Co-Living: The Space between Privacy & Possibility. A master's thesis from Politecnico di Milano. by Reehanul Karim

CO LIV ING

Prof. Anna Anzani Supervisor Prof. Emilio Lonardo Co-supervisor

10714251 Reehanul Karim Ashraf Ali

The Space between privacy & possibility A design inquiry into the future urban living patterns in the dense metropolis of Milano

Master of Science in Interior & Spatial Design

2022 Politecnico di Milano

2022 Reehanul Karim Ashraf Ali — MSc Interior and Spatial Design Politecnico di Milano —Prof. Anna Anzani — Prof. Emilio Lonardo

Abstract It is predicted that by the year 2050, the global population in cities would swell to almost 10 billion people, making it more crowded than ever. With this growing influx of people to cities, there is greater competition for jobs which leads to unemployment, and subsequently to lack of affordability in housing for the many. Following the recent economic crisis and the unprecedented issues arising from the covid-19 pandemic, the novel trend is to not only further densify the existing consolidated city but also refurbish the ones that in a state of disrepair. Today, Milan is the scene of several such transformations which has potential for regenerating the architectural and social fabric of the city. Hence an investigation into the current abandoned building situation and urban stratification of Milan, whilst looking for gaps to redesign these spatial communitas, is required. To this end, this thesis endeavors to launch an inquiry into the present situation and the potential in exploring shared living as a means to unlock and provide for more affordable and liveable structures, thus creating new forms of dwelling in an increasingly densified yet diverse world. Keywords: #sharedliving #usercentricdesign #systemicdesign #inclusivecities

Sommario Si prevede che entro l’anno 2050 la popolazione mondiale nelle città aumenterà fino a raggiungere quasi 10 miliardi di persone, rendendola più affollata che mai. Con questo crescente afflusso di persone nelle città, c’è una maggiore concorrenza per i posti di lavoro che porta alla disoccupazione e, di conseguenza, alla mancanza di disponibilità di alloggi per molti. A seguito della recente crisi economica e dei problemi senza precedenti derivanti dalla pandemia di covid-19, la nuova tendenza non è solo quella di densificare ulteriormente la città consolidata esistente, ma anche di ristrutturare quelle che sono in stato di abbandono. Oggi Milano è teatro di numerose trasformazioni di questo tipo che hanno il potenziale per rigenerare il tessuto architettonico e sociale della città. È quindi necessaria un’indagine sull’attuale situazione edilizia abbandonata e sulla stratificazione urbana di Milano, cercando al contempo le lacune per ridisegnare queste communitas spaziali. A tal fine, questa tesi cerca di avviare un’indagine sulla situazione attuale e il potenziale nell’esplorazione della vita condivisa come mezzo per sbloccare e fornire strutture più accessibili e vivibili, creando così nuove forme di dimora in un mondo sempre più densificato ma diversificato. Parole chiave: #abitarecondiviso #designincentratosull’utente #designsistemico #cittàinclusive

“To my professors, friends, family & the spirit of inquiry”

INDEX

Prologue Motivation: Future Urban Living in dense metropolitan cities

Introduction 1.0 Setting the scene: What is Co-living, essentially? 1.1 Introduction to Co-living 1.2 Timeline: History & background 1.3 Taxonomy: Relationship between public & private realms 1.3.1 Taxonomy: Typologies of co-living models and users 1.3.2 User Taxonomy: Household composition & size in Italy 1.4 Societal challenges: Scenario of Urban housing today 1.5 Demand drivers: Scenario of housing affordability in cities 1.6 Living together: Notion and Need for co-living now

Research methodology 2.1 Setting the perspective: Defining the research process 2.2/2.3 Research Process: Outlaying the research narratives 2.4 Research Process: Transformative map of the thematic stacks 2.5 Research Process: Defining the purpose, process, outcome 2.6 Research Process: Identifying problem statement 2.7 Research methodology: Crafting the research framework 2.8 Research methodology: Synthesis

THeoretical framework 3.1 Strategy for the framework: Stating the prospects for design proposal 3.2 Criteria for assessment: Toolkit for analysis 3.2.1/3.2.6 Case studies with analysis and evaluation 3.3 Literature review 1: Exploring the prospects of digital technology 3.4 Literature review 2: Navigating the public & private realm 3.5 Literature review 3: Breakdown of Andel 2.0 3.6 Overall analysis: Proposing feasible strategies 3.7 Theoretical framework: Synthesis

CONTENTS

Project site Analysis 4.1 Problem analysis: The abandonment problem in Italy 4.2 Territorial analysis: Milan and Urban stratification 4.3 Zonal analysis: Zone 2 vicinity with its significance 4.3.1 Zonal analysis: Surrounding services & connections 4.4 Site analysis: Project site with block urban scale 4.5 Building analysis: Inquiry of project site with stats 4.6 Photo exterior: Color and typical elements 4.7 Photo interior: Elements & interior views 4.8 Photo material: Identifying the damage and decay 4.9/10 Site documentation: Plan and Elevation of existing site 4.11 Load-bearing systems: Structural identification 4.12 Demolition: Retained/demolished portions of site 4.13 Design intervention: Program strategies

Design Implementation 5.1 Program context: Method/Program framing objectives 5.2 Site program and the stacking of spaces 5.3 Programmatic diversity & expansion 5.4 Vision context: An overview of the end-user typologies 5.5 Abacus of the user type, program and functions 5.6 Nature of public with private dwelling spaces 5.7 Site context: Structural rehabilitation of the building 5.8 Masterplan of the site with exterior elevation 5.9 Design context: Interior furniture drawings 5.10 Zoning context: Private-public relationship drawings 5.11 Spatio-auditory context: Tranquil-busy zoning of floorplan 5.12 Fluxes context: Movement of resident vs visitors 5.13 Interior & visualization context: Shared living space 5.14 Interior & visualization context: Bar & restaurant 5.15 Interior & visualization context: Co-working

Epilogue & reflections Final remarks: Conclusion and learnings from research Bibliography & citations

“Can we fit 7.2 billion people in our cities of the future?” Well, it’s difficult, but certainly not impossible; We will have to rethink the way we live now, how we lived in the past, & how we intend to meet the challenges of designing spatial solutions in order to transition into the future.

PROLOGUE

Prologue ‘‘As the effects of rapid urbanization and population boom continues to push people out of cities in the current state of the world, we look toward other forms of living that might help mitigate this growing problem’’

There is a rapidly growing crisis of population increase in European cities.

It has been predicted that atleast 70% of the world’s population would occupy our existing urban cities by the year 2050, having either migrated from other parts of the world or from rural areas, not taking into account the population boom (an increase of 54 percent from 2016). Between January and August 2021, the European country registering the largest number of migrants’ arrivals was Italy. As of August 18, 2020, 35 thousand immigrants reached Italy by sea. [1] So, in a few decades, if you’re wondering why your trains and buses are packed to the brim, or why your rent has soared to astronomical prices thus pushing you to find other places to live outside the city whilst figuring out a transportation line to it, it’s probably because a few million more residents have thus come to occupy it since, owing to childbirth or migration. In such a world, the burning question would be “Can you really afford to continue living in your city centers?”

FIG - 1.1 Popular tweet statement inspired by the research topic.

Source: [1] (World Urbanization Prospects, https://population.un.org)

Chapter 1 A preface to modern problems we face in the dense metropolises

INTRODUCTION

CHAPTER ONE

1.0 Setting the scene — What is Co-living, essentia

elcome to the year 2050, there is now another seven billion people occupying the urban areas making up roughly 68 percent of the world’s population. The cities as we know them today will have exceeded its own capacity to accomodate this extra load of population, leading to driving a mass exodus of people to the suburbs and satellite towns situtated around the metropolitan centers. The City is never a static entity, the salient characteristic of cities is— and has always been—changes. Cities’ are organic and they develop in rhythm with changes in the economic, technological and social conditions. The cities’ potency is their inherent diversity, which maximizes the chance for people to meet regardless of their diverging interests, their different ages and their various social and ethnic affiliations. This is one part of the background of the fact that cities’ have functioned through the ages as meeting places, as experience zones and as milieus fostering innovation and incubation. The burning question in this case is how we can support the cities’ openness and the cities’ overall capacity to absorb changes, and more importantly, welcome even more people into the fold, in the days to come. [2]

Source: [2] (Public space 2, JUUL | FROST Architects, 2009)

SETTING THE SCENE

ally? Why is this topic relevant now more than ever?

[photo credit: https://www.nightflow.com/ The-Navigli]

BACKGROUND & TOPIC The research topic I had chosen initially, which aimed to explore the spatial connotations of co-existing in an ever-increasing and densified urban metropolis, had changed over the course of the pandemic, to questioning the relevance of the same motives in the now-post-pandemic era, which developed stark differences in terms of people’s sensibilities, their work environment and their life at home— away from work. The additional layer that this experience introduced for me, was the imminent issue of social exclusion and inequity felt by all the masses in their living and work environments, which was further exacerbated by

the Covid-19 pandemic and the ensuing challenges and changes that arose in the bigger metropolises. My goal was to explore the emerging narratives that surrounded the financial squeeze of modern life in contemporary living patterns, which, combined with an upsurge in digital nomads preferring the ‘sharing economy’ to owning property creates a niche for exploring a modern solution for individuals who migrate to urban landscapes but do not possess the means to invest in real estate, right away. [3] Hence, I wanted to investigate this challenge of designing spatial solutions for the Future Urban Living in cities, going forward.

The effects of rapid urbanization and popuation boom in the current state of the world now has pushed people out of cities, thus creating a need for exploring a new typology of housing.

Source: [3] Anton & Irene, OneSharedHouse project, 2016)

CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Introduction to Co-living with definition “Co-living is a collaborative method of living that fosters connectedness, increases social capital for their residents, and creates opportunities for conscious use of social, natural & man-made resources. A more sustainable way of living.” [4]

DEFINITION — WHAT IS CO-LIVING? WHY IS IT RELEVANT? The idea of co-living is to create a community-centred environment that not only provides for privacy in living arrangements but also promotes social contact through shared amenity spaces and community events. The occupant rents a small private space—a studio or a bedroom in a shared apartment—and benefits from those shared facilities. As an asset class, the concept of co-living seeks to build a community centred around ‘real socialising’ in a world where most social media platforms are the virtual alternatives for socialising for millennials. The model addresses the need to meet and connect with other people, for a generation that reports more loneliness than their elders. [5]

The lack for affordable housing is a pressing issue in many cities today. Simply put, we aren’t building enough affordable housing to keep up with the demand. House prices are rising in almost every major city, while the incomes have failed to keep up with the property market, meaning it has become much harder for ordinary people – not to mention students – to find an affordable place to live. A community can benefit from economies of scale through sharing services, or by being more self-sufficient in terms of energy, food and mobility. Through the better use of space and by sharing the costs, shared living could enable more affordable housing [6]

Shared living can solve challenges like lack of affordable housing, loneliness, ageing populations and enabling a better and more sustainable way of life for the many, as their needs, aspirations and lifestyles change.

INTRODUCTION & DEFINITION

Source: [4] (Quote from cohousing.org) [5] (Fgould, Co-living: the newest asset class comes to Manchester, Web Blog post, July 30, 2019) [6] Anton & Irene, the OneSharedHouse project, 2016)

[photo credit: pexels-fauxels-3184188]

CHAPTER ONE

1.2 Timeline — History and background of Co-livin

High Middle Ages —1100 AD Households were organized around couples with children, It was still not a nuclear family as it was communal housing with townspeople, other children, and the elderly.

Ind We wh as We an

ITALY

GREECE 2400 years ago—428 BC

500 years ago—1500 AD

Plato on Collective living 2400 years ago in ancient Greece, the philospher Plato described an ideal community or city-state called “Kallipolis”, where everything was organized collectively.

Northen Italy’s ‘Cascina a corte’ It refers to a type of rural building, traditional to the Po valley in Lombardy. A typical cascina is a square-yarded farm located at the centre of a large piece of cultivated land, including houses.

CHINA

Various sources: —Kollectivhus: History of co-housing Internationally and in Sweden :http://www.kollektivhus.nu —A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmid (2019) https://doi. org/10.1515/9783035618686 —The History of Coliving: A collection of research findings https://alexandraplesner.medium.com/the-history-of-coliving-d79bda766dc4 — Wikipedia Articles & blogs

12th Century Chinese ‘Tulou’ Chinese rural dwellings called Tulou was a large, enclosed, and fortified building, made by compacting raw earth, mixed with stone, bamboo, wood etc, by the Hakka people in Fujian. 900 years ago—1127 AD

Thomas Moore’ Sir Thomas M a ‘utopia’, tp de fect world whe self-contained c on an island, sha culture and way 500 years ago—

TIMELINE

dustrial Revolution —1800s We moved to urban settlements now, here single housholds began to form, s communal living became less relevant. We now placed higher value on privacynd individuality over groups needs.

FRANCE

SCOTLAND 200 years ago—1813 AD

200 years ago—1813 AD

Robert Owen’s ‘Parallelogram’ Owen’s utopian socialism saw ideal societies with limited inhabitants who own their means of production. It would have generous common spaces with modest individual dwellings.

Godin’s ‘Familistère de Guise’ Godin built what was called the “social palace” housing complex which created a relatively stable and self-contained worker’s society, where everyone would live as in a huge family.

’s “Utopia” More wrote of escribe a perere a complex, community set ares a common of life. —1506 AD

Charles Fourier’s ‘Phalanstère’ He designed a type of building with self-contained community of 500-2000 members working together for mutual benefit, developed in the 19th century. 170 years ago—1844 AD

continued...’

FRANCE

UNITED KINGDOM

CHAPTER ONE

1.2 Timeline — History and background of Co-livin

Continued industrialization— In the early 1900s, it became quite expensive to maintain maids so groups of families shared the task of food preparation, forming the “Central Kitchen buildings” concept of living in Copenhagen first, then in other European cities.

Ad Th in tac ho to tw

RUSSIA

UNITED STATES 200 years ago—1840 AD

100 years ago—1917 AD

American Boarding houses In 19th century America, the boarding house transcended family life and independence. They were self-contained communities that offered wholesome meals & housekeeping.

The Soviet “Kommunalka” The communal apartment is unusual because it brought together families of vastly different educational backgrounds, attitudes, ethnicities, and life habits. They shared intimate spaces together.

ISRAEL

Israel’s “Kibbutz” Guesthouses A kibbutz is a type of settlement which is unique to Israel. A collective community, traditionally agrarian. The first kibbutz was Deganya Aleph, founded in 1910. There’s 270 kibbutzim in Israel. 100 years ago—1909 AD

The Hässelby “f The Familjehote gkvist’s biggest ect with 328 the name “famil the plan was to when the mothe 80 years ago—1

TIMELINE

dvent of Co-housing — 1950s he concept of co-housing first originated Denmark with an ideal of individual deched houses, while sharing a common ouse, using spatial design & architecture encourage frequent interactions beween the inhabitants.

Rise of Co-living — 2000s The invention of the internet made peer-to-peer resource sharing possible. The sharing economy resulted in contemporary co-living including hacker houses, housing as a service [HaaS], in response to the rising house prices couple with social isolation arising from digital age along with the millenial’s experience-led generation.

DENMARK

FRANCE

70 years ago—1952 AD

8 years ago—2014 AD

Unité d’Habitation, Marseille An 18-story residential block that expressed Le Corbusier’s ideal of urban family lodging, It was a vertical mixed-use community, with a shopping floor and other communal facilities.

Nest Co-living, Copenhagen Nest is one of the first non-profit, co-living spaces in Denmark’s capital, targeting entrepreneurs and innovators. It is spread out over 4 separate, adjacent apartments, with 4-6 residents.

family hotel” ell, was Olle Encohousing projapartments. As ly hotel” implies, support families er away working. 1935 AD

Collective Old Oak, London It is the first to be built and is currently the world’s largest co-living building. It gives people the chance to live in a studio apartment with shared living and working spaces in London. 12 years ago—2010 AD

...Today.

UNITED KINGDOM

SWEDEN

CHAPTER ONE

1.3 Model Taxonomy — Spatial protocols of Tradit According to Susan Schmidt, Living space can essentially be acquired in three ways: by purchase, rent, or acquisition of partial owner group model. [11] However, housing co-operatives and building owner groups who operate on a non-profit oriented or self-directed basis, namely in Switzerland and Germany, view themselves as an opposing or necessary model to the profit-oriented model used purely for commercial exploitation and rental housing, i.e. an approach to ownership and availability that strikes a balance between the two. While housing ownership can influence the typology and layout of the floor plan, ”renting living space” usually means accepting what is available in terms of space, interior design, materials, and furnishings. These living areas often do not fit current or changing living situations, uses and lifestyles. Certain rooms are only used at specific times of the day or week, such as home offices, hobby rooms, or guest rooms, meaning that a good portion of the living space—a scarce commodity in Central European urban environments—is not being used. In recent decades, growing levels of prosperity have led to a sharp rise in housing consumption that by far exceeds actual requirements for appropriate living space. [12]

Sources: [LEFT] [11] A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmid (2019). https://doi.org/10.1515/9783035618686 [RIGHT] [12] Common —“Coliving, in relation to the real estate market”, Web Blog Post, Christina Yoh, April 2019. https://www.common.com/blog/2019/04/what-exactly-is-coliving-explained/

[photo credit: NARA—518522]

[photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608]

MODEL TAXONOMY

tional rental model vs Modern shared living Since the Industrial Revolution of the 1800s, single housholds began to gather momentum, as communal living became less relevant. This placed higher value on privacy and individuality over group needs, and this was reflected on the floorplans of the urban buildings where single bedrooms were disconnected and behind closed doors, with little to no space for socializing; along with the services linked to the individual units through seperate connections.

Figure [1.2] shows a traditional rental model with a Bed—Bath—Living arrangement, with services and amenities.

In an urban environment, coliving facilitates the sharing of a very limited resource: space. Space has become unaffordable, and in order for more people to have access, spaces must be shared. Through sharing, coliving is able to increase the amount of available spatial resources accessible to each individual by transforming traditionally disparate apartments into well-planned spaces with amenities. [2]

Figure [1.3] shows a aggregated model with a common streamlined services and distributed common amenities.

CHAPTER ONE

1.3.1 Model Taxonomy — Relationship between the The public and the private — The private arises from the public, because only by excluding the public from a living environment can the private prevail as a counter-world. Correspondingly, workplace-based wage-labor outside the living quarters and the exclusion of unrelated relatives from the household created space for intimacy and autonomy from society. This evolved into the privacy provided by the home. This development also created a paradox: if the private arises from the public, then the interior always references the exterior. [13] By definition, the duality of public and private, creates two poles that, through their tension and mutual interaction, form a basic principle of shared social life. According to Hans Paul Bahrdt, these two social states are what lead to actual urbanity. The more pronounced the interaction of the two states, the more urban the life in a building, or a neighborhood becomes. [14] This interaction between the public and private has direct consequences for the daily coexistence of the residents of collective living spaces. Since public-private boundaries must be continually explored and renegotiated according to the changing lifestyles, household types, modes of work, and mobility, the polarity is constantly in motion. As access within a spaces increases, the more accessible it becomes and vice versa. Collective living spaces fluctuate between the two poles and varying degrees of collectivity

and intimacy more often than individual spaces. The interaction and the flowing transitions between the two poles are of great significance. The need for privacy and intimacy does vary depending on life phases, education levels, age, personality, nationality, gender, and prior living experiences. The boundaries between living space in the home and community environment and the public realm are becoming more permeable and flexible. [13] Tenets of Collective living — Ultimately, it is the residents themselves who classify degrees of publicness through their regulations and activities. Shared housing can contain a great variety of degrees of public access, which in turn leads to a hierarchization of these spaces. This gradation creates intermediate zones that are essential to human co-existence and create identity in housing. Russian-American architect Serge Chermayeff attempted to introduce six domans to clarify the direct relationship of the city to the private sphere, which is illustrated on the right. [15] He understood these six domains not only spatially, but as a whole social system that includes mobility, infrastructure, and then sociological aspects of living together. Co-living entails a constant balancing act between the public and the private, the interests, living culture and possessions of the user groups from various walks of life, as well as the traction between themselves and their perceived spatial environments.

‘‘This interaction between the public and private has direct consequences for the daily coexistence of the residents of collective living spaces.’’

MODEL TAXONOMY

e public and private realms in urban metropolises

Urban-Public

Urban Semi-Public

The urban public is an unenclosed public realm that people can traverse on and interact with, and possessing maximum accessibility.

This entails an enclosed space in the public realm with non-specific boundaries that could be accessed and exited without any reprieve.

Group-Public

Group-Private

The group public dynamic is any group(s) of people who interact with and use the public realm, which is accessible and unenclosed.

The group private dynamic is any group(s) of people who interact with and use the private indoors, with limited access and control.

Family-Private

Individual-Private

This comprises of a single family who utilizes a living unit and a private household, and within which, sets its own rules and engagements.

This comprises a single individual who takes up a private living unit with minimum access to others from the public realm or community.

Sources: All graphics attributed to user (pch.vector) — https://www.freepik.com/pch-vector [13] (A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmidt, 2019). [14] (Die moderne Großstadt pp. 24, 30, Hans Paul Bahrdt 1998) [15] (Community and privacy: Toward a New Architecture of Humanism, Serge Chermayeff, 1965)

CHAPTER ONE

1.3.2 Model Taxonomy — Typologies of co-living m Through our experiences with the everyday practice of dwelling within a home, we think we know exactly what dwelling entails. However, this commonplace knowledge is the result of prior social processes that are influenced and controlled by a number of factors. [13] While housing is a medium that represents the cultural milieu and individual lifestyle, those functions of dwelling that serve to maintain our existence remain in the foreground. Sociologists Hartmut Haubermann and Walter Siebel define four central characteristics of living: the functional significance of the home, the social unity of housing, and the legal and economic parameters of the home. Collective aspects of living affect each of these four fields of meaning. The following study is based on three models of collective living with its own intentions, creating nine models of living that serve as examples, corresponding to the zeitgeist in which they were created, and are also characterized by parameters like household forms, types of work and mobility. The aim of this study is to examine the developmental lines of these models that will lead to an understanding of the motivations behind their emergence, and the shifting spaces from private into the collective and public spheres, can be made visible. Collective living is always a spatial and social interaction, which is a constantly changing trend more or less depending on these factors. [13]

FIG 1.4 — (A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmidt, 2019)

TYPOLOGIES OF CO-LIVING

models and users

[photo credit: pexels-ingo-joseph-9816]

Economic

\\ The primary focus of the economic intention was to improve access to affordable and higher quality dwellings for disadvantaged user groups. \\ It was sought to cushion widespread housing shortages by creating affordable living spaces for the working class. \\ Characterized by small living unit and a service-oriented design with centralized functions in order to improve household efficiency and harmonize the daily life and work. \\ These were designed and implemented top down, with the desire to improve the living conditions of the inhabitants.

Political

Social

\\ The primary focus of the political intention was to improve housing quality and increasing the social stability. \\ These models were aimed at nuclear families and focused on providing quality, well-planned living spaces. \\ The most essential shared areas in this living model were spaces for outdoor recreation and growing food in front yards, courtyards, or squares. \\ The Family unit, which had not yet been challenged as a social unit thus far, remained the central focus of the community and the inhabitants of these models were mostly families.

\\ The primary focus of the social intention was to reduce per capita consumption of living space in affluent societies and, lower rising housing cost. \\ In light of housing pressure in urban areas, shared housing is also a way to provide affordable living space to a wider range of population sectors. One key feature of collective living models that are based on social intentions is sharing through engagement and participation. \\ In addition to this, sufficiency and environmental sustainability are increasingly important factors for the developers and residents of this model.

