P2 reretake

Symbiotic Community

By Rolf Huijgen 4091507

Experiences

Knowledge

Space Heat

Share

Study materials Rent

Home grown food Transportation Labor

Local produced energy Meals

Friends Study time

Location: Tu Delft Campus

Why student housing?

Problem statement

Discontinued student funding + rising cost for studying + expensive student housing = less students living close at the faculty, less experiences

Main goals oo Design a co-habitation environment that allows students to efficiently use unused space. oo Design an living environment that helps students to cut down on their expenses (expenditure).

Living away from parents International students Living with parents

Target Group - Students Common characteristics

Partyer- extrovert - unhealthy

oo Huge variety in students and their habits ЄЄ Different study schedules ЄЄ Sports & hobbies ЄЄ Social or non-social ЄЄ Healthy/unhealthy oo Short stay (3 to 10 years) oo Relatively long amounts of time away from home (traveling, minor, weekends with the parents, association activities, etc). oo Low income either loan, parental funding or job oo Huge fluctuations in expenditure (partying, holidays, new hobbies, books, etc).

Nerd-introvert-unhealthy

Student growth

Junior student

oo Not a lot of friends in the city yet oo Not a lot of possessions

VS

Senior student

oo Know what they want oo Less compulsory courses oo More possessions

Variable expenses

Fixed expenses Social activities

Food

Insurances

Sport

Study products Entertainment products

Education Payment plans

Student financial balance Usages costs (energy, water, disposal)

Parental Part-time job

Additional services

Loan Student funding (270 â‚Ź per month) Funding

m2 private space

Building costs

Students per shared functions Housing rent

Co habitation Cheap student housing oo Private rooms need daylight, result narrow rooms (roughly 15m2 each) oo Landlord - optimizing max rent point system oo Living room is a luxury, often combined with kitchen oo Efficient hallway for private room distribution

Common area Bathroom Balcony Private room Extra facilities Vertical circulation Kitchen

Co-habitation characteristics Positives oo Relatively low rent, sharing expensive functions ЄЄ Higher function/m2 ratio if ЄЄ Affordable shared luxury functions oo Lower expenses on food consumption - Buying in bulk oo Sharing labor (cleaning, urban farming, cooking, etc) oo Shared experiences/knowledge - strengthen relationships oo Ability to share secondary necessities (bicycles, car, books, tools, etc)

Negatives oo Compromising is necessity oo Noise problems oo The lack of privacy

Core design aspects Separating study from relaxing

Community between housing

oo Reduces personal conflict

oo Share knowledge or experiences

Relax

or

oo Divide labor; growing, cooking, building etc.

Study

oo Be part of something bigger than yourself!

Give more control on privacy

More control on expenditure

oo Multiple common areas

oo Make rent a variable

oo Ability to expand or shrink private rooms

oo Optimally share common facilities

oo Control on visual privacy from outside

Sharing space Between Private rooms - Negotiation process

Between Private & shared spaces - Real time

Reconfiguring spaces results in oo Dilemma lower rent vs. more stuff oo More control on privacy. oo Less clutter = Less distractions = More time to spend on things that matter.

?

Reconfigurable environments

Storage

Sto

rag

e

Storage

Integrated

Constraints reconfigurable environments oo Allows for compact living - with high amount of privacy. oo Should be easy to use both manually and robotically! oo Can be integrated with different functionalities such as: kitchen, table, benches, bed, desk, storage, etc. oo Private walls require a modular build to make it personal. oo Should still act as an acoustic barrier

Modular

Space reconfiguration techniques

Easy reconfigurations

multi-functional Interior Rietveld - Sliding walls

PKMN Architects - Sliding Walls

PKMN architectures - Rotating wall

Yo Home - Raising floor

Pop-up apartment

Compact building

ALBED - rotating and sliding

URHouse - Pushable walls

Naked House - Rolling interior MIMA house - Modular Wall grid

Space efficiency

Reconfiguration techniques Rotating Walls

Sliding Walls

oo Both robotic & manually oo Easy to Use oo Constraint to pivot points

oo Both robotic & manually operated oo Easy to use oo Constraint to track on the ceiling

2 1

Rising / lowering platforms

Rolling interior

oo Both robotic & manually operated oo Constraint to a single location

oo oo oo oo

Manually operated Constraint to a floor level Allows for quick changes Not suitable for big objects

Sliding + Rotating

oo oo oo oo

Practical space Can be manually & robotically moved Easy to use NO COLUMNS!!!!

Endless configurations

Reconfigurable space layout Radial

- Unpractical spaces no corners + Better views - Max 2 possible neighbors + Ideal for sliding - Walls need to stretch

Hexagonal

- Requires more walls to enclose a space - 120 degree corners + Max 6 possible neighbors + Ideal for rotating and sliding

Linear

+ 90 degree corners - Max 2 neighbors + Ideal for sliding - Perpendicular walls need to extend

Orthogonal

+ Practical spaces - 90 degree corners + Max 4 possible neighbors + Ideal for sliding and rotating

Modular Interior activity

Rotating & sliding wall

Table

Desk

Storage

oo Reading oo (Studying) oo Gaming

oo Watching oo Storing oo Un(dressing)

Bed

Kitchen

oo Sleeping oo Sex oo (Lounging)

oo Cooking oo Storing food

oo oo oo oo

Meeting Eating Playing Reading

400

100

Wall construction requirements oo oo oo oo

Acoustic barrier - no noise complaints Light weight - easy to push As slim as possible - more functional space Soundproof connection between walls (Magnetic property or foam-like)

Single private unit Murphy bed

Private unit - 5,3 m2 floor Modular wall (2.5 m3) oo Storage oo oo Desk oo oo TV

25

Chairs Couch

250 common function

100 isolation 250

140

Neighbor

Utilization area

200

2300

800

2300

400 100 isolation

Activity private room

1 UNIT -5.3 m2 floor Sleeping, sex, lounging

Working, gaming, lounging

Lounging, watching TV, etc.

