Homes for people, not for profitThe choice to self-build an adaptable house providing

an alternative to the developer housing model

Andy Marriott

Architecture Master's ThesisYear 5

2016

090008626

3

“Architecture is always incomplete - people who live with it carry on. It is only completed through the process of living in it and through appropriate renovation.”

Itsuko Hasegawa

Contents

- Abstract

- Background

- Broad stroke ego approach post war

- Thatcherism and the capitalist ideology

- The developer housing boom

- Jan Gehl : Healthy living

- Half a good house rather than a whole bad house

- Walter Segal and the self build paradigm

- Embrace the story of the building

- Construction method and personal involvement

- Segal method

- SIPS method

- Steel and SIPS shell method

- Housing Typologies

Proposed Housing Types

-The Long house

- Flexi House Pitched and 2.0

- Flexi House Mono and 2.0

- The Courtyard house

- Lifestyle influences design

- Testing the models on a site

- Conclusion

- Bibliography

- Page 05

- Page 06

- Page 08

- Page 11

- Page 13

- Page 14

- Page 15

- Page 18

- Page 21

- Page 23

- Page 24

- Page 26

- Page 29

- Page 35

- Page 36

- Page 40

- Page 46

- Page 52

- Page 56

- Page 57

- Page 70

- Page 71

4 5

"Some missed the streets as places of community and gathering, and as arenas or

personal expression"

150 500 people on the waiting list for council houses

SME companies 1980 = 10 000SME companies 2013 = 2700

Housing Act 1980Discount

35% for a house after 3 years and an extra 1% every sequential year

50% for a flat after 3 years and an extra 2% every sequential year

Ending 1st August 2016Ending 1st August 2016

Abstract

It is currently very difficult for individuals to get into the housing market, partly due to the extortionate cost of housing within the current developer model. It is impossible for us as Architects to solve every issue with the current housing situation in Scotland, and a total solution to the crisis is not what is proposed here. However we can provide an alternative model to encourage a different way of thinking, and to provide more choice for individuals seeking to enter the market. A housing model that is orientated around self-build modules and a high quality of living in order to create successful communities is a viable option to move forward.

Walter Segal’s self-build approach involves designing housing using standard sheet and timber sizes, and is focused around adaptability, affordability and flexibility. However, it is also a challenging prospect for individuals with no construction experience. In order to tackle the housing crisis, an updated housing model is proposed that is affordable, adaptable and socially responsible, and importantly gives individuals more choice when deciding on their home.

Six housing typologies have been designed using a SIPS and Steel Frame self-build construction method; all are adaptable in terms of floor plan, and can expand, change, and reduce in size depending on the lifestyle needs of their inhabitants. This concept supplies people with a highly flexible housing model that can be adapted to suit any need. It provides both choice and a sense of ownership of the community that they created.

“Our definition determines flexible housing as housing that can adapt to the changing needs of the users. This definition is deliberately broad. It includes the possibility of choosing different housing

layouts prior to occupation as well as the ability to adjust one’s housing over time” Tatjana Schneider and Jeremy Till(2005)

Visual Abstract

6 7

Background

“Let us now go to the specimen problem: the attachment of a group of dwellings to the city. By selecting this problem we are involved both with the anatomy of the urban structure as a whole and with the anatomy of dwellings: the way the houses within the city should stand in relation to one

another and to the whole- the way two components of an urban form might hang together.” Serge Chermayeff and Christopher Alexander (1963)

There has always been some form of housing crisis in the UK. During the last two centuries, the only factor that has changed is the particular circumstances that have influenced this crisis. In 1760, the industrial revolution created polluted, unsanitary slum living for the working classes and Philanthropic towns like Bourneville or Saltaire were a way for rich entrepreneurs to intervene. These entrepreneurs created green, rural towns in the rolling pastures - a falsely idyllic way of living because inevitably, the main focus was not around living, but around work. It wasn’t until the 1919 Housing, Town Planning Act (Addison report) that the Government realised that a major upheaval was needed in order to create better living conditions. This Act was influenced greatly by Lloyd George’s slogan “Homes for Heroes” and aimed to ensure that the men away fighting in the Great War had suitable accommodation to come back to, rather than the slums they left behind.