CHAPTER ONE

Economic

Shared Living based on Economic Intentions

Boarding Homes

Service Apartment

This boarding house, located in Surabaya, Indonesia, is designed by Andyrahman Architect based on contemporary issues, specifically on bioclimatic and biophilic issue in a broader context. [16] Eventhough it’s a modern iteration, the underlying concept remains the same as the American boarding houses of the mid 19th century with close knit private rooms whilst the services and amenities are allocated away from the rooms seperately.

HACHI, the modern serviced apart business areas of Ladprao, Bangko ban housings, office buildings and c 34-unit rooms with an area of 26-4 and multipurpose room. [17] These ed living experiences which is purp them, with the aim of maximizing ga

privacy Low

area: —

Mid

High

year: 2016

Sources: [16] Image and typical floor plan of The Bioclimatic Boarding House by Andyrahman Architect, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2016) FIG 1.5

FIG 1.6

ECONOMIC INTENTIONS

Assisted Living

tment for monthly rental, located in ok, surrounded by very crowded urconventional apartments. This has 44 sqm per room, a serviced office housing model is based on elevatpose built for people who can afford ains with high investment.

Elderly Residential Home by Atelier Zündel Cristea is a residential building found at 68 Rue des Plantes, in Paris. It aims to tackle two issues; Firstly, it involved rebuilding within the urban fabric of the city by reshaping an occupied site in order to give it greater clarity and adapting it to today’s urban requirements. Secondly, the consideration of how to integrate vulnerable or aging populations into the city, and how this should be addressed architecturally. [18]

privacy Low

privacy Mid

High

Low

Mid

High

area:1100 m² year: 2018

area:29k m²

Sources: [17] Image and typical floor plan Hachi Serviced Apartment by Octane architect & design, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2018)

Sources: [18] Image and typical floor plan of Elderly Residential Home by Atelier Zündel Cristea, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2014) FIG 1.7

year: 2014

CHAPTER ONE

Political

Shared Living based on Political Intentions

Co-Operative Housing

Courtyard Housing

The three buildings designed and curated by the Coop for affordable public use, offering a wide range of housing models, starting from compact apartments of 25m2 to cluster-apartments of 600m2 for 20 inhabitants. [19] Co-op housing is characterized by single living units and service-oriented design with aligned functions which are lined on another side of the building, away from the private units in order to maximize the privacy and efficiency but also to enhance sociability.

Nestled amidst the rapid urbaniza lombo city, it incorporated the soot courtyards. Bawa’s design negotia site with an introspective design wh drew inspiration from traditional arc the central courtyard. [20] These flow and ventilation whilst bringing

privacy Low

Mid

High

area: 7.376 m² year: 2013 Sources: [19] Image and typical floor plan, Cooperative development for affordable housing and mixeduse, Spreefeld Berlin by fatkoehl architekten, 2013) FIG 1.8

FIG 1.9

POLITICAL INTENTIONS

Community Household

ation of Cinnamon Gardens in Cothing spatial organizations of urban ated the increasing urbanity of the hich was both radically modern and chitectural tropes in Sri Lanka, like courtyards provide adequate airin light to enliven the living experi-

This project involves building 93 multi-family and mid-range housing units in the Berges du Lac-Ginko development area, which forms part of the urban renovation scheme for the north of Bordeaux. Widely referred to as Ginko, this new district sets out to redefine the components of urban life: the place occupied by cars, how people get around, the distribution of energy, the shape of the urban fabric, the relationship with nature, and so on. [21]

privacy Low

privacy Mid

area: 206 m²

High

Low

Mid

High

year: 1947

area: 6893m² year: 2015

Sources: [20] Image and Ground floor plan Number 05 Lunuganga by Geoffery Bawa, Design Pataki, Web blog post, Jan 2021)

Sources: [21] Image and typical floor plan of Ginko by Hessamfar & Vérons, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2014) FIG 1.10

CHAPTER ONE

Social

Shared Living based on Social Intentions

Housing as a Service [HaaS]

Cluster Apartments

The Paper Factory Hotel is located in the Kaufman Arts District of Long Island City. The renovation created a highly varied series of spaces designed to host daily experiences, from music to educational gatherings, to business workshops. The ground level was opened to create a physically and visually connected sequence of spaces and contains living room seating arrangements, restaurant, bar, game room, and meeting area, whilst maintaining the private rooms upstairs. [22]

Habitat 67, was originally intended high-quality housing in dense urba the possibilities of prefabricated mo costs and allow for a new housing qualities of a suburban home into an the integration of two housing ty home and the economical high-rise

privacy Low

Mid

High

area: 2860m² year: 2020 Sources: [22] Image and Ground floor plan of The Paper Factory Hotel by The Collective, Palette arch, Web blog post, 2020) FIG 1.11

FIG 1.12

SOCIAL INTENTIONS

Student Housing

d as an experimental solution for an environments. Safdie explored odular units of 600 sq.ft, to reduce g typology that could integrate the n urban high-rise. It thus pioneered ypologies—the suburban garden e apartment building.[23]

The Erasmuc SH complex is an eight-storey PBSA unit [Purpose-built Student-Accomodation] with 281 studio units for international students. A central courtyard brings light and air into the heart of the building and extends as an internal street, connecting the complex with the campus’s street network. On both ends of the building, this leads to a generous lobby. It also provides access to individual rooms, the laundrette, a collective study space, concierge’s office & bike parking [24]

privacy Low

privacy Mid

High

Low

Mid

High

area:32.420m² year:2018

area:10.160 m² year: 2018

Sources: [23] Image and typical floor plan Habitat 67 by Safdie Architects, ArchDaily, Web blog post,

Sources: [24] Image and typical floor plan of the Erasmus Campus Student Housing by Mecanoo, World architects, Web blog post, 2018) FIG 1.13

CHAPTER ONE

1.3.3 User Taxonomy — Household composition a

In 2020, the total resident population of Italy came upto 60.2 million. The largest number of people lived in the Northern region of Lombardy, about one-sixth of the population. However, the population of Italy is predicted to decrease by 2035, the number of inhabitants dropping to 58 million. The primary reasons include declining birth rate in recent years and an increase in the population aged 65 years and older, exceeding the younger population by about 10%. In 2020, the average age of Italians was 45.7 years, with the forcasted median age set to increase in the future, to almost 53.6 years by 2050. [25] Further changes in population figures are visible in the marriage rate and family structures. Nowadays, fewer people are getting married compared to previous years. Additionally, the average size of households shows a declining trend. It turns out that Italy has fewer and smaller families than before. Finally, the number of single-person households is increasing. [26] Household size— Italian households were larger in the South than in the North of the country. For instance, the regions of Campania and Sicily recorded 2.6 and 2.4 members per household, with the last positions

occupied by the Northern regions. In the last years however, the average number of people per household decreased in Italy, from 2.4 to even 2.3. Structures of families— Nationwide, 35% of the households consisted of families without a nucleus, such as people living alone, families consisting of two siblings, or a widowed or divorced parent living with a child etc. Furthermore, couples with children made up 32% of all households in Italy, the second most common household structure. Single person households however, were on the rise. In 2020, there were 8.5 million single-person households in Italy, about one million more than in 2012. Problem of overcrowding—According to Eurostat, Italy has the biggest problem with overcrowding among larger European countries, with more than 30% of all families in such living conditions. Idealista reports that, the average size of an Italian home is 81 square metres – smaller than the German (109 m2) and French (112 m2) averages. More than half of all Italians live in apartments, with over 25% living in large condominiums featuring ten or more apartments, and a further 27% in smaller blocks. Meanwhile, 15% were found to live in homes deemed larger than necessary.[27]

Nowadays, fewer people are getting married compared to previous years. Added to that, the average size of households in Italy has fewer and smaller families than ever before. Finally, the number of single-person households is increasing.

USER TAXONOMY

and size in Italy

Sources: [25] Map of Europe’s average household size composed from Statistica, 2020 [26] Italian household, Web Blog post. [27] Statistica - Demographics and household size in Italy. All graphics on the next page are attributed to user (pch. vector) — https://www.freepik.com/pch-vector [Average European Household size in persons, Statistica, 2020 ]

1.9— below 2.00 2.1 — below 2.19 2.2— below 2.29 2.3— below 2.49 2.5— below 2.69 2.7— below 2.90

CHAPTER ONE

1.3.3 Taxonomy — Household composition and si

Single-parent unit

Two-parent unit

A Single parent—child household can be male or female, with atleast 9.8% of Italian households having this type. But 62% of the population has nuclear households.

A nuclear family has individuals forming a couple without children, a couple with children. In fact, 31.3% of Italian households have both the parents with children.

Single adult

Multiple adults

A single-person household consist of one person living alone, which uses up more resources per capita. There are currently 8,410 households in Italy of this type.

Around 15% of households possesses 4 adults or more. Lately, dynamic groups consisting of foreign migrants or families, are a new phenomenon for the Italian society.

Students & Academics There are 32,000 international students in Italy, including independent students and those on exchange programmes.

Bachelor-Nomads With 94 million tourists per year (2018) [29], Italy is the 5th most visited country in international tourism arrivals.

USER TAXONOMY

ize in Italy

Two-adult couple

Two parent—multiple kids

Almost 18.8% of couples live in households without children, but can have pets. This is also a convenient choice for people living in metropolitan cities.

In Italy, 47% of households consist of atleast 2-3 members which may or may not include younger kids with single parents or both parents.

Extended family

Senior citizens

Only 2% of households possesses atleast one member under 20 years old and one member above the age of 65 years of old.

Almost 37% of Italian households consist of senior citizens aged 65 or above, making it the third oldest in the world.

The average household size in Italy is at 2.58 persons per household close to the OECD average of 2.63 [28]. Spending for families was 1.4% of GDP in 2007, against the OECD average of 2.2%. Households without a nucleus was 35.3% of all households in 2020. Single adults were families composed by (eg.) two sisters, or a parent living with widow or divorced child, etc. In contrast, 31% of all households were couples with children. 31 0 FIG 1.14

40 60 80 Percentage of households

Sources: [28] OECD population & statistics data—https://data.oecd.org/italy.htm

[29]United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019) [30] Italy economic snapshot | Statistica | World bank data | OECD data [31] Statistics from Istat, Wikipedia, studylink & Statistica 6 1

100

One person

Single-parent with children

Couple only

Extended family

Couple with children

Non-relatives

CHAPTER ONE

1.4 Societal challenges — Today’s scenario

(Share of population in urban areas)

Share of population living in urban areas — recorded data from 1950 to 2050 100% 100% 80% 80%

9.8 billion

people are projected to make up the global population by 2050

Italy 71%

Almost 70%

60% 60%

of the world’s overall population will occupy the urban areas

40% 40% 20% 20% 0% 0%

69.80%

GDP per capita Sweden Sweden China China

U.S U.S Nigeria Nigeria

Italy Italy India India

share of population in Italy were settled in urban cities by 2016

FIG 1.15

(Share of population in urban areas)

Urban population vs. GDP per capita, 2016 [Italy along with six countries] 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% GDP per capita Sweden China FIG 1.16

U.S Nigeria

Italy India

Sources: [LEFT] Our world in data | UN urbanization prospects 2018 | World bank data OWID based on UN data | The HYDE 3.1 2010 [RIGHT] [32] (Bioagency: “Why coliving is the answer for the experience-led generation, Web Blog post, Aug 2019) [33] (Rittel & Webber, 1973)

SOCIETAL CHALLENGES

‘‘I understood that the issue of ballooning population and the rising migration to cities, combined with housing more people with the available resources and dwindling space is a growing issue that needs attention— a wicked problem indeed.’’ [3]

MOTIVATION, RESEARCH AREA & OPPORTUNITIES My interest stems from over a decade of living-in and renting accommodations designed for multiple individuals with shared facilities such as work-areas, living and cooking spaces located inside housing structures ranging from dormitories to hostels to shared private apartments; the ensuing differences that are associated with space, privacy, location, interests and the shared values of the inhabitants. Moreover, with as many preferences and viewpoints as there are people, I wanted to pose the question of; Can there be an ideal purpose-built co-living scheme that holistically caters to all people? and If this is to be considered, what IS an ideal co-living environment? Would it have to be Liveable or Resilient, or both?

Shared-living communes could be the answer to the effects of rapid population increase, the noticeable space crunch in cities and the social exclusion felt by people, post-pandemic. Christine McDannell, co-founder and CEO of Kndrd and author of The Coliving Code says, “Co-living is absolutely the leading answer to our global urban housing crisis. Not only does it solve the cost and spatial demands associated with housing, but it also addresses the intimate aspects of human connection that have been lost. Loneliness rates doubled in the past 10 years, and rent costs have gone up more than that. It’s very rare that a single solution can solve a complex multi-pronged issue like housing, but co-living truly does.” [32]

I identified an opportunity to delve deeper into this matter, and I further understood that with the issue of ballooning population and rising migration to cities, housing more people with the available resources and dwindling space would be a rapidly growing issue that needed immediate attention, and besides, it could be seen as nothing less than a ‘difficult issue’ — a wicked problem indeed. [33]

Shared-living communes could be the answer to the effects of rapid population increase, the noticeable space crunch in cities and the social exclusion felt by people, postpandemic.

CHAPTER ONE

1.4.1 Societal challenges —Today’s scenario Urbanization and population trends [1900 to 2050]

Population (in million)

7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000

Urban

Rural

Urbanization is an essential part of growth and an important factor in the socio-economic transformation & development of any city. According to the UN, 60% of urban growth is attributed to population increase, while 40% is due to migration from rural to urban areas. Rural – to – urban migration is motivated by the prospect of a higher standard of living, greater employment opportunities, better healthcare and educational facilities, as well as overall well-being. Also, across the world, people are moving to cities in search of jobs and opportunities. The accelerating urbanisation of tomorrow [almost 90%] will primarily take place in emerging economies. [34]

FIG 1.17

Megacities >10million people

Megacities capacity over the years [predicted to reach 45 by 2050]

Population every 10 ppl

1950 2/10 people

2010 5/10 people

1990

2016

Time period in Years FIG 1.18

Year of settlement in urban cities

2050 7/10 people

SOCIETAL CHALLENGES

Pre-pandemic it had been predicted that at least 70% of the world’s population would live in cities by 2050, but the key components of a well-functioning city — housing, mobility, environment, economy and culture — have all been severely impacted by public health concerns. The changes in the way we work, shop and socialize have arguably hit cities hardest. Add in the climate emergency and it is hardly surprising that the United Nations is calling for a focus on transforming cities across the world and the pursuit of a green, resilient and inclusive economic recovery. [35]

The interrelation between the Covid-19 pandemic and the urban conditions has reset many long-held planning paradigms. Lock-downs and social distancing requirements have imposed constraints, but opened up creative opportunities in how we use both our private and public spaces. Studies have shown that communal living can provide companionship for those affected by the psychological effects of the pandemic, [like isolation] along with the the traditional co-living model, not yet an accepted housing delivery model. [36] So, I asked the question: Could we re-think Co-living?

Sources: [LEFT] [34] (IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living. Space 10, 2018). Graphs and Statiscal data from World bank data, UN DESA, UN-Habitat data, Smart city hub. [RIGHT] [35] (Katy Gordon, “Envisioning the future for our post-pandemic cities” Web blog post. July 2,2021) [36] (Mark McCord, weforum: People, Co-living & Communal health, Web blog post, March 1, 2021)

[photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608]

CHAPTER ONE

1.4.2 Societal challenges —Today’s scenario

[photo credit: pexels-wencheng-jiang-6635793]

NECCESSITY BY VIRTUE OF MODERN PROBLEMS Co-living or Shared-living isn’t anything new, tens of thousands of years ago, people co-existed together in the form of tribes and communes in close-knit communities, sharing the available pool of resources and benefits that it included, until modern society deemed it proper to live in single family units, thus relegating us to tiers of social standing, various classes and ethnicities. We grew even more apart as time turned its wheel to the Industrial revolution, leading to rapid production and urbanization of the same cities. Now, opportunites were presented to erect even more walls and fences between us till we reached the era of extremely efficient yet simplified square boxes and aggregates of private living modules we called apartments. The objective? To share costs, resources and amenities. As cities became dense and populated, there was an urgent requirement to house more people with the existing available space and resources. It was Marx who said “Necessity is blind until it becomes conscious”. I believe it is the time to review our past forms and patterns of living so we could propose a newer model for the future, one that catered to all classes and needs, a solution that our ancestors started with, but is now revisited —Co-living.

SOCIETAL CHALLENGES

Source: [37] World population ageing 2019. [38] (Space 10 (2018). IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living). [39] Italy economic snapshot | Statistica | World bank data | OECD data [40] UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs.

There are several factors to consider whilst crafting a valid argument to support an updated concept of living in cities, namely identifying the issues faced by societies today, revisiting the existing models of living arrangements including case studies, then finally basing the co-living spatial design proposal in the metropolitan city of Milano, in Italy. The Inequality factor — As a result of the economic downturn, there is also widespread income inequality, growing unemployment and social exclusion felt by the masses in the wake of the pandemic. The COVID-19 crisis has increased inequality between social groups in health, housing, employment, income and well-being. Whilst a small part of society was able to hold on to or increase its wealth, other groups such as women, young people, older people, people with disabilities, low and middle-income earners and those with young children were acutely affected by the pandemic as a consequence. The Loneliness factor — From the pressures and uncertainties in our personal and professional lives, to the aftereffects of the pandemic, we have embraced a culture of individualism. Studies show that prolonged loneliness has a large impact on mental and physical well-being. Added to this, the number of people older than 60 would also rise from about 1 billion today to 2.1 billion in 2050, [40] That means it’s vital that we design new types of living environment for all age groups – environments that provide social support

sense of purpose, while enabling people to live their own private lives but still be part of a “community” and have a social life. This can help improve the health and well-being of many urban dwellers. The Unaffordability factor — The widening gap between house prices and income levels means young adults increasingly struggle to get onto the housing ladder. The housing market seems to consist largely of one-unit single-family homes, yet many people end up living with flatmates in homes that aren’t designed for it. Shared-living spaces could be designed for just that, by prioritising people’s individual privacy while offering spaces for a vibrant community and a social lifestyle to enjoy. The Population factor — As people live longer and the global population gets older, we need to rethink the living environments of not only the young and healthy, but also the old and ageing, to ensure their participation and social interaction in communities. With Italy recording 23% of its population over 65 years old, and pensions at 16% of GDP, a major demographic shift is underway and housing needs are changing. Reducing these inequalities for EU citizens and promoting upward convergence in living conditions is high on the policy agenda for the European Commission. Drivers of inequality can include gender, age, disability, employment status and citizenship, with implications for pay and income, access to welfare, health and education. [37]

CHAPTER ONE

1.4.2 Societal challenges —Today’s scenario There are four key pain-points currently experienced by various social groups in Italy due to the pandemic. Inequality >Inequality is higher than in most advanced economies. >The poorest 20% of households earn 6.6% of total income Gini coefficient of income inequality (lower is better) Low inequality 23.6 Advanced economies 30.3 (median) Italy — 33.4 Emerging economies 45.9 (median) Very high inequality 62.0

Social exclusion Share of population at risk of poverty/social exclusion (2019) < 16

32.7% 32.8%

16-24

34.7% 37.4%

25-54

31.8% 31.2%

55-64

32.5% 25.6%

Females

>Risk of poverty & exclusion is higher for people aged 16-24.

Human capital

Generation rent

Italy 73%

House prices vs Wage rises

>Italy records 23% of population, over 65 years old and has highest public spending on pensions which counts for 16% of Italy's GDP. Italy 23 %

% population over 65 years old

>The widening gap between house prices & income levels means that home ownership amongst young adults have steadily declined. Represents other countries FIG 1.19

Males

> Productivity is higher (73%) than in most advanced economies. Italy 59%

Human capital Utilization (HCU)

>But only 59% of working age population is employed, which is lower than most economies. Represents other countries

SOCIETAL CHALLENGES

Reducing inequalities for citizens and promoting upward convergence in the living conditions high on the EU policy agenda, post-pandemic.

As rapidly urbanizing cities struggle to provide adequate and affordable housing for their growing populations, a new sharing movement emerges that could radically change the way we live, What will our future homes and cities look like? Is it likely that we might all have to get used to living with other people? [41] The immediate problems that require attention include loneliness and the increasing lack of affordable housing, as well as social and demographic shifts which will change the nature of the city as we know it. What happens to the concept of space—and of sharing— when we are constantly on the move or ever-present in the digital

realm? And what happens when we design for more supportive and adaptive communities to help us lead more efficient and happier lives? [42] Hence there is an imminent need to design shared-living spaces in the present day scenario that not only make it more affordable and enable better living for residents, but also could be an antidote to social isolation and loneliness, due to the wide-spread Covid-19 pandemic. The question becomes, How might we (re-)design and build new realities that promote a sense of well-being and improve the spaces we inhabit in terms of liveability, accessibility and resource efficiency? [42]

Sources: [RIGHT] [41] United Nations SDG goal 11: Sustainable cities & communities–https://unstats. un.org/sdgs/report/2019/goal-11/

[42] (Space 10 (2018). IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living). [LEFT] Italy economic snapshot | Statistica | World bank data | OECD data

CHAPTER ONE

1.4.3 Societal challenges —Today’s scenario House price index vs GDP & unemployment rate 110 108 106 104 102 100 98 96

Italy (HPI)

Italy GDP/capita

During the Covid-19 pandemic, home prices have shot up nationwide while household income fell. As a result, homeownership now became out of reach for many would-be buyers. However, affordability was a growing problem well before 2020 and the start of the pandemic. The price to income ratio is the nominal house price index (HPI) which is considered as the benchmark for affordability for home-buyers. Italy’s HPI is forecast to skyrocket amidst stabilizing GDP per capita post-pandemic. This leaves scope for seeking alternative housing. [43]

Employment rate

FIG 1.20

Scaling prospects of purpose-built shared living models > From traditional housing models to collective living > Creating solutions in response to rising property prices and increasing social isolation due to covid-19 > Digital tools for promoting innovation & ownership

Short-Term

Mid-Term > Space as a strategic tool to create more inclusivity > Carving out space inside existing dense urban cities.