2300 2300

2 UNITS 10.6 m2 floor Working together, lounging, workout, etc.

Rule 1: 4 walls can become one unit of space (rent reduces for both students)

Rule 5: Shared space is returned when students comes home away

Rule 2: You rent either 1 unit (2 walls) or 2 units

home

(3 walls) of space

1

2

Rule 3: You don’t have to share your units

Rule 4: You can share private space (divide rent)

Rule 6: Swap locations if both students agree

Simplified rent per second (RpS) calculator RpS = ((common units / amount of student) + pUnits)*unit cost modifier (Unit size = 2.8 x 2.8 m)

Keep Give

Rent (Units * m2 cost modifier)

Common units / amount of students

Amount of private units (pUnits)

Take Keep

1 pUnit

Give pUnits-0.5

2 pUnits

Take pUnits+1

Special units Entrance/Stairs - 1 unit

oo Reconfigurable oo 1 unit per 8 students oo Requires daylight

2500

2500 2500

oo Either entrance, stairs or both oo 1 unit per floor oo Static

Dinner table - 1 unit

2000

Kitchen - 1 or 2 units

Bathroom - 1 unit

oo Requires daylight oo 1 kitchen per 8 students oo Reconfigurable

2500

2500

oo 2 showers, 2 toilets oo 1 unit per 8 students oo Static

2500

2500

Elevator - 1 unit 2500

Example floorplan

S Common area 15.9 m2

Dinner table

Lounging

Entrance / stairs

Bathroom

Kitchen

Working, gaming, etc.

Sleeping

Activity scenario

S Wake up - prepare meal - eat at dinner table - leave house

Common area 31.8m2

Relax in common area - room disappears Start studying - increase room size

Common area 26.5 m2

Party

Common area 47.7 m2

Stop studying - prepare for dinner and party

Common area 26.5 m2

Common area 10.6 m2

Master layout Tower configuration

+ Easy to achieve more privacy, no pedestrians. + Sharing warmth is more efficient + Higher student density - Vertical farming competes with daylight for housing

Landscape configuration

- Privacy issues with Ground floor + More space/daylight for food production + Collective space on ground floor + Collective activity visible from housing

Master plan reference Interlace

Location analysis - Points of interest

Location Analysis Surrounded by nature

oo (Natural) barrier reinforces privacy from outside

Juli

Sun Analysis

oo Almost no obstruction of direct daylight

December

oo Higher buildings have more access to sun light for passive heating

Urban strategy s r e et

m 5 1

>

Housing Community

>120 degrees

Privacy oo Distance between housing on the same level > 10 meters oo Angle between housing 120 > degrees < 240

Housing program oo Private/common rooms oo Private terrace oo Private food/spices garden

Community program oo Study Rooms (no direct sunlight) oo Extra kitchens/dining for community dinners oo Bicycle storage oo Food storage (no direct sunlight) oo Meeting space - outside/inside oo Entertainment facilities oo Food production

Urban Strategy Connectivity

oo Connect to existing infrastructure oo Prevent community from becoming shortcut

Optimal cluster position

oo Sun radiated roof terraces oo Optimal food production oo Passive cooling by building orientation oo Privacy for the private rooms

Private community

oo Reinforce private community with a moat oo Courtyards not visible from outside

Sustainability Strategy Decentralized Grid

Natural Waste disposal

Modular building oo Highly standardized elements result in prefab building process

oo Reinforces private community

Reduce Unused empty space Energy losses / compact building Natural Grey water cleansing (helofyte)

Reuse Waste flows heat, energy, food (Decentralized Grid) Collect rainwater / convert to drinking water

Produce Produce food for the community Clean sustainable energy with the help of sun collectors

KNOWLEDGE

Computational Strategy

SCRIPTS

Reconfiguration simulation 24 student Activity

Adaptive lighting

Floor plan generator Space properties

oo oo oo oo oo oo

Minimal function space Private / public Affected by noise Need for daylight Rigidity of the interior Function per students

Configuration techniques

Rotating Walls

Sliding Walls

oo Both robotic & manually oo Easy to Use oo Constraint to pivot point

oo Both robotic & manually operated oo Constraint to track on the ceiling

oo oo oo oo

oo Rising / lowering Floors/Ceiling

Rolling interior

oo oo oo oo

oo Both robotic & manually operated oo Constraint to a floor level oo Allows for quick changes oo

Both robotic & manually operated Constraint to a single location Can completely disappear Suspension is a necessity

Opt: Students/common facilities ratio Opt: Daylight / direct sunlight on common area Note: A box is not necessarily the result.

oo

oo oo

Animate Simulate usage interior and collective space

Multi agent based modeling

Cluster positioning

Community space

Constraints oo Min Dimensions oo Possible configurations per unit oo Possible orientation oo Layout

oo oo oo oo oo oo oo

Opt: Indirect daylight where needed.

System that follows the activity of the user

Opt: Visual privacy Opt: Daylight for program Opt: Direct sunlight for roof terrace Min: Wind problems Opt: Structural optimization Daylight (Ladybug)

oo oo oo oo oo oo

Opt: Food production Opt: Scenic route that connects all courtyards and collective functions Shape of the island Daylight (Ladybug) Anemone (multi-agend based modeling)

Final design

oo oo

Materialize Render

Future Developments oo

Urban strategy - vertical student city: optimizing student density

oo oo oo

More variation in floorplan

Thank You