The Act gained a lot of momentum and was the first real social housing initiative rolled out on a large scale. However, due to an economic crash, the movement petered out and soon stopped. By now, almost 100 years later, the main issue is not squalor but rather a lack of affordable housing for lower earners in the UK. This can be mainly attributed to Thatcher’s ‘Right to Buy’ scheme failure and the inevitable privatisation of the housing market, but is also a result of the lack of available land and radical thinking towards housing. We, as a nation explored very radical ideas during the post modernism movement in the UK after the Second World War because there was a need for a large volume of housing and it was considered that standard techniques may have not been the most viable option. Challenge and anarchy was in the air, an urge to try something so different to the norm and experiment with new and different techniques. These radical attempts ultimately failed; but nevertheless the architects had attempted to change the stock shortage situation.

The main issue and the reason several of these radical post-modernist structures did fail, was the loss of humanistic design and the egotistical mindset of ‘Architect knows best’ or the thought that ‘it’s only social housing, so anything is better than what they had before’. Subsidies, brought into place to assist these schemes, did not in fact help the housing situation; instead, the larger the project was, the more of a tax break would be received.

Big, Cheap and Fast was the aim of the game.

Slum Living David Lloyd George Cumbernauld Ardler Dundee

8 9

Broad stroke ego approach post War

“What is the city but the people” Coriolanus, William Shakespeare

After the devastation of the Second World War, the country was in dire need of housing to replace the ruined landscape that was surrounding them. This was important not only practically, with a need to house returning soldiers, but also psychologically, in order to improve morale and begin to rebuild the country after the destruction of war. Architects were essentially given a blank canvas on which to bring their dreams to life, along with substantial funding to realise these plans. This was a real rarity and offered the chance to bring theoretical ideologies into modern living. Many of these architects would have seen Le Corbusier’s Unite D’Habitation, (built in 1952) and also the ideas for ‘the city for 3 million inhabitants’, the latter a project that would not have been possible without the complete demolition of central Paris in 1925. These projects influenced their plans for a new Britain, and with their new-found freedom they were able to utilise techniques such as pilotes, which give the ground back to the urban realm. They also built vertically rather than horizontally which increased density, creating vertical villages, with the majority of a site given over to landscaping. The idea was to think of the monoliths as “machines for living” where all the necessities of life would be provided within.

Mass production was key in the ‘success’ of these projects, by using prefabricated and standard components (i.e. housing modules) as a way to create a mass utopia for living - to paraphrase Corbusier, ‘the machine for living’. These new techniques for creating concrete monoliths coined the term British Brutalism, likely because of the contractors’ lack of knowledge about this type of construction and the lack of funding put into material quality by the government.

So what was the issue? Instead of taking a humanistic approach and focusing on the needs of their users, these architects - not limited by earlier constraints such as space, money, and social norms - were ultimately designing for architects and their own egos! As Toumey (2008) eloquently emphasises:

“The question of use is crucial to the meaning of architecture, and the social assimilation of

structures into the deep life of human beings is an essential ingredient of its value.”

Mass production housing machine

Brutalist Skylines

Ronan point Balfron towerUnite D’Habitation

One housing type for all

10 11

Thatcherism and the capitalist ideology

“A great city should be an inventory of the possible” Rene Descartes

Margaret Thatcher was voted Prime Minister in 1979 and introduced her controversial Right To Buy scheme with her Housing Act of 1980. This allowed tenants of council housing the ability to buy their property at a very discounted rate, as presented below:

In theory this appeared to be a good initiative because it was designed to allow the most deprived of the nation the opportunity to acquire assets that they would not necessarily have been able to afford otherwise and 455 000 homes have been sold under the initiative. It would ensure security and a sense of pride amongst the lower income families; the money gained from the sales of these properties could then be re-invested back into creating more social housing. This would ensure that the future lowest earners could be protected by this government scheme and would be embraced by this socialist society.However, in practice this was not the case - a ‘one for one’ scheme was never initiated and in Scotland the number of houses built were much fewer than originally anticipated (see chart 1). There was now a big demand for social housing and this resulted in working class people who were struggling to make ends meet having to search for accommodation in the rental market.

Chart One - Homes built since 1950

Chart two - Increase of house prices

Margaret Thatcher

12 13

The developer housing boom

The failure of Thatcher’s Right to Buy scheme to build new houses on a one-for-one scale inevitably lead to a shortage of available housing stock and thus allowed the private house builders to step in to meet the demand of the consumer. They could dictate the size, quality and style of “Architecture” they would provide, with the biggest 3 companies: Barratt; Taylor Wimpy; and Persimmon; eventually achieving a monopoly of the housing market. Today, they build a third of the annual housing stock.