Long-Term > Cater to the growing population & depleting resources from population boom & climate change > Rethinking/providing residential home -ownership for people in the future dense metropolises

2018 – 2019 - 2020 – 2021 - 2022 – 2030 – 2050

Solvable

>Social inclusion & community capacity >Improving Digital assets for coordination FIG 1.21

Difficult

>Cost & spatial demand >Closing gap between development and the cultural traditions

Wicked

>Conformity of policies >Creating a good value system for all people through shared-living

SOCIETAL CHALLENGES

[photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608]

Here we find that there is an opening for reformulating the co-living scheme on a systemic level, in order to not only solve the increasing cost and spatial demands associated with housing; but also address the intimate aspects of human connection that has been lost during these trying times. According to Mark McCord, [44] many view co-living as an answer to the global housing crisis, making dwellings more affordable for a majority of people. It’s also touted as a solution to making cities more habitable, as they expand in the near future to contain an esti

-mated 70% of the world’s population. Co-living could also help reduce the strain on global resources by pooling the use of carbon-generating utilities such as heating, energy and water [44] I decided to base my spatial design research inquiry into the feasibility of shared living communes in dense urban metropolitan cities, as people continue to rethink their living spaces to possess a good work-life balance in addition to providing more inclusivity and resilience, in order to combat the urgent need for accomodation, as well as the growing feeling of isolation in the post-pandemic era. Sources: [LEFT] [43] Source: Inferences & statistical graphs from Eurostat | Trading economics. [RIGHT] [44] (Mark McCord, weforum: People, Co-living & Communal health, Web blog post, March 1, 2021)

CHAPTER ONE

1.5 Demand drivers — Scenario of housing afforda

[photo credit: pexels-aleksandar-pasaric-2451032]

Urbanization

Densification

Pandemic

Spatial Scarcity

Isolation

Unaffordability

Social changes

FIG 1.21

POTENTIAL BARRIERS TO HOUSING IN MAJOR CITY CENTERS This megatrend across Europe is restructuring the economic and demographic foundations of countries whilst also influencing infrastructure constraints, land competition and housing affordability. A major contributor to this is that the employment rate in cities, which has increased by 5% over the past ten years. Densification occurs as a natural consequence, meaning our cities are becoming more crowded and space is becoming scarcer, as more people are struggle to find affordable housing. Concurrently, the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic saw changing patterns of work, rising loneliness, and the shortage of quality accommodation that catered to the flexible demands of today’s tenents, who are looking for a more community-led living experience. This experience led to an unprecendented feeling of isolation, which was felt, world over. [45] Co-living is an emerging asset class that offers a blended solution of residential and flexible short stay accommodation with an option to invest as a home-owner. It acts as an active community, addresses the challenges faced in a changing urban landscape, whilst providing opportunities to live in city-centers that would otherwise be too expensive in the traditional private rented sector. In short, co-living can be described as purpose-built and managed developments that include a mix of personal and shared amenity space. “where location, convenience, community, and affordability are all maximized for the tenant, while revenue is maximized for owner and operator.” [46]

DEMAND DRIVERS

ability in dense urban cities across Europe Housing is at the heart of growing economic divides in Europe. This is because productivity growth, which comes with higher wages and better jobs, is concentrated in cities and industrial clusters. Yet, cities are precisely where housing prices are prohibitive. [47] Land and housing assets tend to be a source of income inequality, but also foster spatial inequality, which serves as a barrier of entry for new home-owners in dense urban cities. Housing is unaffordable in metropolitan centers because the construction of new homes has not kept up with demand. These housing shortages and rise in home prices in many EU cities indicate that housing markets are not functioning effectively. While policy incentives (eg. taxation benefits) have favored homeowners, less attention and resources have been devoted to easing the barriers and market restrictions that would allow housing supply to respond to increases in demand. EU policymakers should ensure that land use, rental and other regulations are consistent with incentives to spur residential construction. [47] This is why a comprehensive solution that takes into account future urbanization, increasing asset values and plateauing income in housholds ought to be explored and applied to the landlocked spatial urban landscapes of the future. The next step will examine the state of housing affordability along with prospective demographics, in five potential cities in Europe in order to assess the similarities and trends in the construction sector with the corresponding market demand.

Sources: [45] (Housing affordability and sustainability in the EU, Analytical report, November, 2019). [46](Nick Prescott—Co-living: a new housing model in a broken system, Web Blog Post, Oct, 2020) [47](World bank data: Living and Leaving: Housing, Mobility and Welfare in the European Union, Publication, November, 2018) FIG 1.22

Identifying the demand drivers for Co-living Urbanization

Affordability

Social changes

>Urbanization— Almost 75% of the EU population live in urban areas, and the United Nations expects this to grow to 84% by 2050.

>Affordability—The decline of home-ownership has boosted demand for rental housing. House price growth outpaced wage inflation in Europe.

>Social changes— The pandemic made wide-spread socio-demographic shifts which drove demand for co-living models across Europe.

CHAPTER ONE

1.5.1 Demand drivers — Scenario of housing afford

Milano

> Population under 25 is around 35,000 with students at 152,000. >Professionals prefer renting due to flexible contracts. > Lack of PBSA is a key driver for co-living demand. > Co-living is a very attractive up-and-coming asset class and therefore there is no precise planning definition proposed.

[photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608]

Amsterdam

> Home shortfall here is around 67,000 with property prices up 59.6% by 2015-19. > Shifting towards private renting can take upto 15 years. > Co-living demand for ages 1835 is almost 277,000. > Planning policies aside, the schemes must adhere to the rigid valuation system.

[photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608]

London

> House price to earnings ratio is 14.0 with average salary spent on rent 37%. > Renting has risen from 22% to 30% with the salary needed per annum at £40,000. > Co-living is a new real estate typology and is a living environment distinct from other types of rental properties.

[photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608]

DEMAND DRIVERS

dability in dense urban cities across Europe

Vienna

> Attractive university city for domestic as well as internationals. > Population of 20-32, which is the potential age group rising by 35% from 2000 to 2019 and is expected to keep increasing. > Compared to other European capitals, the residential market in Vienna is structured and regulated.

Berlin

> Population increases annually by 40,000 citizens but Germany’s home-ownership rate is the lowest in Europe. >New construction does not meet the demand. >Investment rates are high as €1.9bn, making Germany an advanced market with top potential for co-living establishments.

Trends

Similar social and real estate trends are seen everywhere.

Concept

Small private spaces and large communal areas are prevalent.

Global investors

Numerous co-living operators are already in many countries.

Regulatory framework No clear framework in terms of zoning, rent controls and VAT/

[photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608]

Sources: [48] CBRE report on co-living comparing [photo credit: pexels-dsd-1822608] five cities with population and CL demand.

CHAPTER ONE

Milan, che ne dici?

A GLOBAL POPULATION of almost 68 percent will

be living in Urban areas as of 2050, with studies showing that people tend to migrate from rural to urban areas as they become richer, with living standards generally likely to be higher in urban areas.

Statistics of worldwide urbanization with a focus on Milano, Italy. billion people are estimated to live in urban areas by the year 2050. It would be almost 68% of the world’s overall population at that time. This would an increase from 54% in 2016.

150k+ is the total number of student population in Milan, Italy with around 35,000 students who are under the age of 25. Most professionals and academics would prefer to rent than buy.

29.4k€

71.32%

is share of population in Italy who are settled in urban cities in 2021. This increased from 65 % in 1972 to 71.3 % in 2021 growing at an average annual rate of 0.19%.

times an average Italian annual household salary is needed to purchase a property in Italy. [49] This is around 31,393 euros or 2,616 euros monthly. With a 20% initial deposit of price of property [45,600 euros], a buyer should be able to purchase a home worth 228,000 euros using a 25-year mortgage.

is the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in Italy, vs 69.86% level of urbanization. [50] The more developed a country generally is, in terms of per capita income, the greater would be the population living in urban areas.

91% Since the start of pandemic,

is the debt of the average Italian household’s net disposable income. With many people at risk of exclusion and financial debt, home ownership becomes little more than a pipe dream compared to reality.

65bil€ is the estimated amount which will be required to construct another 1 billion new homes, which would be needed worldwide then, in order to meet the deficit, and this figure is a rough yearly estimate.

DEMAND DRIVERS

[photo credit: @simonedaino95]

CHAPTER ONE

1.6 Living together — Analysis of criteria Five thematics to consider in the design of a holistic shared living model Co-living for tomorrow primary considerations

centered around people’s needs and affordability

deep & integrated relationship with natural env.

closing the gap between people, culture & tradition

choosing right materials, methods & implementation

placing emphasis on engagement & civic involevement

Financial requisites

Sustainability requisites

Societal requisites

Functional requisites

Political requisites

Economy

Ecology

Equity

Efficiency

Egality

FIG 1.23

Design for shared living in the cities of tomorrow

[photo credit: pexels-pixabay-270246]

LIVING TOGETHER

To address the increasing population, dwindling natural resources and the financial—space crunch, we need to reformulate the value proposition of an affordable co-living scheme.

Availability and affordability of decent housing has become an important economic and social concern in the European Union (EU). This has accelerated in recent years, as housing price increases in metropolitan regions have often outpaced wage increases. Across Europe, people are anxious about their ability to find and afford decent housing. In 26 of the 28 EU capitals, most respondents disagreed with the statement that finding good housing at reasonable prices is easy (EC, 2016a). Young people and newcomers to cities are especially affected, while older generations owning homes in prime locations have benefited from the rise in the value of these

assets.[51] On the left are listed five essential thematics or considerations to design a more holistic shared living model by considering the factors discussed above. It is important to consider a multi-pronged approach when it comes to systemic rethinking or reformulating of this particular issue and the five thematics of: Economy, Ecology, Equity, Efficiency and Egality serve as a starting point for this inquiry, in not only investigating the financial or functional requisites for better living in the cities of tomorrow but also to take into account the social inclusivity, sustainability in construction as well as the policy-making that goes behind such an undertaking.

Sources: [51] (World bank data: Living and Leaving: Housing, Mobility and Welfare in the European Union, Publication, November, 2018)

CHAPTER ONE

1.6 Living together — Need for co-living now Schematic diagram for a Co-Living Spatial Model [CLSM] Functional Spatial design

CLSM

Co-Living Spatial model

Societal inclusivity

Supportive Spatial design

Financial prerequisites

Sustainable Financial model

Sustainable & Eco-driven

Resource Optimization

Political & Policy-oriented

Aligned Policy & regulation

FIG 1.24

How do we leverage changing public needs to maximize spaces for co-habitation? 1. By reformulating the spatial dynamics and design of the shared-living/co-living model. 2. By increasing the affordability and creating a more sustainable path to home-ownership for more people. 3. By designing an integrated energy approach and accessible common pool of resources. 4. By making policy schemes to benefit future housing regimes.

Sources [RIGHT]: [52] (Chetan Choudary, From smart to good cities, Web Blog, July, 2021). [53] (Derek Fidler, “The cost of housing”, WE forum, WebBlogpost, 2019) [54] (“Shaping an Equitable, Inclusive and Sustainable Recovery”, WEF Web blogpost, Sept, 2021)

LIVING TOGETHER

AIMS, SCOPE AND OBJECTIVES It would not be an overstatement to claim that in the world’s present context, most people, if not all, want to live in a city. The comfort of urban life, the glamour, the job opportunities, higher earning potential, education, healthcare, and other benefits increase the charm of city life, thus drawing more people away from rural settings, and into cities each year, adding to the existing birthrate of that city. But with such constant influx of people, this so-called charm starts getting depreciated in the form of pollution, traffic jams, poverty & unemployment, crime, distance from nature, and so on. This keeps the notion of an ‘ideal’ city as a distant dream. [52] One such issue is the population boom and subsequent lack of housing. For the better part of the 20th century, Home ownership has been the crux of the average citizen’s growth in net worth and the cornerstone of any government’s housing policy. But 70 years of consistent appreciation in housing values, combined with stagnant real wage growth, has caused a crisis of affordability in major cities, and an intensification of wealth/racial inequality. Housing, like student loans and health insurance, has fallen into a free market trap. There’s an inelastic demand - everyone needs housing, an education and to be healthy - and people will pay almost anything to acquire these basic needs.

Change — inclusive, efficient, dynamic, and green — is about opportunities for people, planet, and business.

The U.S in 1950 showed that median home price was 2.2 times the average yearly income. Largely, this inflexible cost has been paid with greater private debt. In 2018, mortgage debt as a percentage of GDP grew from 15% to 80%, placing further strain on people’s livelihoods[53] As the COVID-19 crisis continues, there seems to be a widespread realization that we must “build back better & broader”, with an awareness of the great danger, difficulties, and frailties of the economies and societies we have created. This crisis arrived on the back of forces and trends in our societies and economies that were becoming increasingly unsustainable— in terms of the environment, distribution, inclusion, and resilience. Change — inclusive, efficient, dynamic, and green — is about opportunities for people, planet, and business. We need to build resilient economies which serve all parts of society and ensure that nature and our created environments are preserved for the future generations to come. [54] The Co-living of tomorrow however, has significant challenges to overcome in terms of providing for all. Can these purpose-built co-living models bring new homes for young professionals (an emerging asset class for investors)—as well as being suitable for families, children and older generations? Can it offer a long-term solution, with a feasible path toward home-ownership, for residents who staying longer than just a few months? Can Co-living serve as a modern form of housing, whereby residents share values, interests, aspirations and living spaces? This research paper aims to inquire into these questions and finally propose a Co-Living Spatial Model [CLSM] that can aims to apply itself to dense urban cities like Central Milano.

Chapter 2 Outlining the research process, goals and methodology

CHAPTER TWO

2.1 Setting the perspective: Defining the research p

rimarily, I had launched an investigation into the ideological aspects of rethinking shared-living and arrived at five essential thematics as seen in Chapter 1 - pp.48, but I realized that these considerations would have to be streamlined into the process of carrying out this research in a step-by-step manner; It was lacking a holistic outlay of the objectives that had to be set to move forward, so I decided to apply a structured, methodological chart to clarify the boundaries of the research. The initial step was to employ the organization design model to frame the objectives [why], interpretations from the preliminary study of the topic as well as an intended outcome [what] to serve as the main directive, be aligned on the project focus and set clear targets; In order to serve the increasing population in the cities and the slowly dwindling natural resources, I realized that a top-down approach would be suitable, by reformulating the value proposition of an affordable co-living scheme for the greater masses [how] by investigating not only the spatial dynamics that surrounded building, re-using & sharing our urban spaces but also expanding the shared living configurations to create a more inclusive and social context.

IDEO’s design thinking methodology is focused on human centered design approach to quickly explore possibility, test insights and iterate, and it addresses three frames of inquiry namely: the needs of people, the possibilities of technology and the requirements for success in implementation. This approach begins with the needs, behaviors, and circumstances of the people who stand to benefit from a better value proposition for living. Throughout the process, divergent phases – going broad and really thinking about the possibilities – followed by the convergent phases – focusing and narrowing the scope – help guide us to three main areas [1] Inspiration is means of opening up the problem or opportunity space through research activities, in this case the objective [Why] of the research. Ideation is the process of generating, developing, and testing ideas, the [How] which utilizes the tools and design strategies for implementation. Implementation is the path that leads from the project stage into people’s lives, and ultimately the desired outcome [What]. This is the overall research strategy for the topic of coming up with a spatial solution for shared living.[2]

Domain One

Objective — WHY

The “why” explores the pri driver for change in the res by enriching the capacity t innovate, and changing the approach from optimizatio towards innovation.

Understand

Observe

Inspiratio

Discovery

Sources: [1] (Design Thinking models: IDEO, Ramunas Balcaitis, June 2019) [2] (Change By Design, Revised and Updated, Tim Brown, March 5, 2019)

FIG 2.1 [Top] — Organizational design model FIG 2.2 [Bottom] — IDEO’s design thinking framework

I have a challenge. How do I approach it?

SETTING THE PERSPECTIVE

process methods and tools for analysis Organizational study area of the design discipline + research question

Contents — WHAT

imary search to e on

Domain Three

Domain Two

Interpretations — HOW

The “what” moves the narrative from being structure-focused to more process-oriented in terms of approach. This aids in having a more holistic understanding of the issues & research gap.

The “how” triggers the nature of design as an intervention method as well as giving an opportunity to employ several methodologies of design-thinking to practicable solutions for the problem.

Design Thinking Process POV

Ideate

Prototype

Test

Storytelling

Ideation

Pilot

Business model

Implementation

Interpretation

Ideation

Experimentation

Evolution

I learned something. How do I interpret it?

I see an opportunity. What do I create?

I have an idea. How do I build it?

I tried something. How do I evolve it?

CHAPTER TWO

2.2 Research Process: Outlaying the research narr

CONVERGE

Design challenge

Research topic

Synthesis

Ideate

Re-designing the spatial dynamics of shared living

Exploring the feasibility of spatial design in expanding configurations in the shared urban cities of tomorrow.

A holistic framework for tackling the loneliness and urban density issue.

Create propos

CONVERGE

FIG 2.3 — IDEO’s design thinking framework FIG 2.4 — Venn diagram for design thinking

RESEARCH PROCESS

ratives and streamlining the process map FIG.2.3—Design Thinking Framework Sources: [1] (Design thinking framework stencil from Design Thinking models: IDEO, Ramunas Balcaitis, June 2019)

DIVERGE

e design

e a spatial design sal for Milan.

Prototype

Testing & feedback

Evaluation

Test the prototype in a site in Milan’s city context.

Prototype impressions go toward evolution and redesigning the model.

Designing with revised attributes for the future.

DIVERGE

The research gap and opportunity calls for a rethinking of the value proposition for the people who will continue to flow into dense cities. Using IDEO’s human-centric design thinking framework, I mapped the various functions based on the ensuing objectives. Starting from a point of understanding of people’s needs, we explore what is desirable for the users, with what is technologically feasible and economically viable, the intersection of which yields A—emotional innovation, B—functional innovation and C—process innovation, finally the center representing the core design innovation.

CHAPTER TWO

2.3 Research Process: Iterative diagram for identify Research process map

Shared living in future Urban metropolises

Literary research sources (separate pg): [1] (Flexible Housing: The Role of Spatial Organization in Achieving Functional Efficiency, Seyed Reza & co, July 2015)

Urbanization

Social isolation

Rapid urbanization of cities and depletion of our natural resources means that we need to rethink how we live.

The covid-19 pandemic h caused a worldwide issue cities with many peop afflicted with social isolatio

Affordability

Drivers for change

[2,3 & 5] (A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmidt, 2019).

[4] (Positioning of location-independent coliving, Jacob Jay, Oct 3, 2018)

[6] (Social Innovation through Design. A Model for Design Education, Harah Chon, April 2018) [7] (The Challenge of Coliving Economics, Gui Perdrix March 2021)

[8] (Regulating urban densification, Teller, J. 2021)

converging line Physical Stack

Social Stack

Spatial programming can re-define the relationship between intimate,shared and open spaces leading to designing for lesser rent.

Investigate the urban pac of human interaction of o age. Living experiences a what our cities and restle millennials need.

[9] (Co-living as a means to re-engagement. Dora Karadima & Spyros Bofylatos, May 2019)

[10] (A System Model and An Innovation Approach toward Sustainable Housing Renovation, Ju Liu & co, Feb 2020)

[11] (Smart Home Adoption, Soojung Chang and Kyeongsook Nam, Sept 2021)

[12] (Decentralized markets and the emergence of housing wealth inequality, Omar A.Guerrero, Nov 2020)

FIG 2.5 — SL research process map

Create layouts that offer wider range of affordability.

Create shared typologies with diversity and inclusivity.

Balance individual privacy and platform for socializing.

Create curated communit with self-management 2

Define clear boundaries w predetermined spaces

Foster interaction throug intentional social design

RESEARCH PROCESS

ying the research gap with literature sources

has e in ple on.

Widening gap in stagnant wages & high rents make it difficult for young adults to get in the housing ladder.

Digital tools transform the way we look at ownership sharing tools, knowledge, skills and services in-house

Integrating Technology

Smart financing

Operational aspects can rely on automated digital technology with residents and operators in the center for convenience and safety.

converging line

with s

gh n

The sharing economy today is willing to digitize every aspect of our lives, share data, but still with a demand for a private space. 7

Solve density issue with less private and more public area

Do bottom-up approach with community engagement

Research Gap

Financial Stack

Play with price points to get alternative revenue streams 5

How can planning and policymaking help in crafting a good value system for a network of people with diffe ent backgrounds?

converging line

Design a model that offers a better quality of life, at a better price point to a wide variety of people, while bringing financial returns

tes

Question 2

Sustainable & smart finan ing is required to offer a range of people, a path towards home-ownership by increasing affordability.

Digital Stack

ce our are ess

Question 1

Market gap

Digital infrastructure

Open systems can lead to innovation in housing 8

Operational aspects can rely on automated digital tech

Enable decentralized nodes through a digital platform

Though co-living isn't new, we need to rethink our built environment by innovating on the infrastructure and make it affordable & sustainable for future urban living.

CHAPTER TWO

ble ina ls sta ria Su ate gm din

ild in

Hu sp man ati al cent de sig ric n

il bu Di co ver nﬁ se gu sp ra ati tio al ns

Intentional social design

2.4 Research process: Transformative map of the t

a sh

Inte

rna and l ﬂexib il aes thet ity ics

Innovative design practices

Spatio-cultural aspect of Milan

Resource usability and eﬃciency

l ita g i y d d olog e t n ma ech o t t Au

Regulatory framework

Financial sustainability

iv at

s on pti cri ices bs Su serv d an

FIG 2.6 — Transformative map for

Redesign of SL spatial structures in the dense urban city of Milano

Operational digital aspects

r fo s ion m t te va s o sy inn n e al Op igit d

Inclusivity and resilience

Digitalization and technology

D dig ece ita ntr l p ali lat ze fo d rm

RESEARCH PROCESS

ity

thematic stacks with sub-categories

ity

co m

c pa

rin

e om es c n i ti ng quali i s s e dre ial in d A oc &s

Financial equity and social mobility

For m typo alized logy ho for using SL

The use of the transformative map aids in visualising the 16 complex topics and the interlinked issues stemming from the four thematics (taking into account two more for the site of design proposal and the barriers to implementation) with their inter-dependencies between them [3]. Starting with the role of the spatial designer, the design practices of shared living spaces ought to be reprogrammed in order to account for the sensibilities of the people belonging to the

modern era today, whilst bearing in mind that the post-pandemic future entails rapid changes in living and working, which needs to be addressed effectively. The issues of affordability and density leads us to consider the barriers of entry for the user availing such a model, and lastly, the integration of technology in the spatial landscape whilst being conscious of the ecological footprint of the built environment enables us to proceed with clear objectives and requirements.

To provide a better value proposition for the end-user in terms of spatial infrastructure, better inclusivity and integrated technology with a path to home-ownership, this research aims to address the key challenges.

Sources: [3] (What is a transformative map?, James Landale, WEF, 8 November, 2017 ).

CHAPTER TWO

2.5 Research Process: Defining the purpose, proce FIRST FRAMING & OUTLINING THE QUESTION The purpose, process & outcome was derived from this initial framing, with further inquiry pinpointing the relevance of this research [problem] and carve out the research gap [opportunity] that necessitated innovation of the infrastructure within our built environments. There was a segue at this junction to incorporate two of the United Nation’s SDGs, 11 —sustainable cities & communities and 12 —Industry, innovation and infrastructure, These directives were included to not only to meet the challenges of designing successful spaces that aimed to reduce social isolation and increase affordability for the inhabitants in the current pandemic-hit economy, but also to spark an initiative to battle climate change and provide for a more sustainable mode of living in the post-pandemic future, and the years to come. Having delimited the purpose, outlayed a feasibile process, and narrowed down the outcome of such an undertaking, the thesis study has gained a clearer directive in order to pose the primary research question: How can we unlock room in dense urban metropolises, by reformulating the spatial dynamics of shared living spaces for the post-pandemic future, in our cities of tomorrow? This will act as the main research objective going forward.

Objective [Why]

To cater to the growing population and depleting natural resources, by way of rethinking the overall value proposition of an affordable shared living model.

The Purpose

From traditional systems to systemic design amidst the pandemic social change.

Relevan

From ra aging p emerge prices a urban e a need f The Overlay

Include United Nations SDGs

FIG 2.7 — Diagram for framing the research question

RESEARCH PROCESS

ess, outcome and the main research question Chosen research topic

Redesigning spatial dynamics of shared living in urban cities

Contents [What]

Interpretations [How]

To explore new ways of designing shared living spaces in response to the lack of affordable housing and social isolation in the post-pandemic era.

1. Using space as a strategic tool to create a more inclusive/social context. 2. Expanding the co-living configurations. 3. Access to homeownership.

