s or parties, various workshops, multifunctional attic.
processing of cereals, and orders the construction of an industrial complex with a silo on the location of the former monastery. The building process was completed after World War II (fig. 1, 2)
have contacts in the squatting movement that border on friendship. I feel grateful to have been able to follow this path of law. I also deal with lots of family cases, but the other part is squatting, and so far it has been very interesting and I will continue to do it for as long as I feel that I can make some kind of contribution of significance.
of the squatters is to make building suitable for living, use it as a youth center.
Landbouwbelang Maastricht, Austria
Original Function: Industrial Complex
Kampert en Helm constructs a build ing across the full width of the site at Plantage Doklaan (fig. 3). Presses are placed in the former church.
All property belonging to the company is acquired by the city of Rotterdam. The municipal port authority and the Holland-America Line move into the building.
Poortgebouw Tbilisi, Austria
Original Function: Office Building
The same applies to me. A key aspect is that I want to get to the bottom of things. Not superficially assist, but to try and look for the loopholes and the possibilities. I think what we achieved in 2010 was really something spectacular and that is the joy of my work.
Do you think what we are trying to do will make any difference? The fact that there is a national institution of architecture claiming that it constitutes an important legacy? Is that at all useful in a court case, or is it significant only in the cultural
Yes. It is important to keep doing things like you do, because it puts the criminaliza tion of squatting into perspective.
Figure 1: Poortgebouw, 1900.
Figure 2: Landbouwbelang in operation.
Figure 1, 2: Plantagekerk around 1928.
Figure 1: Landbouwbelang’s main hall in use.
1939
The association needs a warehouse for grain storage and the
The printing company Kampert en Helm acquires the church and adds a building to it.
/ p. 55 : A larm system of Artis Squatter Groups / p. 56: Neighborhood map and list of buildings squatted by Artis Squatter Groups).
(p. 230: Letter circulated to borhood about a new squatting November 1980 The squatters engage cussion with the municipality the legalization of the occupation. The squatting considers a proposal by ipality to transform the into independent one person household units, too expensive for the The group is convinced renovate the building nity and on their own, can be offered. As a result, by the municipality is abandoned.
RB: In the case of ADM, there are self-built homes that we deem an interesting contribu tion to architecture in the Netherlands. Such an acknowledgment by a national institute, would that be relevant in a court case?
The newly established Port of Rotterdam makes the building its headquarters.
Less Intimate
The entire complex is in use as a school for vocational training. The former church serves as a gym.
The association closes the ware house due to limited opportunities for expansion within the city. The building is acquired by the nearby paper mill.
1981
WJ: Yes, it would make a difference. Projects like these, that’s the main thing, they will keep putting things into perspective.
The vacant premises are used by several cultural groups such as Intro 167
Periods of vacancy are followed by periods of temporary use by anti-squatters. 51
Private Homes
284
Room (Program)
The Port of Rotterdam moves out of Poortgebouw, and the municipality plans to turn the building into a brothel. After protests the plans are abandoned and the building remains empty.
VLUCHTMAAT This office building was a refugee collective in 2015, and later an innovative economic model, allowing transformation.
Poortgebouw starts to space for squatters to basement rehearsal space musicians, and a venue 1982 The Poortgebouw Association is set up as a formal organization to represent the residents.
(p. 231: Announcement for the
More Intimate
This diagrammatic graphic shows very simply the scales of sharing that are relevant to this research. What makes squatting communes valuable from this perspective is their circumstances extend the ideology of the internal commons to the most intimate levels of sharing- from the sharing of personal belongings, furniture, tools- responsibilities and burdens. Thus, I would argue that it is in these more intimate conditions of sharing that squatter communes provide the most significant opportunity for reflection on the future of co-living.
Squatter Communes: Towards a A Future of Sharing in Co-Living Squatter Communes: Towards Sharing PROTIK CHOUDHURI 4 History of Urban Squatting, Alexander Vasudevan (2017) History of Urban Squatting, Alexander Vasudevan (2017)Architecture of Appropriation, Boer, Otero Verzier (2019) Architecture of Appropriation, Boer, Otero Verzier (2019)After a period of negotiations, the group purchased the complex in collaboration with the municipality’s newly established office for creative spaces
Stichting TOK receives approval for an extensive renovation, to be carried out largely by the occupants themselves.