There is no innovation without competition!SME building companies 1980 = 12 000SME building companies 2013 = 2 700

(Small Medium Enterprises) (Tinker 2013)

One consequence of this monopoly of the housing market, and the lack of available choice, is the rise of a capitalist mindset among the population, where consumers are more focused on the next new gadget or new kitchen appliances than the quality of the living area itself. For example, the Cul de Sac in particular is not designed around the person, but rather around the automobile, with wide streets which invite inhabitants to drive into their private driveway, enter their house, and enjoy private outdoor space in the form of a large garden to the rear. This does not promote a sense of community, and in turn exacerbates the sense of capitalism. This is perpetuated by the fact that little or no information is offered to the public with regards to other housing models, or alternative ways of living, such as co-housing or self build. Without this knowledge, the public are unable to make an informed decision on their living situation or have the possibility to plan for the future.

Knowledge is power

Developer housing landscapeSimilarities in big developers

14 15

Jan Gehl: Healthy living

“The urban, architectural and civil wealth of a city is that of its collective spaces, that of all the places where collective life develops, is represented and is remembered.” Manuel de Sola-Morales

Jan Gehl, a Danish architect, thinks of architecture not as individual “dwellings” but as a community development that strives to encourage everyday human interactions through successful urban planning. This is not on the top of the agenda of the typical housing developer. Gehl encourages a more pedestrianised approach to design, especially in public spaces, which allows life to permeate and to congregate. Many new developments are created on the edge of cities and are very insular because they generally do not take the existing context into account. The developments attain a fringe treatment and do not integrate well into the existing urban fabric.

“It is not just about providing the most effective responses in desperate situations but, whatever the

project, raising the quality of the environment.” Moore (2016)

Half a good house rather than a whole bad house

Pritzker prize winner and Venice Biennale 2016 director Alejandro Aravena, with his architecture practice Elemental from Chile have been developing incremental housing models, in particular Quinta Monroy (2004) and Villa Verde (2013), which can be increased over time. Both are housing projects with very limited budgets and this encouraged Aravena to develop the houses to create the best possibilities for the future needs of the users.

“[It is an] update on the older idea of Sites and Services programmes, whereby basic infrastructure is provided so that people on low incomes can build their own homes.”

Moore (2016)

The attitude that Aravena took to low income housing was to provide more than just a shelter for the residents but also to provide them with the opportunity to personalise and expand the floor space when they have the funds to do so. It gives back the pride and choice that residents should have in their houses.

Providing a simple form and construction method ensures the design is not pretentious and supplies a shell unto which a new expansion can be easily added. It truly is “form follows function” and does not embellish on the over articulated architectural aesthetic; as David Sanderson says of Aravena’s work - “The good stuff is often boring to look at”. This does not in any way suggest that it lacks architectural merit but takes a more humanistic approach to design. As mentioned previously, this has not always been the case when trying to find a “solution” to the housing crisis and now we can see that there is a need for a change in mentality.

Quinta Monroy Concept

Villa Verde Concept

16 17

The two housing types of Quinta Monroy are the ground floor apartment, which is 36m2, and the duplex apartment, which is 25m2, both of which can be expanded to between 72 - 75m2 which is the size of a middle class Chilean home. It provides a chance for those who cannot afford to get into the rental market to be integrated into society instead of being ghettoised. A person does not have to spend extortionate amounts of money to keep changing house whenever their lifestyles dictate but instead can have one house that is a flexible and adaptable lifetime home.

“[Houses should] work quietly in the background but have much longer-term implications and benefits for those who will occupy them” Tatjana Schneider and Jeremy Till (2005)

Villa Verde Shells

Villa Verde Street view before expansion Quinta Monroy before and after expansion

Quinta Monroy before and after expansion

Quinta Monroy detail drawings

18 19

Walter Segal and the self build paradigm

“Standardisation in itself I have tried to do all my working life. But in building it is only significant if you do not standardise but that you use standardised things” Tatjana Schneider and Jeremy Till(2005)

Walter Segal was a Swiss born Architect who first championed the concept of self build in the UK. Whilst trying to implement his method in the 1960s, the UK was in a similar economic state as today and there was a real need for affordable housing, which was not being met by those in charge. Segal is best known for his self build council housing in the borough of Lewisham in London (Walter’s way and Segal Close 1980s). These houses were built by the residents who were going to live in them; some of whom are still living there to this day, a feat made possible because the houses were (and still are) so adaptable. The use of simple building techniques, with post and beam construction and limited wet works, justified Segal’s belief that anybody was capable of building their own house if given the right framework of rules. He developed what is now known as ‘the Walter Segal method’ by using easily accessible, off the shelf building materials that could be sourced from any local builders merchant, and by creating a modularised style of building. The standard sizes of timber and sheet material are easily divisible by 600 and this informs the size of each module of the building grid. As long as everything is constructed on a 600mm x 600mm grid, the building can be built with limited wastage. This also provides a very flexible framework for constructing a house. This idea of construction allows the house to be suited to the occupants and can be easily expanded or reduced depending on the lifestyle and needs of the user.