The Outcome

The Process

From being structure-focused to becoming process-oriented.

nce [Problem]

Formulating spatial dynamics to engage, build, share & re-use available spaces.

Research gap [Opportunity]

apid urbanization to populations, climate encies to rising land and social isolation in environments; there's for spatial solutions.

Main research question

How can we unlock room in dense urban metropolises, by reformulating the spatial dynamics of shared living spaces, in our future cities for the post-pandemic era?

Thesis study

...

CHAPTER TWO

2.6 Research Process: Identifying the problem stat SECONDARY INQUIRY & OBJECTIVES The discourses that stem from the primary research objective are threefold: Firstly, to launch an inquiry into the practice and materials involved in implementing shared living as a viable and feasible model in urban settlements, especially a historic city like Milan. Another line of inquiry would be how this would impact people’s livelihoods, and interpersonal relationships with others, with the causes and effects of current urbanization practices. Secondly, to investigate the known drivers from the previous chapter and elucidate the barriers existing in place that prevent the execution of a shared living model in a realistic setting. Lastly, to inquire into the ability of cities to act as a market facilitator and enabler in re-designing our built environments throughleveraging policies. All three discourses are in line with the research objective of spatial reformulation, and aid in understanding not only the possibilities but also recognize and acknowledge the challenges present in the cities of today. This stage concludes with two objectives. 1. To propose a design for innovating on the accepted shared living typology of today. 2. To back this research claim by putting the property knowledge, technological know-how and the policy barricades that it would face in a dense metropolitan city with its myriad of regulations.

Discourse One

Exploring the physical & material aspects of shared living

Can co-living configurations act as a solution to growing urban and social issues?

Surmised input

Using space as a tool to foster inclusion & interaction.

Sustainable mat design for dis

Expected outcome

Spatial design balances the need for privacy and the desire to socialize.

FIG 2.8—Diagram for identifying the problem state-

Design for low leads to reduc consumption &

RESEARCH PROCESS

tement with discourses, drivers and barriers Chosen research topic

Redesigning spatial dynamics of shared living in urban cities

Discourse Three

Discourse Two

What is required to place the property, practicality and logistics behind the project?

How can we leverage policy to promote inclusivity, affordability and sustainability in cities?

Investigating the challenges and opportunities of shared living

Devising the Future Urban Living of our tomorrow

What are the various potential drivers for change as well as the barriers for development?

Can cities implement policies to enable citizens to have better price and quality of life?

Drivers

terial usage & sassembly.

Demand from urbanization | housing issues | technology Barriers

wer energy ced resource & green living.

Switching from established models | Operative barriers | Design & definition of space

Investigate

What are the operative barriers for shared living?

What is needed to enable shared living to enter Milan?

Objective

Innovate on existing shared living typologies for model

Effective design & policy to foster better living & inclusion

Premise

Ability of cities to act as market facilitators Surmise

1. Play with price points 2. Solve density problem 3. Implement bottom-up

CHAPTER TWO

2.7 Research methodology: Crafting the research f REFINING THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND METHODS The main research question for this thesis remains as: Can we unlock room in dense urban cities by reformulating the spatial dynamics of shared living spaces, with Milan as testing grounds?. I had set three discourses, which aided me in narrowing down the objectives, and focusing on the four layers or stacks as illustrated below, in order to arrive at a method to plan the case study analysis and literature review. Chosen research topic

FRAMING THE SCOPE OF LI The four sub-questio ly tackle both the tangible as w culminating in four expected ou in the implementation of the sh primarily as a guideline to invest given the many constraints and

diverging line

Redesigning spatial dynamics of shared living in urban cities

Objective A

Innovate on spatial typologies & technology for flexibility

Research Gap

Research Question

Can we unlock room in dense urban cities by reformulating the spatial dynamics of shared living spaces with Milan as the testing grounds?

Efficient design & policy to foster better living & inclusion Objective B

FIG 2.9—Research methodology diagram

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

framework, methods and expected outcomes

ITERATURE STUDIES AND OUTCOME ons derived from the objectives effectivewell as intangible aspects of the research, utcomes or frameworks which would aid hared living proposal in Milan, but serves tigate into the feasibility of such a venture, d barriers of this research proposal.

diverging line

Case study Analysis — Selection of relevant projects with identified similarities & user-centric design & relational studies of private & public realm

converging line

Expected outcome A —

Sub-Question 1 [Physical stack] Can spatial programming create enhanced layout design?

A holistic framework with various requirements & commonalities of shared living for design proposal Literature review — Insights from pro-digitized home-owners Expected outcome B —

Sub-Question 2 [Digital stack] Can employing digital resources aid in better living & experiences? Ethnographic research — Questionnaire & Feedback from interviewees about select issues Sub-Question 3 [Social stack] Can sensitive design solve the problem of inclusion & isolation?

A model that compiles user’s sensitivities within shared spaces to promote diverse & inclusive spaces

Expected outcome C —

A list of competencies for taking measures to foster inclusion & safe guard user’s interests or needs Literature review — Insights for inclusive spatial design w/results Expected outcome D —

Sub-Question 4 [Financial stack] Can better financing off er a better value proposition to all?

A systematic overview of the proposed paradigm that aims to diversify the options in housing markets Literature review — Identifying renting schemes & community policies for implementation of shared living in formal housing typologies across various cities

CHAPTER TWO

2.8 Research methodology: Synthesis Tangible objectives

Intangible objectives

— Can spatial design expand diverse co-living configurations in a metropolis? — How can large chunks of vacant commercial spaces be re-imagined and re-purposed? — How can we mobilise new forms of technology to inform design, planning and construction for the shared living of tomorrow? — How can technology assist in fostering more affordable living opportunities and access to home ownership and savings?

— How do we design a value system for exchanging care, skills and information? — How can models and ideas for social organisation be developed to build capacity in the field of shared living in cities? — Could we foster sharing-friendly policy and framework conditions in the public planning processes and tenders? — What approach should we take to curtail housing affordability issues without steep revenue declines?

Innovate on spatial typologies Designing for internal flexibility and aesthetics, leveraging digital technologies for ease of living, whilst creating curated living experiences for the people’s needs and the market.

Strengthen diversity & inclusivity Using spatial design as a strategic tool to create context for inclusion and interaction; Changing the living model by balancing individual privacy with a platform for socializing.

Liveability

Resilience

Sustainability

Affordability

Optimize resource efficiency Regulating the energy consumption and sustainable material usage, along with modularity in construction and assembly, enables a higher quality of living for the inhabitants.

Foster financial equity Create a model that offers a better quality of life, at a better price point to a wider variety of people, while bringing sufficient financial returns back to a series of investors & stakeholders.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

[pexels-w-zhong-8287494]

The research phase started with a bottom-up approach of understanding the needs of people, the possibilities of technology as well as the requirements for success in implementation of a new shared typology in an existing housing market in Milan. Utilizing the design-thinking model from IDEO, and convergent methods, theresearch pointed to a necessity for new forms of spatial solutions in order to address the problems of rapid urbanization and a social change ensuing the pandemic. This yielded in four thematic areas of research and sub-categories, leading to possible literature review sources for shared living adoption.

This step aided in delimiting the subject topic to finding new innovative solutions to the area of modern shared living in cities, and addressing the growing concerns faced by societies at large and metropolises in particular. The multi-pronged approach of organizational model was used to identify the purpose, process and outcome, leading to three distinct discourses. After investigating the research gap and problem, the objectives were set and the methodology and analysis guideline was created. Moving forward, the next phase will delve into the spatio-cultural context of Milan with the proposal of a theoretical framework for the intervention.

FIG 2.10 — Four focus areas for research strategy

Sources: [LEFT] (Diagram based on: A framework for the future of real estate, World Economic Forum, 2021)

Chapter 3 Criteria for research framework, with literature & case studies

CHAPTER THREE

3.1 Strategy for the framework: Stating the two ma

aking the considerations from the previous chapter, we get the tangible and intangible domain which we shall utilize as the basis for our theoretical framework. These two aspects will be used to formulate the assessment criteria, which in turn act as guidelines to delimit the essential information from the selected case studies and literature review. The goal here is to implement a spatial strategy that takes into ac-

Physical Stack Re-purposing & Re-imagining diverse spatial configurations

count not only the structu the digital layer that befits the modern day metropol end which will be supplm from various sources abou inclusivity, resulting in a thr

Tangible

Digital Stack

Spatial s

Mobilizing new forms of technology to inform design and construction

Policies

Social Stack Creating a balanced milieu for better living & socializing

Financial Stack Providing affordability and a path to home-ownership

FIG 3.1 — Factors for designing framework

Intangible

STRATEGY FOR FRAMEWORK

ain prospects for developing the design proposal

ural, interior or material scale, but also s a contemporary housing typology for lis. Case studies are proposed to that mented with Literature review studies ut ownership model, financing and user ree-tier theoretical framework for SL.

Spatial Landscape

Case study 1 Modern forms of shared living typologies & buildings existing today.

Case study 2

strategy

Exploring the prospects of digital integration into housing landscapes

s for SL

Literature 1 Ownership Framework

Navigating the boundaries between private and public interactions.

Literature 2 Insights from Andel 2.0 & Space10 for better forms of home-ownership.

Liveability

Resilience

Sustainability

Affordability

CHAPTER THREE

3.2 Criteria for assessment: Toolkit for analysis Revisiting the selection of criteria for case study and literature analysis Efficiency

Ecology

Equity

Egality

Spatial design angle

Sustainability angle

Inclusive angle

Financial angle

The Architectural, Interior and technological aspect.

The climate, materiality and ecological aspect.

The human centric, cultural & inclusive aspect.

The affordability, civic collaboration, & financing aspect.

Does spatial programming aid in creating enhanced living?

Does employing digital resources aid in better user liveability?

Can sensitive designing solve problem of inclusion & isolation?

Does smart financing solve the problem of affordability?

Toolkit for assessing Case studies & Literature review

Typical factors —

Assessment factors —

Architects/Designers

Price per week/month

Location of project

Density to price ratio

Typology of co-living unit

Efficiency of building

No. of units/capacity of unit

Green standard rating

No. of m² per person

Equity capital rating

Area of total usable space

Financial feasibility for user

Date of construction

FIG 3.2 — Factors for CL assessment

CRITERIA FOR ASSESSMENT

In order to determine the overarching necessities, successes and drawbacks of the current shared living structures, four levels of assessment criteria will be utilized for study.

There are four parameters that is being taken into question in order to compose the list of criteria assessment for further case study and literature review analysis. They are: 1. Efficiency — which deals with the functional and physical aspects of the project and construction, including the spatial design, architectural and interior design elements that contribute to the overall efficiency of the structure. 2. Ecology — which deals with the environmental or the sustainable aspects of the projects, including the usage of materials, articulation of climatic factors and green rating of the project. 3. Equity — which deals with the equitable aspect of the totality of users who reside in

the building, including the accessibility to various shared amenities and spaces, user-centric environment and also the difference in inclusivity of the individual spaces in tandem with the public spaces. 4. Egality — which deals with the wealth/affordability range of the units present in the building, along with the presence of a possible community collaboration or any financial devices during or before the construction of the project. In order to determine the overarching necessities, successes and drawbacks of the current shared living structures , four levels of assessment criteria will be utilized for study, which will be compiled for a holistic analysis for this research.

Sources: All icons used on the left page are from Flaticon website and is to be attributed to their respective authors.

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.1 Case study 1: A small-scale urban renovation fo

COMPACT AND CO-LIVING COMPLEX IN WEST LONDON A contemporary mews house organised around a series of double height volumes with triple aspect windows creating daylit interiors with animated shadows. Living spaces allow working, cooking, dining and reading to take place in one interconnected space. The house provides 3 bedrooms and 2 en-suite bathrooms (sleeping 3-6 people). Throughout, spaces are defined by a vibrant mix of materials including red concrete floors, bespoke birch joinery and laser cut steel bridges. [1]

Teatum & Teatum architects

Urban renting co-living

2017

3-6 ppl

Hammersmith, West London

25 m²

100 m²

1540/month

CASE STUDY 1

for micro co-living in Hammersmith, London.

Source: [1] (Garden House,Noiascape, Project page, August, 2017) [2] (Meet the studio crafting co-living spaces for London’s generation rent, Elle decor magazine, Eliza Zagaria, Oct, 2018)

Photography is by Luke Hayes.

In a city like London, where millions are tied to high-rise rents and cramped spaces, design and development studio Noiascape turns to vertical integration and innovative architecture to craft contemporary living solutions that are both interactive and engaging. From a single home fraught with outdated stylings and uncomfortable spaces, the Teatum brothers created mixed-use apartments over 100 square meters optimized down to the last centimeter. The home includes two bedrooms, an open floor that runs from the first to the second floor, and a supplemental studio carved out just below the roof. [2]

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.1 Case study 1: A small-scale urban renovation fo

Ground Floor Plan

[photo credit: archdaily]

First Floor Plan

[photo credit: archdaily]

Private spaces Public spaces

Source: [3] (Garden House by Noiascape, Project page, August, 2017) [4] (Meet the studio crafting co-living spaces for London’s generation rent, Elle decor magazine, by Eliza Zagaria, Oct, 2018)

FIG 3.3 to 3.6 — Floorplan from archdaily, worked on by myself

Atmospheres appear flexible, fluid, and interconnected — divided not with rigid partitions, but through a strategic game of materials and colors. Cast concrete walls, soft furnishings like bookshelves, wardrobes and benches in birch, with tinted red floors create an audacious amalgam of contrasts that translates into a bold character with plenty of depth. The original layout of the home, inverting traditional spatial order finds the bedrooms on the lower floor to make room for common areas above, where high ceilings and extra light is fully exploited. [3] [4]

CASE STUDY 1

for micro co-living in Hammersmith, London.

Second Floor Plan

[photo credit: archdaily]

Long section of building

[photo credit: archdaily]

Private spaces Public spaces

AMENITIES INCLUDED Rooftop garden terrace, Double height living room, Communal dining kitchen, Co-working spaces, Drinks bar, Laundry space & Library.

ADVANTAGES The vibrant material contrasts influence the perception of space and light, aiding in creating a sense of expanded living experiences which is amplified by the overall daylighting.

PRIVATE SPACES Bedrooms are bright and spacious. A study space at second floor provides a day lit room connected to a roof garden to make working from home a pleasure. Flexibility is integrated into the spatial organisation.

DISADVANTAGES The spaces though efficient in its usage of material, space and programming, lacks any option of expansion and comes at a hefty pricetag in accordance with its location.

PUBLIC SPACES The interconnected spaces flow horizontally and vertically, allowing for interaction between the residents at every level. Living spaces are double aspect and double height, structured to overlap and interconnect, allowing a visual continuity across space, culminating in a study room on the top-floor for working from home.

CONCLUSION Noiascape manages to convert the original layout of the house into a flexible and contemporary daylit garden house which emulate enhanced living experiences with inspired spatial design and efficient design, but does not provide a long term resident solution

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.2 Case study 2: Share house, a compact co-hou

LT JOSAI COLIVING HOUSE IN NAGOYA-SHI, JAPAN This is a plan for a newly-built “share house,” a singular model of housing, even within the architectural industry. The “share house” is an increasingly popular style of living in Japan, somewhat close to a large house, where the water systems and living room are shared by the residents. What makes it different from a large house, however, is that the residents are not family and are, instead, unrelated strangers. So a special technique in both its management and its space becomes necessary for complete strangers to naturally continue to share spaces with one another. [5]

Naruse Inokuma

Intentional social housing

2013

25 ppl

Nagoya-shi, Japan

23 m²

307 m²

450/month

CASE STUDY 2

using complex for minimal living in Nagoya-shi, Japan

Source: [5] (Share House LT Josai by Naruse Inokuma Architects, Alyn Griffiths, Web blog post, August, 2013)

Photography is by Masao Nishikawa.

Share House = a model of a residence in which multiple unrelated people live and share a kitchen, bathroom and living room. In Japan, demands for share houses are increasing, mainly for singles in their 20’s and 30’s. The house was to be newly constructed, and the entire building was composed in a grid-based, three-dimensional topography. Multiple undulations created in the shared space form various zones, each with a different sense of comfort. Through the creation of such varied zones, residents can enjoy the spaciousness of the house while moving through the building like a nomad in search of their favorite spots. [5]

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.2 Case study 2: Share house, a compact co-hou

Ground Floor Plan

[photo credit: archdaily]

First Floor Plan

[photo credit: archdaily]

Private spaces Public spaces

Source: [6] (Share House LT Josai by Naruse Inokuma Architects, Alyn Griffiths, Web blog post, August, 2013)

FIG 3.7 to 3.10 — Floorplan from archdaily, worked on by myself

The shared and individual spaces were studied simultaneously and, by laying out individual rooms in a three-dimensional fashion, multiple areas, each with a different sense of comfort, were established in the remaining shared space. While the entrance hall with its atrium and dining table space are perfect for gatherings, the living room corner and spaces by the window are great for spending time alone. The residents are able to use shared spaces more casually, as extensions of their individual rooms. At the same time, the individual rooms, which seem to have the same character in plan, are all different due to their relationships to the shared space, defined by characteristics like their distance and route from the living room. [6]

CASE STUDY 2

using complex for minimal living in Nagoya-shi, Japan

Second Floor Plan

[photo credit: archdaily]

Section of building

[photo credit: archdaily]

AMENITIES INCLUDED Lounging area, Mezzanine living spaces, Communal kitchen, Dining area, Study room, Rooftop garden, Courtyards for gathering.

ADVANTAGES The entrance hall and dining spaces are excellent for parties and social events while it can double as breathing zones on static days.

PRIVATE SPACES All rooms are single occupancy with 12.4 square-meter individual rooms, each well-lit and provided access to views of the surrounding neighborhood.

DISADVANTAGES The private spaces, while being well lit, are not sufficient in terms of space or facility, with a missed opportunity to offer more amenities

PUBLIC SPACES The shared spaces are abundant and form multiple areas of comfort and inclusion, leaving it to the users to adjust their interaction with others based on their moods and preferences. This leads to informal and private gatherings based on the social relationships of its inhabitants.

CONCLUSION The Share house LT Josai works in a locality such as Nagoya-shi in Japan, due to its over arching acceptance of simplicity and minimalism, but the lack of personalization and amenities make it a rather mundane living experience by international standards.

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.3 Case study 3: Purpose-designed short stay a

THE PAPER FACTORY HOTEL - A 100 YEAR OLD BUILDING The Collective, a company focused on creating co-living spaces, had opened its first U.S. location in 2015 in New York: The Collective Paper Factory. The 100-year-old building that was once a paper goods manufactory and before that a radio factory, will now house the company’s 125-room co-living location that will offer a stay model ranging from one night to 29 days. The goal is to combine private space with shared amenities to create unique experiences among renters. [7]

DHD Architecture

Adaptive reuse housing

2015

125-150 ppl

Long Island, New York

<19 m²

2860m²

150/night

CASE STUDY 3

accommodation for co-living in Long Island, New York

Source: [7] (The Collective Paper Factory, David Malone, Web blog post, Nov, 2019)

Photography is by David Ayash & Jody Kivort

The renovation created a highly varied series of spaces designed to host daily experiences, ranging from cutting-edge music programming to educational gatherings, to business workshops. As a vibrant co-living venue it was important to connect and energize the public spaces in the building. This was accomplished by opening up the individual spaces and visually linking them together. The entire first floor receives a greater connection to the exterior by removing full height partitions, adding large folding doors, and bringing the outside in with rich plantings all the way from Brooklyn Grange. [7]

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.3 Case study 3: Purpose-designed short stay a

[photo credit: palettearch]

The former paper factory was transformed into a hotel, but elements of the building’s industrial past are maintained and showcased. The building’s original concrete floors and columns were stripped, brick walls cleaned, and ceilings opened up. A rich palette of cast concrete, blackened metal, and stained wood were employed to work with these original features. Colorful artwork, plush furniture, and generous plantings are used to bring warmth and life to the space. [8]

Private spaces Public spaces

CASE STUDY 3

accommodation for co-living in Long Island, New York

25% of the overall built area is dedicated to the private living units (on the primary two floors with shared spaces). They make up a majority when taken for the remainder of the 125-room structure

[photo credit: palettearch] Source: [8] (The Collective Paper Factory, David Malone, Web blog post, Nov,

FIG 3.11 to 3.12 — Floorplan from archdaily, worked on by myself

AMENITIES INCLUDED Restaurant, Bar, Game room, Meeting area, Lounge, Large event space, Night club, Dance floor, Kitchen, Outdoor garden, Health wellness center, Conference rooms, Courtyards.

ADVANTAGES The voluminous shared spaces lend itself to the space’s short stay business model, and elevate the feeling of shared community and give more flexibility in the length of their visits.

PRIVATE SPACES The single & double rooms come with the building’s original concrete floors, columns, brick walls, & ceilings. A rich palette, colorful artwork, plush furniture, and plantings bring warmth and life to the space.

DISADVANTAGES The private spaces, while being warm and cozy, are too far removed from the shared spaces amaking it entirely unattached to the building’s persona, with no similar identity.

PUBLIC SPACES The shared environment is highly curated to host various living experiences and create a visually connected sequence of spaces by removal of the smaller walls, and adding folding screens and breakout rooms. The outdoor area was reconfigured have greater connectivity to both levels and added fixed/furniture seating.

CONCLUSION The Paper Factory Hotel by Palettearch manages to combine chic decor, vibrant spaces and a diverse set of amenities to successfully integrate the dialogue between the two. Whilst being eclectic in its offering, it does not provide any ownership for longer occupancy.

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.4 Case study 4: Co-living complex composed o

TREEHOUSE—CO-LIVING COMPLEX WITH MICRO UNITS Treehouse is a 72-unit co-living complex composed of micro-studios and micro-lofts. It is designed for professionals and their pets. Treehouse is centered by an interior garden that is lined with collaborative work areas, relaxing lounge spots, communal kitchen, laundry and pet baths. Above the garden are six floors of residences. Each floor has a different styled unit: lofted sleeping quarters or a spacious penthouse for couples, which all have access to the shared common areas & internal garden. [9]

Bo-Daa

Mixed cluster

2018

75-100

Seoul, Korea

48 m²

4810m²

985/month

CASE STUDY 4

of 72 micro apartments in Seoul, South Korea

Source: [9] (Dezeen:Treehouse by bodaa, Jon Astbury, Aug,2019)

Photography is by Rohspace, Lee Jieung.

The micro-apartments come in three different sizes – 16.5, 23 and 33 square-metres. Key architectural details are full-width slanted windows with blinds that rise bottom-up for privacy while providing a slice of the sky. Other details are sliding doors that double as shelving; full wall magnetic paint or modular storage for easy personalization; and loft units with additional ventilation windows into the atrium for cross ventilation. The beauty of the project is how the spatial composition reflects the communal lifestyle. The atrium is the spatial heart of the residence, yet it is the stacking of private units that creates the space. [9]

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.4 Case study 4: Co-living complex composed o

40%

of the overall built area is dedicated to the private living units with the remaining areas making up the shared spaces, basement and services.

Source: [10] (Dezeen:Treehouse by bodaa, Jon Astbury, Aug,2019)

FIG 3.13 to 3.14 — Floorplan from archdaily, worked on by myself

23m2

is the average space occupied by one person out of 4810m² of the overall built area of the entire building in Treehouse.