They propose a radical transformation of the interior with the aim of fostering social interaction among its different user groups. Balconies are inserted into the church nave which will host exhibitions, performances and lectures.New divisions rearranged to create shared spaces, workshops,
In the future café space, a hole is cut out of the concrete floor, balustraded with fencing from the squatted ADM terrain. Entrance — To enhance social interaction, the number of entrances was reduced to two doors located next to each other on the front side.
Landbouwbelang, Maastricht, Austria Poortgebouw, Georgia Stichting Noodzaak, Berlin, Germany Hebden Bridge, Yorkshire, England
Over time various private spaces were created in the main building’s concrete grid through the construction of walls. By now the squat has become a cultural free-zone where many activi ties and parties are organized.
After lying vacant for three years, the building was squatted in 1980The squatters kept the name of the build ing, carried out much-needed mainte nance, and made it fit for living.
A communal kitchen, various artist studios and working spaces, a yoga/ meditation space with 360 degree views, creative working zones, a community restaurant, martial arts studio, sauna, large club space, large event hall, and basement bar.
The newly established community added living spaces, shared kitchens and bathrooms, a wood workshop, a photographic darkroom, a rehearsal space and a stage. Poortgebouw soon became a renowned venue in the city’s underground scene.
The concrete grid in the middle section of the building has been domesticated through the construction of walls made of found and scrap materials. Used scrap material from the nearby Vendex squat as a construction mate rial.
Democratic process to make changes to social and communal spaces
Individual spaces are free to be modi fied as desired by occupant
Appointed leaders make key decisions regarding changes to social and com munal spaces
Individual spaces are free to be modi fied as desired by occupant
Live-work model for men AND women.
Communal Kitchen for shared produc tion of food. No nursery/creche
Live-work model for men AND women.
Communal Kitchen for shared produc tion of food.
Several nursery/creches with rotation of men and women taking care of children
The construction of mezzanines throughout the building has been key in the transformation process of the building. Arches —Many interventions have arch-shaped openings, created using templates found in the basement by the first group of squatters. Reno vations of the arches in the façade.
Democratic process to make changes to social and communal spaces
Individual spaces are free to be modi fied as desired by occupant
Live-work model for men AND women.
Communal Kitchen for shared produc tion of food.
Several nursery/creches with rotation of men and women taking care of children
The open office floors are divided into private rooms, communal spaces, and into workspaces of 20 to 40 square meters. The costs of using the building are covered by letting these work spaces to creative entrepreneurs.
The house has evolved into a shared structure with much open space inside. Facilities are shared on the top floor, in the newly-built bathroom and shower and in the basement.
The newly established community added living spaces, shared kitchens and bathrooms, a wood workshop, a photographic darkroom, a rehearsal space and a stage. Poortgebouw soon became a renowned venue in the city’s underground scene.
Workshops for printing, sign-writing, weaving and making clothes. A house for common activities with two bath rooms, a sauna, TV rooms, music room, quiet room/library and laundry.
Larger office spaces are divided into rooms by adding simple walls to create private rooms for all the inhab itants and office spaces to be rented out. A shared event space allows for the interaction between the different inhabitants and users of the building.
Practically gutted by fire, No 11 was converted into a cafe/meeting room/dancing space/theatre on three floors with platforms at split levels.
Appointed leaders make key decisions regarding changes to social and com munal spaces
Individual spaces are free to be modi fied as desired by occupant
Democratic process to make changes to social and communal spaces
Individual spaces are free to be modi fied as desired by occupant
Live-work model for men AND women.
Communal Kitchen for shared produc tion of food.
No nursery/creche
Live-work model for men AND women.
Communal Kitchen for shared produc tion of food.