Axonometric of typical Segal constructed house Community participation in Segal construction

Houses of Walter’s way and Segal Close

Street of Walter’s Way

Segal Frame method

20 21

Embrace the story of the building

“Each alteration is a “retelling” of the building as it exists at a particular time- and when the changes are complete it becomes the existing building for the next retelling. In this way the life of the building

is both perpetuated and transformed by the repeated act of alteration and reuse.” (p13) Hollis

Choice, or lack thereof, is one of the overriding factors in the failure of the current housing stock because housing is seen as a commodity which meets the users situational needs at that point in their life. This way of thinking is set around the ideology of short term economics rather than providing suitable dwellings that adapt and change with the users lifestyle needs. There is the notion that flexibility costs more than predetermined housing models because of the increased architectural input and also the increased range of materials required, however this is not necessarily the case.

In today’s market, houses are advertised and sold by the number of bedrooms, and less thought is given to the sizes of rooms, flexibility of space, or the community that will be created and the unusable public spaces that are often created. Currently, developers are able to influence what the mass market view as important, or as ‘the ideal’, because of the current housing shortage. As discussed previously, this is partly due to the scarcity of land which inevitably means that irrespective of whatever housing schemes are built, they are sold and allocated extremely quickly. Society is left in the position of buying low quality, small houses because there is currently no incentive for property developers to innovate their designs.

Segal Factsheet

22 23

NUMBER OF BEDROOMS NUMBER OF PEOPLE

39 SQM

50 SQM 58 SQM

70 SQM

79 SQM

84 SQM 90 SQM

99 SQM93 SQM

102 SQM 108 SQM

61 SQM

70 SQM

74 SQM

86 SQM

95 SQM

NUMBER OF STOREYS IN DWELLING

MINIMUM SPACE STANDARDS

Construction method and personal involvement

People generally associate ‘self-build’ as the approach of getting their hands dirty and building everything from scratch. This can seem like a daunting task even for those who do have some construction knowledge. It requires hard work, sweat and tears. What if there was a way to build your own house with very little stress or building knowledge? It is very easy to build your own house using one of three construction methods:

- The Segal Method- The Sips Method - Steel and SIPS shell method

These methods allow the user to decide the level of involvement they want to have in the construction proces and how quick they want the building process to be. There are four resolved designs that can be altered very easily internally to suit an individual’s requirements because a structural shell is created:

- The Long house- The Flexi house pitched and 2.0- The Flexi house mono and 2.0- The Courtyard house

All four designs can be built using any of the above three methods and they provide an option to change spaces and expand instead of downsizing or upsizing. This invites an opportunity to create a collective with the same goal and instead of buying into the idea of developer housing, and in additition to save the 20 percent fee that is charged. This allows people to invest in better communities in which they have the opportunity to design. It allows for personalisation and give the the chance to build quality affordable housing that is defined by the iteration which suits their lifestyle at that particular moment in time.

“The hard plan marshals its occupants into ordered action. The soft plan, on the other hand, allows its occupants to unfold their lives in multiple ways.” Proctor and Matthews (2009)

24 25

Segal MethodThis is the most hands on approach to self build and it may seem the most challenging to undertake. The Segal method provides a working framework that uses a set of criteria to follow and allows for the creation of a living environment that is adaptable, straightforward to build and requires limited construction knowledge. It uses standard building materials readily available at the builders merchant to ensure the ease of procurement.