On the south side, a cut-out in the sloping profile of the building creates a roof terrace at fifth-floor level, providing a place to sit out in the sun. Windows on the south facade help to create a stack effect to ventilate the central atrium, releasing any hot air and drawing wind into the garden. The floors become gradually slimmer as the building gets higher, in order to comply with the area’s zoning rules. Most of the units give on to the northern aspect. Details such as built-in modular storage and magnetic wall-paint have been designed to make personalisation of the spaces quick and easy, whilst door numbers are discreetly hidden to underline the impression of communal space. [10]

CASE STUDY 4

of 72 micro apartments in Seoul, South Korea

Private spaces Public spaces

AMENITIES INCLUDED Green lounge, Event space, Postal office, Laundry services, Co-kitchen, Cinema nook, Printing office, Pet wash area, Restaurant, Library & Co-working spaces.

ADVANTAGES The clear advantage is how the spaces lend itself to the users, switching between the smaller private scale and the larger public scale spaces, for personalized experiences.

PRIVATE SPACES The private spaces include two typologies of single floor and duplex style arrangement with private bath and kitchenette, and three-meter windows flanking the intimate living spaces, bringing light and ventilation.

DISADVANTAGES The excess of landscaping in the interior causes too much humidity, especially in the summer. Also, the rooms while being spacious also is wasteful of the unused spaces.

PUBLIC SPACES The first apparent public space is the 7-storey glazed atrium, which cuts the building’s volume in two, and provides the base floor with large trees, stone-paving and benches giving an overall feeling of the outdoors. This is supplemented with stacked floors and spacious corridors which act as impromptu meeting points.

CONCLUSION Treehouse by Bo-daa successfully integrates the concept of interfacing private and public spaces to give a tailored experience that the user can choose, and thereby creates a superior living experience for this age, but lacks the efficiency in spatial distribution.

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.5 Case study 5: Co-operative housing society fo

SPREEFELD CO-OPERATIVE HOUSING, BERLIN GERMANY The Spreefeld building is located in the center of Berlin. The site is made out of three buildings with 60 apartments. It is an open-plan concrete structure with a timber façade. On the groundfloor, there’s a kinder-garden, and double-floor units dedicated for working, designed and curated by the Coop for affordable public use, the floors above offering a wide range of housing models, starting from compact apartments of 25m2 to cluster-apartments of 600m2 for 20 inhabitants. [11]

Fatkoehl + BAR + Carpaneto Architekten

Mixed cluster + single units

2013

60 units

Berlin, Germany

25 m²

7400m²

700-2.050/ month

CASE STUDY 5

or everybody at River Spreefeld in Berlin, Germany

Source: [11] (Archdaily Coop Housing at River Spreefeld, Web Blog post,2013) [12] (Spreefeld Berlin Cooperative development for affordable housing and mixed-use, fatkoehl arkitekten, projects, 2013)

Photography is by Ute Zscharnt , Daka, Michael Matuschka, Andreas Trogisch, Eric Tschernow, Johannes Dumpe

To compensate the offer of the whole ground-floor for the public including the beach at the river, each house offers a semi-public roof-gardens and large, private vertical gardens. The developers planned for the project to be open to the neighborhood and city, and also to differentiate between private, communal & public spaces. [12] The building design has varied spatial configurations so that no two dwellings are alike. The goal was to offer these living spaces in an affordable manner to include people with low incomes, as well as possessing the capability to be transformed based on the needs, like merging rooms together for refugees.

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.5 Case study 5: Co-operative housing society fo

Private spaces Public spaces

The three buildings designed by the three architectural offices were vertically split up in three sections: 1. working area, 2. cluster units, 3. single units starting from the bottom, the ground floor is largely open to the public, reflecting its attitude to the urban environment. Available to non-residents are Option Rooms – unassigned, unfinished spaces for community, social, or cultural projects. In addition to conventional units there are six cluster apartments that provide a communal living structure for groups of 4 to 21 people of varying income backgrounds and affordability.[13] [14]

Source: [13] (Archdaily Coop Housing at River Spreefeld, Web Blog post,2013) [14] (Spreefeld Berlin Cooperative development for affordable housing and mixed-use, fatkoehl arkitekten, projects, 2013)

FIG 3.15 to 3.17 — Floorplan from archdaily, worked on by myself

CASE STUDY 5

or everybody at River Spreefeld in Berlin, Germany

Private spaces Public spaces

AMENITIES INCLUDED Rooftop Community terrace, Outdoor garden, Kindergarten & Daycare center, Option areas [multifunctional areas], Laundry rooms, Fitness rooms, Guest rooms, Youth room, Communal kitchen and Co-working.

ADVANTAGES The public-private balance here is excellent with the user’s preferences and comfort levels, at the same time provided a myriad of facilities to take advantage of external renting.

PRIVATE SPACES Most if not all private spaces possesses its own private bathroom, small kitchenette and access to a balcony, which is spacious and overlooking either the river or the gardens below.

DISADVANTAGES The sporadic nature of the three buildings leads to unavailability when it comes to any expansion or upgrading of the dwelling units, and requires uprooting and shifting the family

PUBLIC SPACES The public spaces are vast, with facilities geared towards all ages, with daycare and kinder garten for kids, to youth rooms and clubroom spaces for teens, maker spaces, multifunctional rooms and private rentables for adults, with the older generation having access to community rooms and parks for socializing/relaxation.

CONCLUSION Spreefeld’s primary success lies in the fact that it tackles a lot of different objectives really efficiently, from being open to the city, to resource-saving, low-cost construction, to economy of spatial design and affordability, to offer residents a holistic living experience.

CHAPTER THREE

3.2.6 Case study analysis: Evaluating the case stud Garden house—Hammersmith, Ldn

LT house—Nagoya-shi, Japan

Paper facto

Urban renting—co-living

Residential private—co-living

Adaptive

3 units/6 people

12 units/12-24 people

125 unit

25 m² per person

23 m² per person

100m²

307m²

2017

2013

1.540/month

450/month

Comfortable | Unaffordable

Adequately sized | Affordable

Factors

S.no

<19 m

Crampe

Good lighting, use of material & spatial design with little area.

Efficient use of available space with local materials.

Maximizes th through varie

Reduces electricity via daylighting & provides a lush terrace garden.

Multiple fenestrations bring in light, air and reduces cost.

Repurposes t and reduced

Offers a compact yet stimulating environment for its residents.

Private rooms extend into shared spaces, provides equity.

Delivers an ex who would pr

Expensive for the area, but gives a personal yet premium experience

Nominal price is achieved, affordable yet vast in offering.

Extremely ex geared to pro

CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

dies using the four metrics of assessment criteria

ory—Long Island, NY

Treehouse—Seoul, South Korea

Spreefeld—Berlin, Germany

e reuse—co-living

Mixed cluster—co-living

ts/125-150 people

75 units/75-100 people

60 units/60-120 people

48 m² per person

25 m² per person

2860m²

4810m²

7400m²

2015

2018

2013

150/night

985/month

700-2.050/month

Oversized | Expensive

Adequately sized | Affordable

m² per person

ed | Unaffordable

he shared spaces ed amenities & uses.

Makes good use of vertical living, provides enhanced experiences.

Optimizes the transition from intimate to shared and is open to public.

the original materials cost of production.

Reduces electricityvia daylighting & provides a lush terrace garden.

Produces its own energy through geo-thermal & photovoltiacs.

xorbitant offer to people refer to rent hotels.

Spatial composition reflects the communal lifestyle for people.

Optimized communal structure achieves equity capital for all.

xpensive and isn’t ovide affordability.

Bit expensive, but spacious rooms & prime district is a good trade-off.

Ranges from affordable to premium units, thus bridging the problem.

CHAPTER THREE

3.3 Literature review 1: Exploring the prospects of d

[photo credit: pexels-proxyclick-visitor-management-system-2451622]

Smart locks

Smart thermostats

Smart lighting

Z Wave Hub

Smart access

AMRS

Connectivity

Community app

IMPACT AND RELEVANCE OF DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY IN HOUSING The profound impact of technological change on social, economic and political structures is nothing new. Technology is never neutral: as tasks become streamlined, new organizational forms emerge. Scholars often use the umbrella term digitalization to refer to the broad range of technological changes taking place during this period. Specifically, it involves the translation of physical processes into data, allowing them to exploit improvements in the processing, storage and communication of digital formats. The centrality of digital data in this paradigm is reflected in the processes of automation and platformization. Though automation has existed since long before the invention of the microprocessor, digitalization extends the range of human labor tasks that can be replaced by machine input far beyond manual labor to include a great deal of abstract work. Meanwhile, platformization encapsulates the organizational changes enabled by the use of digital networks to coordinate commercial and non-commercial transactions via algorithms. [15] These three aspects are the ones this research will concern itself with, and the sub-categorizations that lead to strategies for implementation. While smart home devices are popularized in our culture, the true future of living begins in smart living. These serve our need for flexibility and convenience. They also give us that sense of community that we all crave for. When these buildings are hardwired for connectivity and community, they are capable of much more. [16]

LITERATURE REVIEW 1

digital technology integration into housing As cities become increasingly dense and digitization soars, urban-dwellers often experience a sense of loss of community and connection. Security concerns and lack of convenience often spurs users to look elsewhere. While all-in-one digital solutions provide advanced security levels, they are also efficient community management tools. Unlike flyers and brochures, a digital message board can deliver important notifications quickly and efficiently. In these uncertain times, Using a community-based app, can help residents connect with their neighbors and remain safe through centralized security measures. [16] Smart devices are the primary user interface for residents, with devices like smart locks, smart thermostats, and smart lighting. Smart apartments are wired with Connectivity from the beginning, it allows property managers to collect data from the building as a whole, allowing them to operate more efficiently. By integrating property management into the connected building network, they can spend less time on manual tasks and more time building their communities. Smart apartments have Community management features built right into the platform. These could include event calendars, resident assistance, and on-demand property services from Uber, Amazon to house cleaning, plumbing to dog walking. They can provide remote access to residents who lock themselves out, or set a minimum temperature in every unit during the winter. [16] Thanks to increased building efficiency, smart apartments could actually spur more development of affordable housing. In the following spread, a shared smart complex from SALTO [17] shows how these services work.

FIG 3.18 to 3.19 — Depicts the digital technology prospects for urban living Sources: [15] (Housing in the digital age: Trends and implications, Carlos Delclós, December, 2020). [16](What are smart apartments and why they’re the future of living, Blake Miller, Web Blog Post, June 2020) [17](Access control solutions for shared living spaces, SALTO, Website product blog)

Identifying the digital prospects for Urban living Accessibility

Connectivity

Automation

> Equity and access for more Utilizing smart digital infrastructure can lead to providing residents with equal access and a barrier free environment.

> Designed for interactionsThrough platformization of key amenities in a digitized space, it is possible to connect more people on a micro scale.

> Optimized user experience Through a structured digital technology, users can be offered not only flexibility and convenience,but also security.

100

CHAPTER THREE

3.3.1 Literature review 1: Digital technology integrat 3 2

Cinema hall

Gymnasium

Dining hall

Storage locker

Warehouse

Main Access 9

FIG 3.20 — Axonometric diagram of digital devices in shared living

Storage room

LITERATURE REVIEW 1

tion into shared living: A control map by SALTO 4

1 Dining hall • Smart thermostats • Smart lighting

Resident hall

2 Gymnasium • Smart lockers • Smart access • Smart subscription

Private room

3 Cinema hall • Smart subscription • Smart lighting 4 Resident hall • Smart lockers • Smart thermostat • Smart subscription • Energy automation systems 5 Private room • Smart access • Smart thermostat • Smart lighting 6

Dining hall

Meeting hall & workspace

6 Dining hall • Smart thermostat • Smart lighting • Energy automation systems 7 Meeting hall & workspace • Smart access • Smart lighting 8 Parking entry • Vehicle access control • Car & Bike park barrier 9 Staff Storage room • Smart lockers • Smart subscription 10 Main Access

• Perimeter access doors • Automatic slding doors 11 Warehouse

• Perimeter access doors • Automatic slding doors 8

Parking entry

12 Storage lockers • Smart lockers • Smart subscription

101

102

CHAPTER THREE

3.4 Literature review 2: Navigating the realm betwe ‘‘When we as designers are concerned with space, we are dealing with a tiny part of the infinity that surrounds the earth, with each building marking a unique place in that infinity.’’ —Peter Zumthor

Distance and space between people — The outbreak of coronavirus and the worldwide spread of the concept of social distancing have made it necessary to reorganize the space around us according to new measures. In this regard, it could be useful to deepen the study of proxemics, a discipline theorized in the 1960s by the American anthropologist Edward Hall with the aim of understanding the meaning that we attribute to the concepts of distance and space along with an opportunity to rethink spaces on a human scale in order to reach a new normal. [18] According to Hall, it is possible to identify four main spheres of distance that mark the relationships between people and

that can be imagined as bubbles around us: intimate distance (1 to 18 inches), where the physical contact of couples or family relationships takes place; personal distance (1,5 to 4 ft), for interaction among friends; social distance (4 to 12 ft), where the exchange with colleagues or acquaintances takes place; finally the sphere of public distance (more than 12 ft), for public relations and speaking. The ability to recognize these various zones of involvement and the activities, relationships, and emotions associated with each is vital. The population all around the world are crowding into cities now, with builders and speculators are packing people into vertical filing boxes—both commercial offices and dwellings. [18]

Edward T. Hall’s Spatial spheres 0m 0.45m

1.2m 3.7m

Individual zone Personal zone Social zone Public zone individual

personal

social

public [Illustration credit: Premise/Idea from Edward T Hall’s “Hidden dimension”]

LITERATURE REVIEW 2

een the public and private space via spatial aspects Spatial Proxemics in shared living [The Dwelling level]— This research aims to investigates the forms of proxemics in the design of space in dwelling and close quarters. Typically, dwelling sizes are much smaller in dense cities than in suburbs or rural areas. For individuals or couples sharing small apartments, privacy can be an important consideration; higher costs for city living can also mean lower quality facilities, such as paper-thin walls or lack of access to in-building laundry services, adding to the issue of privacy from neighbors or strangers [19]. Recognition of these very niche issues can help designers and architects to make informed choices before they consider their design or spatial interventions to these housing modules in cities.

Intimate distance

Personal distance

Less than 6 inches (15cm) entails that we only feel comfortable with our partners or family members at this proximity. This is the closest distance we can allow another person to be.

Parties and social events may entail being at a close distance to our peers at around 1-2.5 feet (46 to 76cm) at which distance we feel secure with interacting with others.

Social distance

Public distance

Inside public transportation, shopping markets and social gatherings, we interact at a comfortable 4-7 feet (1.2-2.1m) around others, often the norm throughout the pandemic.

A safe distance of around 12 to 25 feet (3.7 to 7.6 m) separates us from people in spacious public backdrops like museums, plazas and the sort, where we feel most comfortable.

Sources: All illustrated people graphics attributed to user (pch.vector) — https://www.freepik.com/pch-vector [18] (Architecture post covid, Using proxemics in spatial design, Anna Veronese, 2021). [19] (The space between: The proxemics in spatial design, Chiara Rubessi, Blog post)

103

104

CHAPTER THREE

3.4.1 Literature review 2: Navigating the realm betw

[photo credit: Rethinking the future.com]

IMPORTANCE OF SPATIAL TYPES AND SCALE OF SPATIAL PERCEPTION There are four spatial typologies to consider; Symmetrical spaces create the effect of monumentality whilst asymmetrical spaces are less as they allow for more variation and do not have such a rigid hierarchy. Effects of scale is either the absolute scale of a space or relative to that of another. Absolute scale is best used when the user enters narrow passageways before being led into an expansive void, which makes for a compelling spatial effect. The Spatial effect of bearing and being borne is common to all cultures. The very essence of building is the fight against gravity, the suspending of an object off of the ground. Porosity is the measure of voids within a solid. It is spatially significant because it creates spaces that are varied and interconnected. It also blurs the boundaries between space and architectural elements. [20] The perception of space, although visual, is largely based on our relationship with scale. According to Alois Regel’s Aesthetic model, there are three main scales that we experience space; small/near: at this scale we are able to best understand geometry as we can see and touch the object, we are able to build a mental map of it and understand it easier; medium/middle: here we experience a portion of an object a time. Texture and clarity are important if the user is to understand the space as a whole; large /far: when experiencing architectural objects from a large distance, the ability for tactile understanding fades out. We lack the optical dexterity to interpret complex forms, and therefore high contrast forms or materials are important. [20]

LITERATURE REVIEW 2

105

ween the public and private space via spatial aspects SPATIAL PERCEPTION AND ITS RELEVANCE IN DESIGN Spatial perception, by definition, is the ability to perceive spatial relationships in respect to the orientation of one’s body despite distracting information. It consists of being able to perceive and visually understand external spatial information such as features, properties, measurement, shapes, position and motion. [20] When we experience a space in person, all of our senses are harnessed to craft the mental image in our psyche. Some factors that could be altered to achieve the desired perception of space are: Orientation, Wayfinding, Circulation, Spatial dimension For instance, the Jewish Museum in Berlin by Daniel Libeskind is a notable example in the realms of triggering emotions using spatial perception as the key feature. [21] I believe that by understanding how the visual nature of space functions, whilst keeping in mind the proxemics of people interacting with one another, I can set about articulating spaces of a more meaningful order. Sources: All photograph credits below belong to Daniel Libeskind architecture studio. [20] (Architecture post covid, Using proxemics in spatial design, Anna Veronese, 2021). [21] (The space between: The proxemics in spatial design, Chiara Rubessi, Blog post)

Orientation

Circulation

Spatial dimension

Wayfinding

106

CHAPTER THREE

3.5 Literature review 3: Breakdown of Andel 2.0 FIVE LAYERS OF STACK FOR ANDEL 2.0 This is based on the first Danish model for living called – the andelsbolig – which had since become outdated. Imagine magazine was quoted saying “Land values and risk have skyrocketed, but in 2018, we had the digital tools to leverage finance and co-ordinate large groups of people”. Andel 2.0 – a workshop by emerging design studio In-Between Economies, with DOMA and Eutropian explored the topic. The project took the first steps towards designing a new type of civic institution for housing that would make it easier for people to design, build and commission their housing structures. [22] This is relevant now more than ever due to the ever-increasing urbanization and outdated

housing systems(causing land and rental prices to blow up), coupled with stagnant wages, affordability issues, as well as the covid-19 pandemic causing radical social changes in how we live and who we live with, in shrinking urban cities. This literature review focuses only on sections dealing with digital tools, usage of spaces and financing models for viable use.

Source: [22] & text data of figures from (IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living. Space 10, 2018)

FIG 3.21 to 3.22 — Diagram for stacks in Andel 2.0

Enabling By shifting to a model of joint civic platform and open city information modelling (BIM), we can create digitally verified land markets that enables civic financing and planning rights to design and build co-operative housing in cities without the hassle of bureucracy and financing battles. \\ LOCAL ROOFTOP PLAN This strategy suggests the permitted development for rooftop extensions, paid for by the platform toward increasing the density and housing supply in cities currently plagued by a population hike. \\ CIVIC DATA STANDARD Lists the feasibility of secure, anonymous housing data which shows the price, density, performance and usage statistics that are open and available to the residents as a public service.

LITERATURE REVIEW 3

Financing By devising a networked ‘peer-to-peer’ financial model, we can de-risk the acquisition, planning and construction of homes whilst ensuring that customizable, quality homes are provisioned for the end users who can afford a sustainable route into the housing ownership ladder. \\ EXISTING BUILDING RENOVATION A good opportunity can be provided by collating the commune’s resources together to buy and renovate existing dilapidated or disused buildings, thus spurring re-development. \\ UNDEVELOPED PLOTS Sites in the city that are haphazard or awkward are not profitable for developers, but serve as potential opportunities for housing. A network of such sites can be collectively developed by the platform. \\ RENT TO EQUITY The residents of this typology make rent-sized payments that then go into building equity and is reinvested in the construction of new housing.

\\ LOCAL LAND TRUST The localized land trust group can ensure that there is a separation of the land from the building price so that the rent becomes more affordable for the end-users.

107

108

CHAPTER THREE

3.5.1 Literature review 3: Breakdown of Andel Dwelling By providing mobility to the residents when their needs change, we can enable them to own a part of a collective asset, participate in their own housing scheme, construction & management of a moresustainable lifestyle to practice in their chosen cities. \\ APARTMENT SWAP This allows for residents to up-size and down-size due to their requirements like starting a family or moving in with a partner etc, but also offers the option to switch to another block in the city. \\ UNIT EXPANSION Allows for the ability to extend and expand into the neighbouring apartments or living units owing to similar reasons, listed above.

Organising By establishing a trust group that is able to mediate and oversee the new purchases, development and construction between the investors and dwellers by way of a series of structured databases, we can enable the decision making process to be more transparent and fair. \\ OPEN LAND REGISTRY Open source data platform that interfaces with builders or designers and provides small site data and planning advisements for ease of understanding in construction.

LITERATURE REVIEW 3

109

Sharing By shifting to a model of joint civic platform and open city information modelling (BIM), we can create digitally verified land markets that enables civic financing and planning rights to design and build co-operative housing in cities without the hassle of bureucracy and financing battles. \\ LOCAL ENERGY GRID With the advent of renewable energy technologies in cities along with blockchain energy trading allows for the platform to sell between the blocks or back into the grid.

\\ APARTMENT METADATA Integrated metadata inside the living units like sensors, Iot and smart technologies alert users towards preventative measures, and also give the option to provide utility services to other users. \\ BOOKABLE AMENTIES Digital web platforms allow for commercialization of the common spaces/amenities with the option of residents as well as external entities to rent the spaces, rooms or facilities via online booking.

Source: Data and text from (IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living. Space 10, 2018)

FIG 3.23 to 3.24 — Diagram for stacks in Andel 2.0

The takeaway from this literature review is that through smart financing models, diligent use of technology for supporting both the bureaucracy, as well as provision of tools in living arrangements, we can lend a viable path to home-ownership for the dreamers, as well as enhancing the quality of life for the residents, aiming for a secure future.

110

CHAPTER THREE

3.6 Overall analysis: Proposing four feasible strateg FIG 3.23 — Tabular Diagram showing assessment of the four research stacks

Efficiency

1 // Adequate density = leads to community A lack of supply in affordable housing and an increased demand can drastically increases rent prices in cities. [1] Densely built apartment buildings create community among residents while offering affordable rents for individuals.

19m2

30m2

Ecology

4 // Environmentally compatible materials The building materials to be used for construction can heavily impact the overall resilience of the structure as well as the long term impact on the city it is providing service to, thus fulfilling the required green standards.

50m2

2 // Spatial configurations | price points By offering diverse spatial layouts from compact units [20m²] to cluster units [600m²] with pricetags that not only allow users to purchase units at their own budget but also grants affordability for others to get into the housing ladder.

5 // Self-production of renewable energy By utilizing green technologies on-site, there can be self-producing, regenerative energy systems made possible through a cogeneration-unit, a geo-thermal-system and photovoltaics, we can increase the energy efficiency of the project.

3 // Modular building design & construction The materials, technology and method of construction can be geared toward modularity & disassembly, in essence saving space and also enabling the management/maintenance of these parts to be self-constructed by residents.

6 // Natural capital and biodiversity Urban farming practices like local food production, warehouse farms & community gardens can provide micro-distribution proposal to people, encouraging sustainable living and at the same time, reducing the carbon footprint.

OVERALL ANALYSIS

gies for implementation of a co-living model in Milan

Equity

Egality

7 // Prioritizing equity and access for people By providing a barrier-free environment where residents can move freely between shared and private spaces through digitized access keycards aids in securing subscriptions of services, and ensuring users are given access to facilities.