Several nursery/creches with rotation of men and women taking care of children
Contrary to alternative forms of co-living models, the careful management of these self-organized and self-built spaces is fundamental for accommodating individual desires within the common good. Successful, long-lasting squats learned to creatively organize communal living by destabilizing hierarchies, shifting roles, and using democratic committee meetings to make decisions and are supported by unconventional approaches to economic and cultural exchanges, and forms of collective care.
houses in the street. This does not mean that St Agnes Place has no political value.The definition of ‘middle class’ is difficult.To speak about a middle-class background is complex enough but when we refer to middleclass jobs or a middle-class campaign,there is an important distinction to make: we have not been furthering middle-class interests but we have made use of our middle-class skills. A parallel distinction can be made for workingclass skills – between using them in a situation where they are making a profit for a privileged owner and where people own what they produce. I now know how to put new sash-cords in a window;I shall never again have to pay someone to do it for me.One day asked someone in the street ‘Have you seen the agenda?’;she replied ‘What is an agenda?’;I explained and she can now be that much less powerless at meetings. What I think is happening in St Agnes Place is that both middle-class and working-class people are moving out of the class positions determined by the existing culture.In their changed relationships with each other and with the physical environment,they have formed a small classless society or at least the outpost of one.This is close to the impulse that inspired the libertarian left of the ‘sixties,to the political analysis of Big Flame and to the concept of struggle on a ‘reproductive’ as well as a productive front. Squatting has a number of strengths as a force for change towards a new culture.First,it combinesa point of action – finding a house – with a continuing process of living.Second,it brings together middle-class and working-class responses to aspects of the existing society which have become intolerable.Third,although it is not a struggle in a place of production,it is right in the middle of a reproductive struggle:a struggle with the existing culture’s way of reproducing the right sort of people for feeding into the existing productive system.(The new culture needs to become independent in production as squatters support the existing consumer society too much by scavenging on it).And finally,it is a place where traditional working-class and middle-class skills can join to complement each other. What the new culture is about is not so much
the system as building something new, showing it can work and saying ‘Come and join
are pioneers in the city who can show what is possible and how good it is.•
191
Squatter
Towards a A Future of Sharing in Co-Living
Co-ownership and the Commons
Squatting: The Real Story, Nick Wates and Christian Wolmer (2020)
Established Co-op finds suitable vacant building and purchases it
The Co-op Board is composed of democratically selected stakeholders/residents from previous iterations of this co-living model
Co-op seeks stakehoders and allows them to become mem bers by buying a share of the Co-op
Co-op hires architect to work with stakeholders to determine facilities
Determine design of living units, organization of event spaces (adaptable social and cultural spaces), necessity for leasable commercial space, location of kitchen and commu nal dining, size and location of garden space, presence of fixed amenities such as nursery and daycare, and gym
Co-op hires develop er to renovate build ing according to architect’s translation of stakeholders’ ideas
Architect is the mediator between stakeholder and develope- the instigator. They will ask questions and bring up concerns during stakeholder meetings as a “consultant”. They will then translate ideas to a building design and communi cate to developer.
Co-op determines resident contributions and distributes rent credits in exchange
Co-op works to with stakehold ers to determine how residents will contribute to manage of communal facilities and how credits will be distributed based on contribution to the co-op.
Agricultural space in which some foods will be grown for communal food production. Promotes shared stew ardship
High reconfigural double height units in which inhabitants determine the domestic environment, degree of privacy and social exchange between roommates and commune residents.
Allows for centralization of domestic labor and sharing of reproductive burdens.
Allows for persuit of live-work lifestyle, easing the burden on both while improving social fabric within the commune.
Threshold space - allows for an open interior environment with high degree of social permeability
Primary spaces of negotia tion - multifunctional and adaptable space frames re-configurable by residents. May become temporary exhibition and theatre space, meeting halls, or more permenant individual and small possession sharing rooms, libraries, offices, nurseries, and daycares.
Restaurants and commercial space in the ground level allow residents to lease commercial space and generate income towards the co-op
By actively participating in reconfiguring, acti vating, and performing of these spaces, resi dents form intrinsic social and physical bonds between each other and to the structure which they have directly configured...