SET OUT A GRID OF 600MM X 600MM

APPLY SHEET MATERIAL, MEMBRANES AND INSULATION FOR THE WALLS OF THE LOWER FLOOR

CONSTRUCT FLOOR AND ROOF STRUCTURE

SIMPLE SEGAL SHELL IS READY

TYPICAL SEGAL CONSTRUCTION

DIG OUT PAD FOUNDATIONS AND SET STEEL SHOES FOR VERTICAL TIMBERS

ENSURE VERTICAL TIMBERS ARE LEVEL IF THE SITE IS UNEVEN

CONSTRUCT FRAME FOR LOWER WALLS AND USE HANGERS FOR THE FLOOR JOISTS AT 600MM

CENTRES

PLACE STUDS FOR THE WALL CONSTRUCTION AT 600MM CENTRES

26 27

SIPS Method (Structural insulated panel system)The SIPS method of construction for the housing typologies was developed as a modern iteration to the Segal method and uses structural prefabricated panels to provide an air tight, sustainable and quick building to erect. It is a lot quicker to erect a house with this method as all the panels can be prefabricated off site and the key to making this option affordable is to order the panels en mass. One of the main benefits of using this method is the ease of joining the panels which can easily be done by unskilled labourers.

SIPS Factsheet

Exploded Axonometric of SIPS construction

28 29

TYPICAL SIPS CONSTRUCTION

POUR CONCRETE SLAB OR USE PAD FOUNDATIONS AS PER THE SEGAL METHOD

FIX A SOLE PLATE TO ENSURE THE SIPS DO NOT TOUCH THE WET GROUND

ERECT EXTERNAL WALLS

ERECT FLOOR CONTRUCTION ERECT GABLE ENDS FOR ROOF

CREATE THE INTERNAL UPPER FLOOR PARTITIONS FIX THE TIMBER ROOF BEAMS

ATTACH THE SIPS ROOF PANELS COVER THE SHELL WITH A BREATHER MEMBRANE

INSTALL THE WINDOWS INSTALL THE INTERNAL PARTITIONS

Steel and SIPS shell methodThis method of construction utilises standard steel sections and SIPS. It proposes self build in terms of utilising the local blacksmith to produce the portal frames and hiring contractors to erect the steel frames and SIPS. This method is very effective when a collective comes together to design a new community and the houses are to be completed in phases. Using regionalised industry supports the local economy, reduces carbon footprint and helps increase the sense of community.

This method provides the users with a load bearing portal structure made of steel to allow for complete freedom of internal walls, and they are given an empty shell to work with as opposed to a muddy site. The SIPS panels are used as a cladding mechanism and can be easily altered if expansion is required because there are no roof trusses, which allows the roof space to be used. It is also straightforward to add an extra portal to the back of the house if the user wants to expand. This method gives the users the choice of a variety of different floor plans and could even change for a ‘day time’ and ‘night time’ plan, similar to Le Corbusier’s Maison Loucheur and the modern iteration from Proctor Matthews .

30 31

Le Corbusier’s Maison Loucheur

Proctor Matthews flexible plan Mellenium village

Steel and SIPS construction process of The Long house

32 33

Steel and SIPS construction process of The Flexi house Mono 2.0Steel and SIPS construction process of The Flexi house Pitched 2.0

34 35

Housing Typologies

During this thesis research, it was essential to investigate the a variety of different housing types in order to give more flexibility to the end users as to what type of house would best suit their current needs, whilst also being adaptable to any future needs. This ultimately gives the power back to the public and instead of designing speculatively, it can ensure that there is still a choice for users once the shell of the building is supplied to them. Clients can then refer to various floor layouts that are available in their particular shells, and also devise a bespoke plan if necessary. This allows for personalisation of the property and expansion possibilities in the future. Four house models were designed derived from the same generic core concepts: adaptability; flexibility; simple plan; ease of construction; choice and possibility. The model allow the users to build completely different internal and external expressions of home.

“It is not about designing allegedly ‘good’ or ‘correct’ layouts but aims to provide a space which can accommodate the vicissitudes of everyday use over the long term” Tatjana Schneider and Jeremy Till (2005)

Steel and SIPS construction process of The Courtyard house

36 37

Proposed Housing Types

“You will just create the beginning and then who knows where it’s going to end? So forget about control.” Alejandro Aravena (Winston 2016)

The Long house

This house is designed around flexible single floor living for 6 people, initially planned as containing 3 bedrooms, with the possibility of expansion. The plan is simply divided in the middle to separate the living and private accommodation. It allows for adaptability within narrow sites whilst providing private garden thresholds at the front and back. It is created with a simple repeated portal frame structure and can be easily expanded horizontally as well as vertically. The frame allows the rooms to be altered as needs see fit as all the internal walls are not load bearing. This aim of adaptable living is encouraged by providing flexible living spaces.