10 // Equitable renting schemes for majority Residents can make rent-sized payments that goes into building equity and is reinvested into the construction of new housing. [2] A web platform can allow for renting of the shared amenities by residents and outsiders alike.

8 // Design for human interaction By designing the private spaces with the essentials on a smaller scale, and public spaces with shared amenities on a larger scale, it is possible to melt indicators of private spaces into the collective, fostering user interaction and inclusion.

11 // Flexible living unit interchange Residents should be given the possibility to upsize and down-size, extend and expand into the neighbouring apartments or living unit owing to their requirements [2] like starting a family or moving in with a partner etc.

9 // Automated digital technology platform By providing a structured and automated digital technology on-site, users can be ensured an optimized living experience, on par with today’s standards and pace, whilst also providing a layer of security, monitoring and control throughout.

12 // Open land trust & registry Lists the feasibility of secure, anonymous housing data showing price, density, performance and usage statistics that is open to the public. A land trust can separate the land from building price that makes it affordable for users [2]

111

112

CHAPTER THREE

3.7 Theoretical framework: Synthesis Theoretical Framework for Co Living Spatial Model [CLSM]

Adequate density

Eco-materials

Equity & access

Equitable rent

Diverse pricepoints

Energy production

Human interaction

Flexible swapping

Modular design

Natural capital

Automated tech

Open registry

Functional value

Ecological value

Equitable value

Financial value

19m2

30m2

50m2

Co Living Spatial Model Design Implementation

FIG 3.24 — Theoretical framework map for CLSM

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

My thesis investigation started with applying IDEO’s design thinking framework to quickly boil down the evaluation criteria for the case study and literature analysis. After applying this deliberate approach, it was possible to dilute down the essential information required to create a workable framework for implementation in the next chapter. It proposes a mult-pronged approach which deals with the functional, ecological, equitable and financial value of a project in the present day climate. This chapter also throws light onto the importance and role of spatial proxemics/ perception as well as the aspects of integrating digital technology in

113

shared living spaces in urbanized cities today and how they could potentially impact contemporary user behaviour and liveability in close proximity with others. Coming off of the back of these studies, there is a more defined objective going forward, with a holistic knowledge of the challenges and possible solutions of the implementation of such an human-centric methodology of designing a spatial structure, therefore challenging any or all preconceived notions of the way we co-exist with people, how much we utilize technology in our households, as well as how much we are willing to spend on a truly modern living experience in 2022.

[photo credit: pexels-micah-boerma-1008743]

Chapter 4 Project site analysis with a spatiocontextual design approach

116

CHAPTER FOUR

4.1 Problem analysis: An outline of the abandonmen In Milan, the real estate market is trying to recover from the negative effects of economic crisis (which have been less severe than in other cities in Italy). The prices of new houses in the first half of 2019 registered an average increase of +1% (with peaks of up to 4%). Nonetheless, the problem of abandoned buildings also arises in a city like Milan. [1] This study further illustrates the relationship between abandonment and the urban tissues in Milan, citing three typical cases of abandonment in terms of areas: (i) Central/historical areas (high accessibility, mix and quality of the built environment. (ii) Semi-central areas (areas with good accessibility but mainly residential. (iii) Peripheral areas (scarce accessibility, low mix and low quality of the built environment, e.g. mainly industrial or old nuclei). [1] which are marked on the map. Looking at the functional factors (e.g. typologies and distribution) in Milan we see that the vast majority of abandoned buildings are non-residential; their re-use or demolition is difficult because of their size and typologies, such as hangars, large commercial estates or logistic buildings. Public/official arguments against these problems depend on nuisance reasons (safety and security, and their use as sites of illegal activities) with others highlighting their detrimental effects on nearby properties (i.e. reducing their market value). The types of policies for coping with the abandonment problem in Milan, seem to favour normative and enforcing measures, while partnership, incentive and enabling policies are marginally tackled. [1] This study lead me to believe that there is merit in transforming these abandoned building and spaces, rather than build on new land. The square surface is very high and there is the possibility to renovate old buildings and provide students and professionals with rooms to stay, or private rentable spaces that provide income and eventually more possibilities for public spaces too. The chosen site is lot A90 in Zone 2.

(photo credit: Giovanni Hanninen, Abitare.it gallery)

Source: [1] (Abandonment as a social fact_Milan, Moroni, De Franco et.al, 2020)

PROBLEM ANALYSIS

117

nt problem in Italy with a focus on Milan

Abandoned sites by typologies FIG 4.1 [RIGHT] — Abandoned areas or sites in the city, classified according to typologies and former use

Central—Semi-central areas Industrial buildings Residential buildings Commercial buildings Service buildings

Source: [Fig 4.1] (Istituto Nazionale di Statistica Italia (web) & Commune di Milano data-

118

CHAPTER FOUR

4.2 Territorial analysis: An overview of Milan at larg

ilan, the regional capital of Lombardy, has an overall population of 1.3 million people making it the biggest industrial city of Italy. It is a magnetic point for designers, artists, industrialists and businesses. There are also areas of connection between the city and the countryside, which are identified and divided by type and mode of use, in order to regulate the use of the territory and to guarantee a communion between the city understood as urbanized and the agricultural and green component forming part of the city area and in close connection with the surrounding area. [2] Milano is divided into 9 Municipalities or districts, each with its own geographical, historical, social and cultural identity. The historical centre starts from Piazza Duomo, overlooked by the beautiful Cathedral and flanked by the Quadrilatero della Moda - Fashion District, Church of San Satiro, then raditaing toward the San Lorenzo Columns on the east and the Castello Sforzesco on the north-west. Toward Zone 2, Milano Centrale is distinguished by its eclectic style and plaza, and serves as the main hub of train arrivals and departures. This district develops along the north-eastern route until it reaches the Journalists Village and the post war district of Maggiolina. A 5 minute walk in the eastern direction would take us to the youth district with a peculiar identity, that it found expression in the acronym NoLo - North of Loreto, crossroads between the green and red lines of the metro, on the border with City Area 2. Further along the green line is the station of Lambrate and the Citta studi with the Ortica district south of Lambrate being synonymous with student population and also famous for its street art. [3] Urban stratification The expansion of Milan has occurred over the centuries, with the city changing with the increase in population and becomes an economic and social center of regional and global attraction. With the increase in housing demand, the historic center becomes an area of the city destined for the wealthiest citizens: in this contentment a social discriminant is generated, which can be called “urban stratification”. According to this principle, the areas of the city are inhabited by people of the same social class, given the disparity in prices between the various areas. In addition to urban stratification understood as social, there is also a stratification of the buildings: the historical areas are progressively redeveloped and rebuilt. This phenomenon involves a multitude of different styles within the same context. From a social point of view, the city of Milan tends to conform over time: housing demand is increasing and, consequently, house prices increase throughout the city; the population is mostly composed of people who are in the city for work, often live alone or share their home with other tenants. [4]

Source: [2] (Cittametropolitana, dataset analysis and background) [3] (Historical background of Milan, Milanmap360, mapping website) [4] (UN habitat data from the wcr 2020 report, 2020)

TERRITORIAL ANALYSIS

119

ge, with a focus on the issue of Urban stratification

Milan Population Statistics by zone FIG 4.2 [RIGHT] — Milan population data with a focus on zone 2 on the north-east of city.

Overall

Zone 2 (NIL)

Density/km²

Foreign pop

1,371,498 10,741

16,714 18%

Source: [Fig 4.2] (Istituto Nazionale di Statistica Italia (web) & Commune di Milano data-

120

CHAPTER FOUR

4.3 Zonal analysis: Characteristics of Zone 2 vicinit The Zone 2 of Milan is one of the 9 administrative zones of Milan, Italy. It is the slice that connects the centre to the periphery in the north-east direction. Overview The history and development of Zone 2 have been largely influenced by its location on important routes leading from Milan to major nearby settlements such as Monza and Venice. The main quartieri (districts) of Zone 2 are subdivided into four parts, with the Ponte Seveso district in the south of Zone 2 being the project site location. The Naviglio Martesana canal traverses most of Zone 2, and has been a prominent transportation means in the development of the Milanese area; between the 19th and 20th century, this role has been taken on by the railway system. The Milano Centrale railway station, the most important railway station in Milan and in Italy, is located in the eponymous district of Zone 2. [5] As a consequence of the development of the railway system, in the early 20th century the Milanese north-east quickly changed from a rural area to a mostly industrial city outskirt, experiencing a dramatic increase in population. In the mid-20th century, as a consequence of the expansion of the city centre, Zone 2 changed again, this time into a mostly residential and tertiary area. The recent evolution of Zone 2 is also strongly influenced by the high concentration of extra-European immigrants, the highest in Milan, which has led to the development of distinctively multi-ethnic neighbourhoods such as that of Viale Padova (in the Loreto district). The complex history of Zone 2 is witnessed by its diverse landscape, which includes such contrasting elements as modern skyscraper-punctuated districts, old-fashioned popular Milanese neighbourhoods, luxury villas on the banks of the Naviglio Martesana, restored “cascine” (country houses), abandoned factories, and modern high-income residential areas [5] making it an ideal location for a project proposal of this nature. Notable places Milano Centrale, Milan’s most important railway station Corso Buenos Aires, major shopping street Naviglio Martesana, canal connecting Milan to the river Adda Citta studi, major institutional locality with a large student body Parco Lambro, one of the largest parks in Milan Biblioteca degli Alberi Milano park near Piazza Gae Aulenti & Isola district Bicocca art district and village, a culturally significant area.

Source: [5] (Wikipedia—Zone 2 of Milan, Wiki dataset, 2022)

ZONAL ANALYSIS

ty with the historical development and significance

Milan Zone 2 Ponte Seveso FIG 4.3 [RIGHT] — Zone 2 map showing notable locations nearby along with metro transportation and river lines

M1 (red line) M2 (green line) M3 (yellow line) M5 (lilac line) Naviglio Martesana

Source: [Fig 4.3] (Google map data, 2022)

121

122

CHAPTER FOUR

4.3.1 Zonal analysis: Characteristics of the surround

Urban context with services FIG 4.4 [TOP] — Zone 2 map showing notable locations nearby along with green spaces, markets, restaurants and roads.

The map is indicative of the green public spaces, with the possibilities of services, institutions, shops as well as the offer of restaurants and cafes. The location in black indicates the location of the site along the via Sammartini road next to Centrale.

ZONAL ANALYSIS

123

ding area with available services and connections

restaurants/cafe

parks & green areas

groceries/markets

main road networks

building location

Source: [Fig 4.4] (Google map data, 2022) [6] Notes from Interior design lab, Section A [054575], Professor Anna Anzani, 2022)

CHAPTER FOUR

4.3.2 Zonal analysis: Transit map of the surrounding

124

Urban context with land routes FIG 4.5 [TOP] — Zone 2 map showing notable locations nearby along with green spaces, markets, restaurants and roads.

The map is indicative of the land transit routes namely the tram and bus routes, showing the connections around the neighborhood. The proximity of the site from the station can be reached by bus route 87 and tram routes 5 & 10.

ZONAL ANALYSIS

125

ins

g area showing tram and bus routes around zone 2

Tram routes Bus routes building location

Source: [Fig 4.5] (Google map data, 2022) [6] Notes from Interior design lab, Section A [054575], Professor Anna Anzani, 2022)

CHAPTER FOUR

4.3.3 Zonal analysis: Characteristics of the surroun

zara

sondrio

126

isola

gioia

Urban context with Metro nodes FIG 4.6[TOP] — Zone 2 map showing locations of the metro train lines within proximity of the site location.

centrale

The map is indicative of the public transit points for the underground metropolitan train lines connecting the site with the rest of the city. The closest two points of access is at Sondrio and Centrale FS, both of which area accessed in 9mins from site.

ZONAL ANALYSIS

127

nding area with available services and connections

rovereto

ins

pasteur

Caiazzo

loreto

M1 (red line) M2 (green line) M3 (yellow line) M5 (lilac line) Naviglio Martesana

Source: [Fig 4.6] (Google map data, 2022) [6] Notes from Interior design lab, Section A [054575], Professor Anna Anzani, 2022)

128

CHAPTER FOUR

4.4 Site analysis: Characteristics of project site with The site of our project is located in the North-east district of Ponte Seveso in the Zone 2 of Milan where the Naviglio Martesana canal terminates in the north, with the Centrale railway station yard flanking the east. The focus will surround not only the site but the neighborhood and urban context as well, with the site classified by the Commune di Milano as "Abandoned/derelict" type, designated by the muncipality for a variety of dwelling and services in its 2030 plan for the future development of Milan. The site area is chosen as such due to its proximity to the city and its urban transportation, as well as its spatial flexibility and use, from which the inhabitants will benefit from. There is good diversity and quality urban living in the neighborhood block, with the site having walkable access to viale Marche (a boulevard dotted with apertifs and restaurants) and the Maggiolina square on the west, along with NoLo youth district in the east as well as the famed cycling route along the Naviglio canal, all of which, are culturally active and bustling. It is also 10min away from the Central railway hub in Milan, and the City centre business district Garibaldi, reachable via autobus line 87, and green metro line respectively. It is also appropriate for students attending major universities with just 20mins travel separating Citta studi and Bovisa alike, highlighting the favorable aspects of proximity and connectedness that is evident from the site location. Ponte Seveso district is interwoven with the residential blocks and the industrialized sector, with the ever-increasing growth of zone 2 bringing exciting prospects for the future.

Neighborhood information and statistics

Block scale Building scale Urban scale

Main intended use of buildings —Residential/Repurposing Demographic projections for 2027 — 18.404 (inhabitants) Residents — 16.714 (inhabitants) Foreigners —18% Prevailing nationality — Filipino Children aged 0-5 — 5.1% Seniors over 75 —10.4% City at day —40.082 (inhabitants) City at night — 18.808 (inhabitants) Disused buildings —High Rental homes — 33.8% Production activities —3,774 (local units)

Source: [7] (Milano 2030—PGT analysis, Commune di Milano website dataset)

SITE ANALYSIS

h block scale and urban scale for reference

Urban scale

Block scale Building scale

Site context with its environment FIG 4.7 [RIGHT] — Micro analysis of site with its surrounding Block and Urban scale with area, for reference

Building scale area

1.400 m²

Block scale area

14,380m²

Urban scale area

113,797m²

Source: [Fig 4.7] (Google map data, 2022)

129

130

CHAPTER FOUR

4.5 Building analysis: Characteristics of project site Context description— The property is located south of the Greek quartier, in the Ponte Seveso district, part of the decentralization zone 2. It is a former industrial building which is now derelict and in a ruined state, with an enormous L-shaped floorplan and an outhouse adjacent to the main floor area, formerly housing industrial appliances and machinery. The site sites along a lengthy two way street, parallel to via Cristoforo Gluck on the west and via Raffaele Parravicini on the south-east. Further north is via Melchiorre Gioia, a parallel road which angles towards the Ciclabile Naviglio Martesana canal. Urban transport connections— The services provided by the public transportation from the property is sufficient. It is connected to the neighbouring muncipalities through the bus/car line 81 (Sesto Marelli) and line 43 (Piazza Greco-Piazza Firenze), with the Central station, reachable by bus line 87. Description of the property— The building itself constitutes part of an old industrial property, dating back to the 1950s, with the walls fronting the south-west and south-east direction of the street being around 5.95m tall, with large windows and iron grills with filigree designs. The walls are of load-bearing brick masonry, coated with a mild yellow plaster which is now aging & cracked. Both the entrances to site are located on the southeast direction with a shorter/wicket gate on one side and a large industrial grade with rolling shutters near the intersection. This leads to a simple double-height hallway with a fallen ceiling and some offices/toilets on the left. The 4.5m outhouse consists of a preparatory area, an intact concrete ceiling, square panelled windows and a wide-span column free layout inside.

Technical site data and Histogram Density/km² —10.741 Fences — None Services —Low Open spaces — 296m²/21% Industrial buildings — Med Fronts length —28.5W/44.6SE Property —1.400m² Public spaces — High Disused buildings —High Built area — 1.104m²/78.85% Built height —5.95m Perimeter isolated —68.7%

D 4 3

2 1

Source: [8] (Istituto Nazionale di Statistica Italia (web) & Commune di Milano dataset)

D — Density S — Services P — Public spaces BA— Built area OS — Open spaces

BUILDING ANALYSIS

e with block scale and urban scale for reference Via Giovanni Battista Sammartini, 55

Built area

78%

.5m

.6 5

21%

Open spaces

Building context with key facts FIG 4.8 [RIGHT] — Micro analysis of site with its surrounding Block and Urban scale with area, for reference

Building scale area

1.400 m²

Block scale area

14,380m²

Urban scale area

113,797m²

Source: [Fig 4.8] (Google map data, 2022)

131

132

CHAPTER FOUR

4.6 Photo survey exterior: Characteristics of the si

21%

via Raffaele Paravaccini

Open spaces

via Giovanni Sammartini

the interjunction of roads

Neighbourhood context & color FIG 4.9 [TOP] — Neighbourhood contextual color map

The state of the places represents, through the usage of photos and pre-eminent colors existing in the surrounding neighbourhood area, collate the typical elements found there, that characterize it and differentiate it from other landscapes.

PHOTO SURVEY EXTERIOR

ite in reference to its color and typical elements Via Giovanni Battista Sammartini, 55

Built area

78%

Source: [Top] (Coolors palette generator, 2022)

133

134

CHAPTER FOUR

4.7 Photo survey interior: Elements & views of the s

Legend: 1. Main access pathway 2. Great hall [north-east] 3. Great hall [north] 4. Office entry wall 5. Outhouse interiors

5 1

2 3

Building Keyplan

Building interior context + views FIG 4.10 [TOP] — Interior photo survey and contextual color map

The board illustrates the interior walkthrough of the various spaces and the existing condition of the site. It is to be noted that the main hall does not possess a ceiling whilst there is much damage to the auxilary roofs and an overall growth of foliage on site

PHOTO SURVEY INTERIOR

site structure's interior with material properties

Source: [Top] (Coolors palette generator, 2022)

135

136

CHAPTER FOUR

4.8 Photo material survey: Identifying the damage

The aesthetic damage refers to the portions of the buildin has faced plaster detachment on the exterior and interior with the surface erosion of materials present.

The functional damage refers to any aspects of damage t tains to the usable portion or the utility of the building, eg: tiles, window panes, cave-in of rubble or even deterioratio

The structural damage refers to extensive damage or the existing structures that serve as support members or rein ment, eg: mortar detachment, exposed rods or cracked c

Legend: A1 - Rust + plaster A2- Veneer on door A3- Exterior plaster

A F

F1 - Outhouse window F2- Window panels F3- Rubble cave-in

S1 - Roof S2- Roof S3- Pane

A F

S S F

Building Keyplan

Material context damage & decay FIG 4.11[TOP] — Neighbourhood contextual color map

In order to begin a design phase or treatment aimed at the reuse and updating of an abandoned building, the first step ought to include a conservation phase, based on the physical care of the environment on site, including the assessment of decay or damage

PHOTO MATERIAL SURVEY

137

and decay of the surface materials present on site Via Giovanni Battista Sammartini, 55

ng that r, along

that perbroken on.

e lack of nforcecolumns.

f tiles f + columns el door wear

broken rooftiles

grown foliage

aged plaster

cracked bricks

rusted panes

Source: [Top] (Coolors palette generator, 2022) [6] Notes from Interior design lab, Section A [054575], Professor Anna Anzani, 2022)

138

CHAPTER FOUR

4.9 Site documentation: Plan and Elevation drawin

The property has two entrances, a primary entrance on the South-west with a shuttered industrial grade door, with a smaller wicket gate on further up on the property. The entrance leads to a huge double-height hallway, an enormous 43m long by 8.75m wide, which acted as the primary focal point and work area previously. This is flanked on the north by three sheds, characteristic of an Italian wing, with terracotta rooftiles. The middle shed's roof had caved in, leading to some debris on the floor. The other half of the L-shaped floorplan consists of the auxillary wing with 5 rooms, angled softly to form the official/logistics arm of the industrial building. This is accessed by entering through the side wicket gate. The main structure is connected in part by a second building on the North-west, full with four aisles, and a squared floorplan. This outhouse is fronted by panelled glass wall, and a colonnaded space and a rear corridor that leads back into the main working area. The front yard acts as a lung space between the two structures, as well as providing accesses to it.

Keyplan

Floorplan

scale 1:100

SITE DOCUMENTATION

ng of the existing abandoned project site Via Giovanni Battista Sammartini, 55

Room A 8.25 x 7.95m

Built area

78%

.6 5

Room B 8.25 x 8.25m

.5m

21%

Open spaces

FIG 4.12 [TOP] — Floorplan map of

139

140

CHAPTER FOUR

4.10 Site documentation: Plan and Elevation drawin

5.95m 4.50m

2.05m

south-east elevation (via Giovanni Sammartini) The property has two entrances, a primary entrance on the South-west with a shuttered industrial grade door, with a smaller wicket gate on further up on the property. The entrance leads to a huge double-height hallway, an enormous 43m long by 8.75m wide, which acted as the primary focal point and work area previously. This is flanked on the north by three sheds, characteristic of an Italian wing, with terracotta rooftiles. The middle shed's roof had caved in, leading to some debris on the floor. The other half of the L-shaped floorplan consists of the auxillary wing with 5 rooms, angled softly to form the official/logistics arm of the industrial building. This is accessed by entering through the side wicket gate.

Elevation

scale 1:100

south-west elevatio

SITE DOCUMENTATION

ng of the existing abandoned project site Via Giovanni Battista Sammartini, 55

78%

.6 5

Built area

.5m

21%

Open spaces

on (via Raffaele Parravicini)

FIG 4.13 [TOP] — Elevations from site

141

142

CHAPTER FOUR

4.11 Analysis of Load-bearing systems: Identificatio

The identification of the load bearing system is vital to the project and the design intervention. It provides an insight into the nature and scope of the intervention, and informs us about the parts that can be retained as well as the parts that has to be demolished to preserve the structural stability of the overall building. The main hall of the structure consists of a gargantuan 0.65 x 0.8m vertical column indicated in the plan. It is lined on the perimeter exterior walls [0.6m] oly, whilst the interior is a large spanning hall, 8.75m wide with indications of a roof structure and beams evident from the cave-in of the same. The logistics wing on the south-west has smaller walls [0.3m] with cross beam structure still present. The outhouse is a relatively newer structure with composite concrete walls [0.3m] and a thin column grid structure. It also has paneled windows on the entry and clerestory type windows at the middle wall, letting in lots of daylight, through the day.

Keyplan

Structural systems FIG 4.14 [TOP] — Floorplan map of site, indicating the vertical and horizontal load bearing systems.

scale 1:100

LOAD BEARING ANALYSIS

143

on of the vertical and horizontal structural systems

primary beams

Columns

support beams

Masonry wall

Source: [Fig 4.14] (Google map data, 2022) [6] Notes from Interior design lab, Section A [054575], Professor Anna Anzani, 2022)

CHAPTER FOUR

4.12 Assessment of demolition: Identification of po

The drawing depicts two items of consideration. The walls that are to be demolished to make way for the new structural intervention and the column grid measurements that span the exterior of the building. The former is identified in order to ensure that a clear path is paved for the insertions. This way, the walls that can be retained, can be tended to, in case of superficial damage repair, or preservation. This also accounts for the physical nature of the building to be meshed with the social aspect of the intervention, especially additional temporary structures as well as signage elements and furniture. The latter is important to identify the requirement of any strucutural supports to the portions of site that needs it.

4.15 4.90

28.0

4.90

4.50

5.30

4.90

144

4.25

Keyplan

Demolition drawing FIG 4.15 [TOP] — Floorplan map of site, indicating the vertical and horizontal load bearing systems.

scale 1:100

4.50

DEMOLITION ANALYSIS

145

ortions and walls of site to be retained/demolished 22.25 4.50

4.05

5.10

4.50

8.65

10.60 8.35

5.30

8.85 31.75 5.00 4.80 4.60

4.50

4.25

44.0

Floorplate direction

Demolished

Column measurement

Existing walls

Source: [Fig 4.15] (Google map data, 2022) [6] Notes from Interior design lab, Section A [054575], Professor Anna Anzani, 2022)

146

CHAPTER FOUR

4.13 Design intervention: Program strategies Attachment

Detachment

Connection

This aspect refers to any introductions or incorporation of physical elements for reinforcement [structurally] or inclusion of functional aspects like tiles, window panes or the like.

Structural Repairs Reinforcement Inclusion

Any existing structures that pose obstruction or inconvenience to the buildings function is to be either removed partially or reconstructed to accommodate new functions or leave behind the old.

Reinforcement Reconstruction Exclusion

The connection aspect involves bridging the gap between the old structure and the new elements of the intervention. This also involves establishing resident fluxes in the interior of the building.

Consolidation Establishment Association Attachment

DESIGN STRATEGY

147

[pexels-mali-maeder-119809]

The chapter deals with a incremental approach to assessing the site in question and also the accessibilities, viabilities and caution in equal regard through macro and micro analysis of not only the state of the building itself but also the conditions surrounding the site. This is to ensure that the design intervention to follow is well-informed and takes into account all the factors in order to propose an optimal solution. The latter part explores the building in its entirety, the existing state, materials on site, range of decay as well as the structural integrity of the abandoned old building. This enabled us to view a holistic picture of the site, its extent

of damage as well as its scope of possibilities. In conclusion, we can gather that a three-pronged approach would be most suitable for such an undertaking; Addition, is the first step where any insertions to be made on site is tackled in a sensitive manner by reinforcing the existing but introducing the necessary measures. Subtraction, which involves the removal of portions where it is necessary whilst retaining the others; and Connections, where the bridging of two aspects regarding the fluxes are tended to, in a considerate manner. Thus, we aim to provide a platform for living, with these parameters in mind in the upcoming closing chapter.

FIG 4.16 — Three focus actions for the project strat-

Sources: [LEFT] (Diagram based on: Remnant, Tracing the past remains for gestures of the future, Reehan et. al, Polimi Interior studio, 2021)

Chapter 5 Design implementation of research with final reflections

150

CHAPTER FIVE

5.1 Program context: Method and program framing

he main crux of this research has always been to break away from the traditional living model which often propounds that most of our everyday activities is to be carried out "in the comfort of our very own house". But hasn't that notion aged and become irrelevant in today's era? Most people nowadays cannot stand to spend too much time inside the house and would rather work at the mall or a cafe amidst white noise, or perhaps travel and stay in a location where they could interact more with others and network, infact they would pay more to have experiences with others, with even the workplace having more collaborative elements than ever. But how woulld this work in the post-pandemic era?

I have posed this question repeatedly throughout the extent of this research and one element remains abundantly clear; people no longer crave for possessions as much as they do experiences. With the filter of an "inbetween space", the boundaries of private and public can be redefined in a way that is relevant and that which provides utility to the people. By simply creating a layer that accommodates some of the functions that the individual unit used to own, we can free users to choose of their own volition just how much they wish to interact with others, or be in their own company, afterall, as much as it is pleasant to socialize, we need our safe haven too.

FIG 5.1 [BOTTOM] — Diagram illustrating the combination of existing context and definition of functions to gain insights for implementation. FIG 5.2 [RIGHT] — Diagram illustrating the distribution of spaces in a traditional living model vs the modern proposed model of shared iiving.

The diagram on the right illustrates this concept best, with functions like working, dining and learning becoming co-working, shared dining and learning respectively. This model of program arrangement leaves it to the user to decide for themselves their comfort level and degree of public or private environment to suit their preferences. Along with the existing context of the abandoned building, integrating these defined functions in line with modern sensibilities will yield a unique living experience for the future cities.

+ Existing context

Reside

Respite

Relax

Gather

Interact

Work

Definition of functions

PROGRAM CONTEXT

g objectives for the project implementation phase Traditional living concept Community Community

Relaxing Relaxing Sleeping Sleeping

Eating Eating

Socializing Socializing Intimacy Intimacy Grooming Grooming

inhabitants inhabitants

Cleaning Cleaning Hosting Hosting

Cooking Cooking Dining Dining Learning Learning

Working Working

Lounging Lounging

residents residents

neighbours neighbours Gathering Gathering

Gaming Gaming Exercising Exercising

Shared living concept Exercising Exercising

Sleeping Sleeping

Grooming Grooming

inhabitants inhabitants

Intimacy Intimacy

Hosting Hosting

Gathering Gathering

Socializing Socializing at at events events Lounging Lounging Gaming Gaming Eating Eating

CoCo-learning learning CoCo-working working

residents residents

Relaxing Relaxing Shared Shared Cooking Cooking

Shared Shared Dining Dining Community Community Participating Participating

neighbours neighbours

151

152

CHAPTER FIVE

5.2 Program context: Conceptualizing the site prog The co-living scheme I have researched thus far calls for an investigation into the site program and distribution in order to arrive at clarification and strategy for the coming steps. To this effect, I have deemed it appropriate to follow an iterative approach that takes into account the dual nature of the design intervention, on one hand striving to create a holistic and comfortable living quarters for the prospective residents; on the other, to finely balance the nature of private and public spaces on a scale demanded by the needs of today. Phase 1 starts at the beginning and the split of the program into private indicated in cerise, and the public, in blue. The intersection of the both creates an opportunity for interaction, I deem this, the in-between space, or the "semi" layer. This mixing chamber offers us an opportunity to delegate interesting spaces and functions. Phase 2 and 3 expands on this notion, further adding layers to the above and demarcating functions into places of residence, respite and living for the former, and places of commune, events and working for the latter. This is now split into a multitude of chunks ranging from the public to private that helps inform us as to the reordering of the spaces into a vertical stacked volume as shown in the diagram on the right. I believe this style of progam is appropriate for our particular abandoned site, and should go hand in hand along with the restoration of structural and aesthetic functions.

FIG 5.3 [RIGHT] — Step by step process of the program evolution showing the diversification of space and a distribution strategy.

[pexels-josh-sorenson-976853]

PROGRAM CONTEXT

gram with distribution and the stacking of spaces Phase 1 PRIVATE PROGRAM OF SPACES PUBLIC

PRIVATE PRIVATE

FORMAL PRIVATE

EXCLUSION PRIVATE

SEMI

MIXING CHAMBER

INBETWEEN GATEWAY

PUBLIC PUBLIC

PUBLIC INFORMAL

PUBLIC INCLUSION

Iterative process

Phase 2 EXCLUSION PRIVATE & LIVING

LIVING + SHARING

INCLUSION PUBLIC & INTERACTION

CLASSIFICATION Allocation of program

Phase 3

RESIDENCE

RESPITE

LIVING

COMMUNE

EVENTS

WORKING

GREEN ROOFTOP

CO-WORK

OPTION SPACES

Upper

PRIVATE

MEETING

TOILETS

CO-LIVING RESIDENCES

EVENT SPACES

CO-LIVING RESIDENCES

SHARED LIVING ROOM

MGMNT + SERVICES

MEETING ROOMS OPTION SPACES

BREAK OUT SPACES SHARED KITCHEN

DINING SPACES

BAR, CAFE & RESTAURANT

EVENT SPACE + SHARED LIVING ROOM

CO-WORKING SHARED DINING AMENITY/SRVS

PUBLIC

PRIVATE

Program development

PUBLIC Lower

153

154

CHAPTER FIVE

5.3 Program context: Conceptualizing the program The programmatic study resumes with the conceptualization of the various spaces applied to site, imagined in an informal manner, shown here. The concept of dual functioned spaces features here, with the splitting of the program and the distribution around the building. Spatial distribution strategy Steps one and two delves into the redistribution and diversification of spaces, multiplying the program into various levels of living and working, supplemented by the in-between space or the mixing chamber. The last two steps consolidates the program distribution onto the main building and the outhouse as well. The primary function of living will be housed in the former with the latter being used for co-working spaces, owing to the proximity to the front entrance. As discussed before, the transient nature of the site program starts at the accesspoint of the building at the entry, placing the public realm nearby this juncture. The more you traverse inside however, the more private the program becomes, culminating at the mezzanine floor of the main building where the majority of the private spaces are housed. The auxiliary arm of the building [near the entrance] will house the administrative wing with common amenities like the print offices. This structure will also house temporary residences for the traveling nomads, who would be well-served owing to the proximity to the Centrale railway station. Reflection and thoughts moving forward From the placement of temporary and public functions near the entryway to more consolidated and private functions on the interior, the spatial strategy for this design intervention is simple yet effective in aiding the designer to order the spaces and allocate functions along the extent of the site, thus paving the way for structural interventions to take place freely.

FIG 5.4 [RIGHT] — Visualization of the programmatic concept application to site illustrating the vertical distribution, and strategy for spatial balance.

PROGRAM CONTEXT

155

mmatic diversity and the consolidation of spaces

PRIVATE LIVING

RESIDENCES

SHARED LIVING

CO-WORKING

AMENITIES

MIXING CHAMBER

Programmatic concept

Program diversification

Conceptualizing the program in the previous page helped us to visualize the stacked design program for the co-living model, distributing the public spaces first, with the private above.

The next step deals with multiplying the program into the various spaces, with residences on the top, and the public commune or mixing chamber taking the ground floor.

MORE PRIVATE

Private Residences

Living

Atrium

LivingLiving

Atrium

Living

garden expanse

Commercials | Relaxation Commercials | Relaxation Commercials | Interaction & Networking Interaction & Networking Public events

Commercials | Public events

Foyer | Cafe | Lounge Mixing chamber | Guests MORE PUBLIC

MAIN BUILDING

OUTHOUSE MAIN BUILDING

Foyer | Cafe||Events Lounge Workshops MixingCo-working chamber | Guests

MORE PUBLIC

OUTHOUSE

Programmatic expansion

Harmonizing program with site

Having a clear distinction of the program, we can now expand it into zoned areas which begind to take multiform attributes, extending to cover even the outhouse building.

Applying the principle of degrees of private or publicness, the site program begin to take a harmonious shape with the rest of the building, forming a clear picture for us to design.

Program evolution

garden expa

Workshops | E Co-workin

156

CHAPTER FIVE

5.4 Vision context: An overview of the end-user typ The co-living scheme primarily focuses on catering to five different user typologies namely single adults [academics or professionals] multiple adults, couples, family units & bachelor nomads, for whom I will aim to accommodate dwelling quarters into the repurposing of the abandoned building, along with the common areas for interaction, and the available resident amenities, spread along the extent of the site. The five typologies is representative of over 70% of the Italian resident households in Milan, and form the crux of the student/worker/family body. I view this end-user group appropriate for the co-living model proposed, as it allows ample diversity for co-existence, as well as offering a platform for social exchange and establishing networks. The user group is thus chosen to provide an alternative mode of living for those who seek to move away from traditional collective living models like apartments and gated community housing, towards embracing a new type of living, in line with the demands and backdrop of the new age. These models are viewed not only as short stay hotel-type units but also as long term rental accommodation, where you can avail the service of a residency programme and stay for a few years. After a careful analysis, I can surmise that the building at via Sammartini, post-restoration has the capacity to accommodate roughly 30 people at a time in the dwelling areas, and a further 150 people in the commercial/ public areas like the restaurant, co-working and visitor lounge spaces. The available usable space [1.154m²] can be halved for both of these functions, with further spaces adding onto the mezzanine floor. The objective is to create a harmonious space for shared living, whilst equippiing the building with all the facilities and needs, congruent with today's era, and most importantly, to simulate unique living experiences, which are often coveted by the experiential generation of the 21st century.

FIG 5.5 [RIGHT] — Map illustrating end-user typologies in relation with the availability of area on site and allocation of spaces.

VISION CONTEXT

pologies and area allocation of the proposed model

Area assignment

157

158

CHAPTER FIVE

5.5 Vision context: Abacus of interrelated elements

Utilization

User type

24/7 hrs

Single adults Multiple adults Couples Family units Bachelor nomads

9/5 hrs

Working professionals Self-employed

2/3 hrs

General public Servicemen

FIG 5.6 [UP] — Diagram showing the relation of the typology of users to the spatial program and its func-

VISION CONTEXT

s between the user type, program and functions

Site program E-bike station Gardenscape Outdoor seating

Functions Sleeping

Private

Cooking

Co-working space Shared kitchen

Dining

Option spaces Communal dining

Working

Printing oﬃce Arcade lounge

Relaxing

Cinema zone Bar/Restaurant

Gathering

Noticeboard Amphitheater

Socializing

Play area Urban farm

Exercising

Laundrette Living quarters

Entertainment Public

159

160

CHAPTER FIVE

5.6 Vision context: A glimpse at the interrelation of

[photo credit: pexels-szabolcs-toth-3255349]

The first diagram aims to put into perspective the power balance between the private and public spaces by allocating the researched site program, against the total available built area on site. The private residences, designed for a base 30 inhabitants comes up to a neat 30m2 per person inclusive of amenities like kitchenette, living and restrooms. The public area allocation has a significantly smaller area per person ratio, still coming upto a comfortable 4.75m2. This balance signifies the emphasis placed on the spatial distribution for residents, who have a larger stake in the ownership of the place as compared to visitors. The second diagram depicts a heat map quadrant between the two important parameters surrounding this co-living model which is the degree of private or publicness of the site program versus the amount of tranquility and the busy nature of the same. The spaces that fall into the intersection of the Tranquil and Public section yields the semi-public realm, with spaces like the outdoor seating and gardenscape, whereas the intersection of the Busy and Private section yields the semi-private realm. with spaces like resident lounge and urban farm. The primary residences, along with its facilities fall under the most tranquil areas, whilst spaces like restaurant or the arcade constitutes the busiest or the most public of spaces in the building. These tools help us understand how to navigate the areas available in the refurbishing process of the abandoned building and offer insights that would enable us to create a holistic and comfortable living experience for the end-users, whilst combining a multitude of amenities like a commercial wing, to aid in generating revenue for the maintainence. FIG 5.7 [RIGHT] — Map depicting the interrelation between private and public spaces. Heat map showing the degrees of private/publicness of

VISION CONTEXT

public areas and amenities with private dwelling

30 Inhabitants [30.15m2 per person]

30 Inhabitants 710m2

710m2

905m2

[30.15m2 per person]

150 Inhabitants

150 Inhabitants [4.75m2 per person]

[4.75m2 per person]

Tranquil Tranquil restrooms

locker room gardenscape

living quarters restrooms kitchenette

locker room gardenscape

living quarters kitchenette

e-bike station frontyard

coworking hub

Private

e-bike station frontyard

outdoor seating

coworking hub

outdoor seating

option spaces

Public

coworking spaces shared kitchen coworking spaces

laundry room laundry room

shared kitchen

urban farm

printing areas

urban farm

communal dining

communal dining community space community space

resident lounge resident lounge admin areas admin areas

arcade lounge

arcade lounge bar/restaurant bar/restaurant

Busy Busy

Area inter-relationships

161

162

CHAPTER FIVE

5.7 Structural context: Illustration of the analytical a The previous chapter analysed the existing state of the building in tandem with the structural ineptitude prevalent in its make-up. I decided to employ a pragmatic approach to treat these deteriorating buildings in a sensitive way, I endeavored to follow a simple strategy of applying three focus actions to the site. They are attachment, detachment and connections. This aims to tackle the prevailing structural problems in a holistic manner. Analysis of step-by-step treatment of building The first diagram illustrates the site at present, as is and refers to chapter 4, the first order of business is to add the core functionality for the working of site by way of introducing a mezzanine floor, supported by the same column grid left behind, along with slim steel columns [of 0.45x0.15m thickness] to support the structural load of the floor. These columns feature on either sides of the main access point of the now divided great hall. The second set of diagrams performs two actions, the first being the necessary removal of the portions of the building [i.e. broken beams, walls, ceilings etc] that are delapidated or destroyed, in order to preserve the structural integrity of the new structure. This is followed by creating the connections between the main building and the auxillary structure and the outhouse. This also involves establishing the pathways and rehabilitating the old, in order to preserve the charm of the existing building. The third set of diagrams involve the addition of services like a tubeless elevator to ascend the handicapped and the disabled, with further multiple staircases which are of two typologies, heavy for the primary vertical movement of the resident rooms and restaurant with the light supplying the duplex rooms above. Finally, the roof which was lost is now reconstructed using a similar language and capped with terracotta rooftiles for completing the overall aesthetic outlook of the building.

FIG 5.8 [RIGHT] — Visualization showing the iterative actions of attaching, detaching and connecting the design elements for building rehabilitation.

[photo credit: Forgas arquitectes]

STRUCTURAL CONTEXT

assessment of the rehabilitation of the building

Structural rehabilitation

163

164

CHAPTER FIVE

5.7 Structural context: Illustration of the architectur The iterative approach resumes a similar strategy of tackling the issues in the case of treating the damage and decay surveyed in the previous chapter. In order to propose an appropriate design scheme for intervention, there is first a necessity to rehabilitate the existing damaged elements in order to ensure the structural and functional integrity of the site, as well as the aesthetic make-over for use as a co-living commune. Analysis of step-by-step treatment of building The first and second diagrams indicate back to pg. 52 of chapter four, which surveys photographically, the existing state of affairs in the building and the extent of the damage and decay of the site at via. Giovanni Sammartini and the structural response on the part of the designer, whilst the remaining four is a schematic to indicate a full yet necessary rehabilitation of the portions of the site including the deteriorating walls, columns and floor structures, as well as additions for improving the living experiences.

Aesthetic damage treatment

The first step is to treat the surface erosio clear the debris and foliage found on site a rehabilitate the extensively damaged portio of floors, walls and columns.

Structural rehabilitation

The much needed structural additions requ a complete articulation of the beams, colum and floorplate made of composite materials order to both use and preserve the building

FIG 5.9 [RIGHT] — Diagrams indicating a step-by-step aesthetic, functional andstructural rehabilitation of the interior and exterior elements of the abandoned building.

Structural recl

STRUCTURAL CONTEXT

ral additions for the rehabilitation of the building

on, and ons

uire mns s in g.

Functional damage treatment

Roof level restructuring

Secondly, after the assessmment of the functional elements on-site is carried out, the reinstallation of the window-panes, missing/broken rooftiles and column reinforcement is done.

The steps after, involves reconstructing the door portals, designing a column grid on top of the existing structural artefacts, and finally erect a roof structure that has deteriorated.

Fenestration detailing Having taken care of the interior and the structural aspects of the building, we move to functional entities that enable circulation and light, such as the reconstruction of fenestrations.

lamation

Skylight detailing The final touch is the inclusion of skylights in order to take advantage of the daylight that would flood into and illuminate the entirety of the main hall, serving to enhance spaces, most lived in.

165

166

CHAPTER FIVE

5.8 Site context: The masterplan of the site showin

The main structure of the site is shown here with the exterior functions, the staircase leading to the outhouse and the urban farm, and further leading to the covered seating area in the mezzanine rooftop of the outhouse building. The reconstructed roof of the building also shows the skylight apertures that bring in light to the areas that are lacking, namely the living quarters facing the adjacent wall and the auxillary arm of the structure where the living room for the bachelor nomad residence is housed. This is the extent of the structural rehabilitation of the building with the added functions. The adapative design intervention aims to provide ready access to the residents using the site but also to the general public through the entry to the restaurant space as illustrated in the interior layout.

Keyplan

Masterplan

scale 1:100

DESIGN CONTEXT

ng the exterior spaces from a plan view

FIG 5.9 [TOP] — Masterplan of site

167

168

CHAPTER FIVE

5.8 Site context: The exterior elevation views of the

South-east elevation

1 Keyplan

Elevations

South-west elevation

scale 1:100

DESIGN CONTEXT

e building from both the public-facing roads Via Giovanni Battista Sammartini, 55

21%

Open spaces

Built area

78%

FIG 5.10 [TOP] — Exterior elevations of site

169

170

CHAPTER FIVE

5.9 Design context: The interior furniture layout sho

The interior layout is the final version of the allocated functions and spaces. The two main entries are preserved from the existing state, with the difference being that the former main entry is now the public access point to the building, leading to the Bar/restaurant. The wicket gate entry is given as the primary entry point for the residents and is more private and controlled. The debris is cleared off to reveal a bare front yard spotted by landscaping elements, that leads to the primary building entry ahead, admin entry on the right hang side and the refurbished outhouse on the left, which consists of the co-working and communal spaces. The living quarters are distributed across the ground and mezzanine floor forming the spine of the building's function.

Resident entry

Restaurant entry

Interior layout (ground floor)

scale 1:10

DESIGN CONTEXT

owing the ground floor of the co-living structure

40p + 36p

42p

00 FIG 5.11 [TOP] — Ground floor interior furniture layout

171

172

CHAPTER FIVE

5.9 Design context: The interior furniture layout sho

The mezzanine floor at level 3.0m is accessed centrally by both staircase and elevator. This floor expands on the existing functions from the ground floor in terms of providing more room to house patrons in the restaurant on the south-west wing, with the rest of the building structure dedicated to living quarters, with a range of typologies for couples, families and shared adults. The administrative wing houses rooms for temporary living meant for traveling nomads. Finally, at level 4.0m the top of the outhouse consists of the urban farm and an oudoor covered area for private gatherings/parties. The mezzanine floor is supported by thin composite columns that retain the aesthetic industrial feel of the former buidling. The ratio of public to private places are balanced to provide a unique living experience that offers privacy but also espouses the in-between space right at the threshold of housing so that residents feel like they have not only ownership of their abode, but also the option to feel

Interior layout (mezzanine floor)

scale

DESIGN CONTEXT

owing the ground floor of the co-living structure

e 1:100 FIG 5.12 [TOP] — Mezzanine floor interior furniture layout

173

174

CHAPTER FIVE

5.9 Design context: The interior building sections s Roof level 9.20m

Beam level 6.20m

Mezzanine level 3.20m

Ground level 0.0m

South-east sectional elevation A

Pergola level 8.22m

Roofplate level 5.22m

Sill level 3.05m

Ground level 0.0m

North-west sectional elevation B

Interior layout (sections)

scale 1:100

DESIGN CONTEXT

showing vertical movement and usage of space

B A FIG 5.13 [TOP] — Interior sections furniture layout

175

176

CHAPTER FIVE

5.10 Zoning context: The Ground floorplan showing

The ground floor plan depicts the various connections, circulation and services available in both private and public zones. There exists a clear hierarchical order to the passage from the exterior to the interior, with a degree of publicness starting from the former to the degree of privacy found in the latter. This transition or flow is intentional in order to cater to the residents and offer a sense of ownership of place as well as to the general public for clarity in usage of space. The entrances are marked in blue for public as they form the starting point of this flow, towards the enclosed spaces marked in cerise, in the form of private bedrooms in the main building, closed congregational seating in the co-working arena, and finally to the administrative service areas in the auxiliary wing. The front yard and the outdoor seating are marked in gray for the neutral zones.