Rend

er o

f liv

ing

spac

e in

Lon

g Ho

use

38 39

ON

E S

TO

RE

Y

3 B

ED

6 P

EO

PLE

TO

TA

L F

LOO

R A

RE

A =

90

.2 S

QM

TH

E L

ON

G H

OU

SE

GR

OU

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

SE

CT

ION

1:1

00

40 41

Flexi House Pitched and 2.0

The idea for the pitched portal frame for the design allows for usable space to be built into the roof space and as such, extra rooms can be gained. The plan is again split in the middle to clearly read the differentiation between the private and living accommodation, although there is scope in the flexible wall systems to increase the area of living space. The design is proposed for four people in two double bedrooms, with the possibility to change one of the bedrooms into an office or extra space in general. If the 2.0 version of the Flexi House is chosen, simply increasing the height on the steel columns of the portal frame provides the user with extra flexible spaces upstairs in the centre of the house. This allows for change in the scale of the living spaces below with some parts of the house being given double height spaces with daylight entering through the roof lights. The two variations of the same portal frame layout show the ease and adaptability of the design to change with the users’ needs. As well as expanding vertically, it can be simply extended horizontally if wanted.

Rend

er o

f ada

ptab

le b

edro

om s

pace

in F

lexi

hous

e pi

tche

d 2.

0

42 43

ON

E S

TO

RE

Y

3 B

ED

5 P

EO

PLE

TO

TA

L F

LOO

R A

RE

A =

84

.6 S

QM

TH

E F

LE

XI-

HO

US

E P

ITC

HE

D

GR

OU

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

SE

CT

ION

1:1

00

44 45

TW

O S

TO

RE

YS

3 B

ED

6 P

EO

PLE

TO

TA

L F

LOO

R A

RE

A =

10

0 S

QM

TH

E F

LE

XI-

HO

US

E 2

.0 P

ITC

HE

D

GR

OU

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

SE

CT

ION

1:1

00

FIR

ST

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

46 47

Flexi House Mono and 2.0

This is another iteration of the Flexi House design and is designed with the same number of bedrooms and the same overall floor area. It again uses the concept of splitting the plan through the centre of the building, but if a second storey is added, this language is continued upwards to allow for a complete change in scale between the private and living spaces. It gives a more typical residential scale to the bedrooms and bathrooms whilst allowing the living area to be a double height space. The ground floor plan also incorporates the flexible walls, like the other version of the Flexi House, to allow for freedom in the living plan and if a double storey version is built it gives a variety of scale available to the users.

Rend

er o

f liv

ing

spac

e in

Fle

xi ho

use

Mon

o 2.

0

48 49

ON

E S

TO

RE

Y

3 B

ED

5 P

EO

PLE

TO

TA

L F

LOO

R A

RE

A =

84

.6 S

QM

TH

E F

LE

XI-

HO

US

E M

ON

O

GR

OU

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

SE

CT

ION

1:1

00

50 51

TW

O S

TO

RE

YS

3 B

ED

6 P

EO

PLE

TO

TA

L F

LOO

R A

RE

A =

10

6.7

SQ

M

TH

E F

LE

XI-

HO

US

E 2

.0 M

ON

O

GR

OU

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

SE

CT

ION

1:1

00

FIR

ST

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

52 53

The Courtyard house

This design takes precedent from Jørn Utzon’s Kingo courtyard houses and the idea of additive architecture. It clearly encloses the users’ private space with living aspects focusing on the enclosed courtyard. The plan is clearly split between a flexible living space and private accommodation with the possibility of various arrangements. It is designed for four people living on a single storey in a live/work adaptable house and it provides an option to easily expand into the courtyard or rear gardens in the future. The design incorporates a generous living space that could suit an ageing clientele. The organisation of the model provides that the user with the feeling of a more secure environment.

Rend

er o

f liv

ing

spac

e in

the

cour

tyar

d ho

use

54 55

ON

E S

TO

RE

Y

2 B

ED

4 P

EO

PLE

TO

TA

L F

LOO

R A

RE

A =

69

SQ

M

TH

E C

OU

RT

YA

RD

HO

US

E

GR

OU

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N1

:10

0

SE

CT

ION

1:1

00

56 57

Lifestyle influences design

With a society that is becoming ever more technological, it could be argued that there is no longer a requirement for the standard office setup. People are now more easily connected, which allows more people to work at home or have the use of a hot desk (renting a desk or space in an environment because a laptop and internet connection are the bare essentials that are needed to run the enterprise). This means that providing flexibility rather than prescribed spaces creates a more free lifestyle. It is difficult, as Architects, to predict the future lifestyle trends but providing adaptability to suit different circumstances gives the public the possibility of evolving their domains.