Resident entry

Restaurant entry

Zoning plan (ground floor)

scale 1:100

ZONING CONTEXT

g the private-public relationship in terms of zoning

Private zone Public zone Neutral zone

FIG 5.14 [TOP] — Ground floor showing private—public zoning layout

177

178

CHAPTER FIVE

5.10 Zoning context: The Mezzanine floorplan show

The rhythm of the public-private flow resumes even at the mezzanine level, with most spaces like bedrooms, nomad living and outhouse rooftop level being private, whilst bar floor and landing zones being the only public areas. This is a study in user comfort level and circulation of the resident and common areas, with unique stacking of spaces to enhance the right of possession for the inhabitants. Lastly, it is to be noted that the upper mezzanine levels where the duplex/single bedrooms are located, are at the least 4m in height owing to the reconstructed roof which adds an additional 0.85-1.25 m culminating in the skylight roof windows, bringing in ample light into the spaces. The windows present on the side of the building look onto the private urban farm as well, whilst the opposite end with the couple and shared bedrooms respectively, looks onto the resident lounge.

Zoning plan (mezzanine floor)

scale 1:1

ZONING CONTEXT

179

wing the private-public relationship in terms of zoning

100

Private zone Public zone Neutral zone

FIG 5.15[TOP] — Mezzanine floor showing private—public zoning layout

180

CHAPTER FIVE

5.10 Zoning context: The interior building sections s

South-east sectional elevation A

North-west sectional elevation B

Zoning (sections)

scale 1:100

ZONING CONTEXT

showing vertical movement and usage of space

Private zone Public zone Neutral zone

B A

FIG 5.16 [TOP] — Interior sections zoning layout

181

CHAPTER FIVE

5.11 Spatio-auditory context: The Ground floorplan

Aural architecture contains at least five types of spatiality: navigational, social, musical, aesthetic, and symbolic. Navigational spatiality is the ability to use auditory spatial awareness to “visualize” a space in order to navigate around objects and geometries. [1] This aspect becomes relevant to our project on the basis of there being a variety of spaces, some which are loud and public, whereas others might be tranquil and private. Sensing sound or being spatially aware through proximity to sound plays a part in gravitating toward those spaces. Eg: If a person were to cross a busy restaurant on their way from work, they might want to partake in the same environment. Building environment today lack the design of soundscape in them, partially because most of the noise is accidental. But due to changes in our life and work patterns, this discipline is more required than ever. Auditory experience is affected by location, shape, surface materials and a number of occupants in space and the design is tweaked accordingly. [2] A quick look at the ground floor shows us that the restaurant and co-living spaces would generate the most noise, whilst a degree of tranquility pervades the resident spaces, with the living/dining room noisier than the private bedroom areas.

Resident entry

Road noise

182

Restaurant entry

Soundscape plan (ground floor)

scale

SPATIO-AUDITORY CONTEXT

n showing the tranquil-busy ratio in terms of zoning

e 1:100

Train-station noise Loudest Noisy Quiet

FIG 5.17[TOP] — Ground floor showing private—public zoning layout

183

184

CHAPTER FIVE

5.11 Spatio-auditory context: Mezzanine floorplan s

Urban homes are mostly subjected to traffic noise and high rises building suffer from noise boom. Especially since the site is situated within close proximity to the train station, this is more relevant. Hence, use of window seals, double pane windows in the direction of the noise, buffer layer if the living space is at the lower floor and removing internal noise reflection can help improve living area soundscape. [2] The mezzanine floorplan indicates that the floor above the restaurant generates noise but the rest of the spaces are low-noise. It's interesting to note that the spatial proximity from the shared/family bedrooms to the urban farm on the exterior, albeit a space which might not be used frequently. Architecture is an interface for human experience. We believe it is no longer viable to ignore the auditory sense when designing any space. Taking it into account and designing with desirable acoustics firmly embedded into the environment is what users shall need in the future. With outside environments getting busier and noisier by the day, It is important to design a responsive environment and create a soundscape that is conducive to the end user. [2] Thus a closer inspection on the spatio-auditory state of the site is required to suggest the counter-measures to combat unnecessary noise emanating from the South-east direction of the train station as well as around the neighborhood.

Soundscape plan (mezzanine floor)

SPATIO-AUDITORY CONTEXT

185

showing the tranquil-busy ratio in terms of zoning Neighborhood noise

Neighborhood noise

scale 1:100

Loudest Noisy Quiet

FIG 5.18 [TOP] — Mezzanine floor showing private—public zoning layout

186

CHAPTER FIVE

5.11 Spatio-auditory context: Interior sections show

Station & Road noise

South-east sectional elevation A

Neighborhood noise

North-west sectional elevation B

Soundscape (sections)

scale 1:100

SPATIO-AUDITORY CONTEXT

187

wing the tranquil-busy ratio in terms of zoning

Loudest Noisy Quiet

B A

FIG 5.19 [TOP] — Interior sections spatio-auditory layout

188

CHAPTER FIVE

5.12 Fluxes context: Ground floorplan showing the

The order of access to this co-living commune is by nature two-fold, one is that of the residents themselves and all their privileges including areas that only they have access to as a renting member. The second is that of the general public and the people interested in utilizing the commercial entities that are open to the same, vis-a-vis the Outhouse with the co-living room and the Bar cum Restaurant from the South-west entry.

Resident entry

The pathway of the public: The public have access to first the restaurant, which has a ground floor (42 person capacity) and a mezzanine floor (45 person capacity). They can access here by entering from via Raffaele Parravicini and have ample room to sit inside. They are not however permitted to access the resident lounge. The other pathway to the public is the main entry from the same road, leading to the outhouse co-working space. It is also possible to approach the concierge in order to make inquiries about vacancies and membership. The pathway of the private: The inhabitants have more access to facilities in the building, gaining entry through via Raffaele Parravicini gate leading to the front yard with the e-bike station, the access pathway from there leads to the Outhouse building on the left, containing the shared dining and co-working areas (76 person capacity), then the Administrative wing on the right with printing room facilities and arcade lounge in the auxiliary building, and finally the entirety of the Main building straight ahead, including the bar, lobby/lounge and living units.

Restaurant entry

Fluxes plan (ground floor)

scale 1:100

FLUXES CONTEXT

movement of residents and visitors in the site

General public access Coliving resident access Optional access

FIG 5.20 [TOP] — Ground floor showing private—public zoning layout

189

190

CHAPTER FIVE

5.12 Fluxes context: Mezzanine floorplan showing t

The access to the mezzanine floor is predominantly for the resident population, with the exception of the Bar and restaurant leading from the ground floor staircase. The pathway of the public: The public only have access via ground floor to the restaurant for this mezzanine level. The pathway of the private: The majority of the mezzanine is used by the residents, firstly from the Auxiliary building for the purpose of providing temporary housing for the bachelornomads. The Outhouse building has private access to the roof level from the front yard next to the shared dining space; this level consists of an urban farm and gathering space. Finally, the living spaces in the main building is reached from the lower living unit in the case of shared living or family, whilst the two bedroom units are accessed through the elevator from the ground floor. This study sheds light on the perceived movement of the residents and the general public, and allows us to speculate on the interactive spaces between the two, the extent of the privacy threshold for our residents vs the degree of accessibility to non-residents whilst ensuring that the possibility of fostering interaction is still intact.

Fluxes plan (mezzanine floor)

scale 1:1

FLUXES CONTEXT

the movement of residents and visitors in the site

100

General public access Coliving resident access Optional access

FIG 5.21 [TOP] — Mezzanine floor showing private—public zoning layout

191

192

CHAPTER FIVE

5.12 Fluxes context: Building sections showing the Roof level 9.20m

Beam level 6.20m

Mezzanine level 3.20m

Ground level 0.0m

South-east sectional elevation A

Pergola level 8.22m

Roofplate level 5.22m

Sill level 3.05m

Ground level 0.0m

North-west sectional elevation B

Fluxes (sections)

scale 1:100

FLUXES CONTEXT

movement of residents and visitors in the site

General public access Coliving resident access Optional access

B A

FIG 5.22 [TOP] — Interior sections fluxes layout

193

194

CHAPTER FIVE

5.13 Interior context: The interior moodboard & pale

INTERIOR CONTEXT

ette for ground and mezzanine shared living units

All images shown belong to their respective owners, sourced solely for the purpose of conceptualization.

195

196

CHAPTER FIVE

5.13 Visualization context: The interior views of the

Shared living unit

e co-living shared unit for single adults

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

197

198

CHAPTER FIVE

5.13 Visualization context: The interior views of the

e co-living shared unit for single adults

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

199

200

CHAPTER FIVE

5.13 Visualization context: The interior views of the

e co-living shared unit for single adults

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

201

202

CHAPTER FIVE

5.14 Interior context: The interior moodboard & pale

INTERIOR CONTEXT

ette for ground and mezzanine shared living units

All images shown belong to their respective owners, sourced solely for the purpose of conceptualization.

203

204

CHAPTER FIVE

5.14 Visualization context: The interior views of the

Bar & restaurant

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

e bar cum restaurant for general public + residents

205

206

CHAPTER FIVE

5.14 Visualization context: The interior views of the

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

e bar cum restaurant for general public + residents

207

208

CHAPTER FIVE

5.14 Visualization context: The interior views of the

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

e bar cum restaurant for general public + residents

209

210

CHAPTER FIVE

5.14 Visualization context: The interior views of the

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

e bar cum restaurant for general public + residents

211

212

CHAPTER FIVE

5.15 Interior context: The interior moodboard & pale

INTERIOR CONTEXT

ette for ground and mezzanine shared living units

All images shown belong to their respective owners, sourced solely for the purpose of conceptualization.

213

214

CHAPTER FIVE

5.15 Visualization context: The interior views of the

Co-working space

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

e co-working spaces for general public + residents

215

216

CHAPTER FIVE

5.15 Visualization context: The interior views of the

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

e co-working spaces for general public + residents

217

218

CHAPTER FIVE

5.15 Visualization context: The interior views of the

VISUALIZATION CONTEXT

e co-working spaces for general public + residents

219

220

Epilogue: Reflections and research learnings Co-Living Spatial Model [CLSM] checklist for the future

Low Equitable rent

Modular design

Open registry

Equity & access

Eco-materials

Automated tech

Med

19m2

High

Human interaction

Adequate density

30m2

50m2

Diverse pricepoints

Focus Actions

Objectives

Prioritizing social interaction Adequate density control Regulating equity and price Building material efficiency

Financial outlay Sharing economy Adaptive reuse Future Urban Living

FINAL REFLECTION AND EPILOGUE

The culmination of this thesis takes into account the various challenges tackled along the way, starting with the theoretical framework objectives, which had lent a clear directive for the project and offered much insight into the objectives that were immediate, versus those that had lower priority. Through such a lens, it is possible to garner focus on the aspects that need to be addressed first, including focused goals like regulating equity and pricepoints for the end-user which would go a long way in enabling similar projects across the city, whilst fostering social interaction which can aid in combating the loneliness faced by everbody in the now post-pandemic reality. The study of the existing abandoned building structure in Milan went hand in hand with this multipronged approach to design, technics, politics and a user-cen-

tric aim, to yield spaces for people with diverse backgrounds. The inquiry into the in-between space meanwhile, lead us to an interesting threshold that dealt with the public-private interrelations of the site and managed to bridge the gap between granting sufficient privacy to the user, whilst stil maintaining ownership of one's own space and freedom of choice. This could be a step ahead in forging a more resilient path for the future of housing in Milan. Thus, implementing a workable framework solution, centered around user needs with a strong focus on liveability and resilience, this project was able to propose a truly contemporary space that could serve as a modern form of dwelling whereby residents can endeavor to share not only their interests, values and aspirations but also their living spaces in close proximity to others, with ease.

FIG [LEFT] shows a strategy and checklist for proposing a CLSM to future projects.

221

222

Bibliography (sources and citations) CHAPTER ONE [1] World Urbanization Prospects, https://population.un.org [2] Public space 2, JUUL | FROST Architects, 2009, http://byensrum.dk/english/documents/PublicSpace2.pdf [3] Anton & Irene, OneSharedHouse project, 2016, http://onesharedhouse.com/ [4] Quote from cohousing.org. [5] Fgould, Co-living: the newest asset class comes to Manchester, Web Blog post, July 30, 2019, https://www.fgould.com/ uk-europe/articles/co-living-newest-asset-class-comes-manchester/ [6] Anton & Irene, the OneSharedHouse project, 2016, http://onesharedhouse.com/ [7]Kollectivhus: History of co-housing Internationally and in Sweden :http://www.kollektivhus.nu [8]A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmid (2019) https://doi.org/10.1515/9783035618686 [9]The History of Coliving: A collection of research findings https://alexandraplesner.medium.com/the-history-of-coliving-d79bda766dc4 [10] Wikipedia Articles & blogs, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Co-living [11] A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmid (2019), https://doi.org/10.1515/9783035618686 [12] Common —“Coliving, in relation to the real estate market”, Web Blog Post, Christina Yoh, April 2019, https://www.common.com/blog/2019/04/what-exactly-is-coliving-explained/ [13] A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living, by Susanne Schmidt, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1515/9783035618686 [14] Die moderne Großstadt pp. 24, 30, Hans Paul Bahrdt 1998, http://www.gbv.de/dms/hebis-darmstadt/toc/176719180.pdf [15] Community and privacy: Toward a New Architecture of Humanism, Serge Chermayeff, 1965, https://www.amazon.it/Community-privacy-Toward-Architecture-Humanism/dp/B0007EG8VE [16] Image and typical floor plan of The Bioclimatic Boarding House by Andyrahman Architect, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2016 [17] Image and typical floor plan Hachi Serviced Apartment by Octane architect & design, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2018 [18] Image and typical floor plan of Elderly Residential Home by Atelier Zündel Cristea, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2014 [19] Image and typical floor plan, Cooperative development for affordable housing and mixed-use, Spreefeld Berlin by fatkoehl architekten, 2013 [20] Image and Ground floor plan Number 05 Lunuganga by Geoffery Bawa, Design Pataki, Web blog post, Jan 2021, https:// www.designpataki.com/now-stay-in-these-timeless-geoffrey-bawa-properties-in-sri-lanka/ [21] Image and typical floor plan of Ginko by Hessamfar & Vérons, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 2014 [22] Image and Ground floor plan of The Paper Factory Hotel by The Collective, Palette arch, Web blog post, 2020 [23] Image and typical floor plan Habitat 67 by Safdie Architects, ArchDaily, Web blog post, 1995 [24] Image and typical floor plan of the Erasmus Campus Student Housing by Mecanoo, World architects, Web blog post, 2018 [25] Map of Europe’s average household size composed from Statistica, 2020, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1231406/ average-household-size-in-europe/ [26] Italian household, Web Blog post, https://www.thelocal.it/20200424/are-italian-apartments-really-some-of-the-smallest-in-europe/ [27] Statistica - Demographics and household size in Italy https://www.statista.com/topics/5925/demographics-in-italy/ [28] OECD population & statistics data—https://data.oecd.org/italy.html [29] United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division (2019) https://population.un.org/wpp/ [30] Italy economic snapshot | Statistica | World bank data | OECD data, https://data.worldbank.org/country/IT [31] Statistics from Istat, Wikipedia, studylink & Statistica, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italian_National_Institute_of_Statistics [32] Bioagency: “Why coliving is the answer for the experience-led generation, Web Blog post, Aug 2019 [33] Rittel & Webber, 1973, https://www.sympoetic.net/Managing_Complexity/complexity_files/1973%20Rittel%20and%20 Webber%20Wicked%20Problems.pdf [34] IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living. Space 10, 2018, https://space10.com/collection/imagine-exploring-the-brave-new-world-of-shared-living/ [35] Katy Gordon, “Envisioning the future for our post-pandemic cities” Web blog post. July 2,2021, https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/business/3281194/sponsored-envisioning-the-future-for-our-post-pandemic-cities-articleisfree/ [36] Mark McCord, weforum: People, Co-living & Communal health, Web blog post, March 1, 2021, https://www.weforum.org/ agenda/2021/03/co-living-communal-mental-health/ [37] World population ageing 2019. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/publications/pdf/ageing/WorldPopulationAgeing2019-Highlights.pdf [38] (Space 10 (2018). IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living).https://space10.com/collection/imagine-exploring-the-brave-new-world-of-shared-living/

BIBLIOGRAPHY

[39] Italy economic snapshot | Statistica | World bank data | OECD data, https://www.oecd.org/economy/italy-economic-snapshot/ [40] UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. https://www.un.org/en/desa [41] United Nations SDG goal 11: Sustainable cities & communities–https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/report/2019/goal-11/ [42] Space 10 (2018). IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living https://space10.com/collection/imagine-exploring-the-brave-new-world-of-shared-living/ [43] Source: Inferences & statistical graphs from Eurostat | Trading economics. [44] Mark McCord, weforum: People, Co-living & Communal health, Web blog post, March 1, 2021, https://www.weforum.org/ agenda/2021/03/co-living-communal-mental-health/ [45] Housing affordability and sustainability in the EU, Analytical report, November, 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/growth/document/download/e816b42f-c2f1-4407-aa1d-36fb3fdf848a_en [46]Nick Prescott—Co-living: a new housing model in a broken system, Web Blog Post, Oct, 2020, https://themeteor. org/2020/10/19/co-living-a-new-housing-model-in-a-broken-system/ [47] World bank data: Living and Leaving: Housing, Mobility and Welfare in the European Union, Publication, November, 2018, https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/eca/publication/living-and-leaving [48] CBRE report on co-living comparing five cities with population and CL demand. https://www.cbre.co.uk/services/property-types/residential/co-living [49] Idealista, https://www.idealista.it/en/news/property-sale-italy/2020/04/22/2777-what-kind-house-can-averageincome-buy-you-italy [50]Italy GDP Growth rate 2022 data, https://tradingeconomics.com/italy/gdp-growth [51] World bank data: Living and Leaving: Housing, Mobility and Welfare in the European Union, Publication, November, 2018, https://www.worldbank.org/en/region/eca/publication/living-and-leaving [52] Chetan Choudary, From smart to good cities, Web Blog, July, 2021, https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/businessreview/2021/07/02/ from-smart-to-good-cities-shifting-the-focus-from-technology-to-quality-of-life/ [53] Derek Fidler, “The cost of housing”, WE forum, WebBlogpost, 2019, https://europeansting.com/2019/01/11/the-cost-ofhousing-is-tearing-our-society-apart/ [54] “Shaping an Equitable, Inclusive and Sustainable Recovery”, WEF Web blogpost, Sept, 2021, https://www.weforum.org/ reports/shaping-an-equitable-inclusive-and-sustainable-recovery-acting-now-for-a-better-future All illustrated people graphics attributed to user (pch.vector) — https://www.freepik.com/pch-vector All images displayed are attributed to user (photo credit given under the image) CHAPTER TWO [1] Design Thinking models: IDEO, Ramunas Balcaitis, June 2019, https://empathizeit.com/design-thinking-models-ideo/ [2] Change By Design, Revised and Updated, Tim Brown, March 5, 2019, https://www.ideo.com/post/change-by-design#:~:text=In%20this%20revised%20and%20updated,and%20a%20viable%20business%20strategy. [3] What is a transformative map?, James Landale, WEF, 8 November, 2017, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/11/whatis-a-transformation-map/ CHAPTER THREE

[1] Garden House,Noiascape, Project page, August, 2017, https://www.archdaily.com/893909/garden-house-teatum-plus-teatum-architects [2] Meet the studio crafting co-living spaces for London’s generation rent, Elle decor magazine, Eliza Zagaria, Oct, 2018, https://www.elledecor.com/it/best-of/a24276038/noiascape-london-rent-apartment-coliving/ [3] Garden House by Noiascape, Project page, August, 2017, https://www.archdaily.com/893909/garden-house-teatum-plus-teatum-architects [4] Meet the studio crafting co-living spaces for London’s generation rent, Elle decor magazine, by Eliza Zagaria, Oct, 2018, https://www.elledecor.com/it/best-of/a24276038/noiascape-london-rent-apartment-coliving/ [5] Share House LT Josai Floorplan renderings by Naruse Inokuma Architects, Alyn Griffiths, Web blog post, August, 2013, https://www.dezeen.com/2013/08/29/share-house-by-naruse-inokuma-architects/ [6] Share House LT Josai Conceptual 3d model by Naruse Inokuma Architects, Alyn Griffiths, Web blog post, August, 2013, https://www.dezeen.com/2013/08/29/share-house-by-naruse-inokuma-architects/

223

224

Bibliography (sources and citations) CHAPTER THREE

[13] Archdaily Coop Housing at River Spreefeld, Web Blog post,2013, https://www.archdaily.com/587590/coop-housing-project-at-the-river-spreefeld-carpaneto-architekten-fatkoehl-architekten-bararchitekten [14] Spreefeld Berlin Cooperative development for affordable housing and mixed-use, fatkoehl arkitekten, projects, 2013, https://fatkoehl.com/en/housingmixed-use/spreefeld-berlin/ [15] Housing in the digital age: Trends and implications, Carlos Delclós, December, 2020, https://www.cidob.org/en/publications/publication_series/notes_internacionals/245/housing_in_the_digital_age_trends_and_implications [16]What are smart apartments and why they’re the future of living, Blake Miller, Web Blog Post, June 2020, https://blakemiller. co/what-are-smart-apartments-2/ [17]Access control solutions for shared living spaces, SALTO, Website product blog, https://saltosystems.com/en/industries/ shared-living-spaces-solution/ [18] Architecture post covid, Using proxemics in spatial design, Anna Veronese, 2021, https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/global-literature-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov/resource/pt/covidwho-1079294 [19] The space between: The proxemics in spatial design, Chiara Rubessi, Blog post, https://www.chiararubessi.com/works/ proxemics-spacedesign/ [20] Architecture post covid, Using proxemics in spatial design, Anna Veronese, 2021, https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/global-literature-on-novel-coronavirus-2019-ncov/resource/pt/covidwho-1079294 [21] The space between: The proxemics in spatial design, Chiara Rubessi, Blog post, https://www.chiararubessi.com/works/ proxemics-spacedesign/ [22] Text data of figures from (IMAGINE: Exploring the brave new world of shared living. Space 10, 2018) pp.98-105, https://space10.com/collection/imagine-exploring-the-brave-new-world-of-shared-living/ CHAPTER FOUR [1] Abandonment as a social fact_Milan, Moroni, De Franco et.al, 2020, DOI: 10.1080/07352166.2020.1792310 [2] Cittametropolitana, dataset analysis and background, https://www.dati.lombardia.it/Government/CITTA-METROPOLITANA-MILANO-Dataset-pubblicati/pzqr-fre7 [3] Historical background of Milan, Milanmap360, mapping website, https://www.introducingmilan.com/history [4] UN habitat data from the wcr 2020 report, 2020, https://unhabitat.org/sites/default/files/2020/10/wcr_2020_report.pdf [5] Wikipedia—Zone 2 of Milan, Wiki dataset, 2022, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zone_2_of_Milan [6] Notes from Interior design lab, Section A [054575], Professor Anna Anzani, 2022. [7] Milano 2030—PGT analysis, Commune di Milano website dataset, https://www.pgt.comune.milano.it/ [8] Istituto Nazionale di Statistica Italia (web) & Commune di Milano dataset, https://dati.comune.milano.it/ CHAPTER FIVE — All chapter cover photo credits are given below: C1 - [photo credits: pexels-davide-caiezza-9216669] C2 -[photo credits: pexels-intrecciofoto-9836127] C3 - [photo credits: pexels-salvatore-de-lellis-9683981] C4 - [photo credits: pexels-leef-parks-4136610] C5 - [photo credits: pexels-rachel-claire-4577179]

BIBLIOGRAPHY

225

PREFACE

2022 — MSc Interior and Spatial Design