“[buildings are] left behind like the faint memory as a soft touch of a butterfly on a warm summer’s day. The butterfly dies. It is time to be reborn.” Andersson (2014)

Having the choice of flexible spaces or flexible building shells enables anybody to develop their domains as they see fit. The spaces can be easily used as office spaces for people that work at home and altered for sleeping purposes at night. If a family size were to increase then the spaces could be transformed into extra bedrooms. Sennet ( mentions that this is not the typical mindset of the modern society:

“As uses change, buildings are now destroyed rather than adapted; indeed, the over-specification of form and function makes the modern urban environment peculiarly susceptible to decay.”

Sennett (2013)

Testing the models on a site

In order to test these models in context, sites in Aberdeen were explored. Aberdeen was chosen as a location due to the need for affordable housing to be supplied because the cost of housing in Aberdeen is one of the highest in Scotland. The oil industry is facing a downturn and this has had an impact on the residents of Aberdeen, many of whom are facing unemployment and may require more affordable living. There are several surplus council owned sites (see next page) which have been identified as possible chances to integrate a new housing scheme into an already well established existing fabric. Of the five identified sites, the former primary school of Kincorth was chosen to investigate further as it is a large three hectare site embedded within an area with existing infrastructure and amenities. The site uses the existing urban grain to allow integration of the community into the new development.

On this site, the six housing typologies were designed in cluster groups around common shared spaces whilst breaking the site down into smaller neighbourhoods. They were placed in a terraced arrangement to allow for future extension possibilities and a large shared common space was provided within each cluster to allow for communal activities. The neighbourhoods all have shared parking nodes close to the dwellings to ensure the site is mainly pedestrianised within. The arrangement of the clusters are around a large communal green space to encourage community activities. The space also provides an opportunity for future expansion of the development and the possibility of commercial integration into the community.

58 59

60 61

SITE PLANFORMER PRIMARY SCHOOL, KINCORTH ABERDEENSCALE 1:500

62 63Render proposed housing clusters

64 65

LONG SECTION 1:500

LONG SECTION 1:200

LONG SECTION 1:200

66 67Render accessing the site from the WestRender accessing the site from the North West

68 69Render accessing the site from the EastRender accessing the site from the North East

70 71

Bibliography

- Andersson, S.L. [2014] Empowerment of Aesthetics, Forlaget Wunderbuch.

- a+t research group [2011] Density is home / Vitoria-Gasteiz : a+t architecture publishers.

- Chermayaff, Serge,1900- [1963] Community and privacy:towards a new architecture of humanism

Doubleday.

-Cook, Peter,1936- [1999] Archigram / Rev ed. New York : Princeton Architecture Press

- Fernández Per, Aurora, [2013] 10 stories of collective housing : graphical analysis of inspiring

masterpieces / Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain : a+t architecture publishers

- Fernández Per, Aurora [2010] Next:collective housing in progress / Vitoria-Gasteiz : a+t

architecture publishers.

- Fernández Per, Aurora. [2009] HoCo :density housing construction & costs / Vitoria-Gasteiz :

a+t ediciones.

- Gehl, Jan,1936- [2007] Life between buildings :using public space. 6th ed. Skive : Danish

Architectural Press.

-Glendinning, Miles,1956- [1994] Tower block : modern public housing in England, Scotland,

Wales and Northern Ireland New Haven, Conn.; London : Yale University Press for the Paul Mellon

Centre for Studies in British Art, 1994

- Heathcote, David [2004] Barbican : penthouse over the city. Chichester : Wiley-Academy.

- Hill, Jonathan [2006] Immaterial architecture / Abingdon : Routledge.

- Holl, S. [2000] Parallax, Princeton Architectural Press

- Levitt, David [2010] The housing design handbook :a guide to good practice / Abingdon :

Routledge.

Conclusion

In conclusion, after identifying one of the main problems within the current housing market in Scotland, it is clear that the apparent crisis cannot be solved with one broad stroke. As discussed, a ‘one size fits all’ approach is not viable, and in fact this mindset has negatively contributed to the current situation. Rather, a series of small movements and interventions will help to move forward by providing an alternative to current housing trends. By examining housing options not widely used in Scotland, and by informing the public, this thesis provides society with a new choice, which they may not previously have considered.

The next stage in developing this concept would be to explore the economics and feasibility of this method with prospective clients, and conducting on-site tests with an interested collective. By using proven construction techniques such as SIPS and Steel, this housing model provides a viable option for individuals seeking to enter the housing market. The success of the proposed model lies in its simplicity, buildability and adaptability, three key elements which together could change the face of the current housing industry.

72 73

- Littlefield, D. and Lewis, S. (2007). Architectural voices. Chichester: Wiley-Academy.

- MVRDV (Firm) [2012] The vertical village : individual, informal, intense [published to accompany

the exhibition held at the Museum of Tomorrow, Taipei, 8 October 2011 - 8 January 2012]. /

Rotterdam : NAI Publishers.

- Norberg-Schulz, Christian [1980] Genius loci towards a phenomenology of architecture / New

York Rizzoli.

- Pallasmaa, Juhani [2005] The eyes of the skin : architecture and the senses / Rev. extended ed.

Wiley-Academy.

- PRP Architects [2007] Place and home : the search for better housing / London : Black Dog.

- Reichel, A. (2007). Builidng with steel. Munchen: DETAIL - Institut fur internationale Architektur-

Dokumentation GmbH & Co. KG.

- Richardson, Vicky. [2014] A Clockwork Jerusalem /[U.K.] : British Council Design / The Vinyl

Factory.

-Scotland’s housing expo 2010 / Edinburgh : Architecture + Design Scotland, 2011.

- Tuomey, J.[2008]Architecture, craft and culture :reflections on the work of O’Donnell + Tuomey

Oysterhaven, Co. Cork : Gandon Editions.

- Utzon, J. (2009). Additive architecture. [Denmark]: Mogens Prip-Buss.

- Williams, Bob. [1990] Filling the empties : short-life housing and how to do it / 2nd ed. Shelter,

- Zumthor, Peter,1943- [2005] Peter Zumthor: atmospheres :architectural environments.

surrounding objects / Basel : Birkhauser Verlag.

- Zumthor, Peter,1943- [2006] Thinking architecture. / 2nd expanded ed. Basel : Birkhäuser.

Journals

- Proctor, S. and Matthews, A. [2009]. Pattern place purpose. London: Black Dog. journal

- Schneider, T. and Till, J. [2005]. Flexible housing: opportunities and limits. arq: Architectural

Research Quarterly, 9(02), p.157.

- Till, J. and Schneider, T. [2005]. Flexible housing: the means to the end. arq: Architectural

Research Quarterly, 9(3-4), p.287.

Websites

Aberdeencity.gov.uk. (2016). [online] Available at: http://www.aberdeencity.gov.uk/nmsruntime/saveasdialog.asp?lID=60808&sID=24445 [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Architectural-world.com. (2016). ARCHITECTURAL WORLD: CONTEMPORARY CITY FOR THREE MILLION INHABITANTS. [online] Available at: http://www.architectural-world.com/2008/05/contemporary-city-for-three-million.html [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Dezeen. (2016). MVRDV to transform army barracks in Germany into housing. [online] Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2016/04/14/mvrdv-us-army-barracks-mannheim-germany-traumhaus-affordable-low-cost-housing/ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Moore, R. (2016). Alejandro Aravena: the shape of things to come. [online] the Guardian. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/apr/10/architect-alejandro-aravena-pritzker-prize-elemental-housing-iquique-constitucion-tsunami-defences [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Ons.gov.uk. (2016). [ARCHIVED CONTENT] Percentage of workless households falls to lowest

74 75

level since 1996 - ONS. [online] Available at: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/lmac/working-and-workless-households/2013/sty-percentage-of-workless-households.html [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

politics.co.uk. (2016). Right to Buy. [online] Available at: http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/right-to-buy [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Scotlandhousingcrisis.org.uk. (2016). Scotland’s housing crisis. [online] Available at: http://www.scotlandhousingcrisis.org.uk/ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Sennett, R. (2013). Richard Sennett “The Open City”. [online] YouTube. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEx1apBAS9A [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Shelter England. (2016). Donate. [online] Available at: http://england.shelter.org.uk/donate/100khomelesschildren?gclid=Cj0KEQjwl-e4BRCwqeWkv8TWqOoBEiQAMocbPzii-o2yF8j9dU5KfSSNbfzwQ2ipnb1UglvdlDwakpgaAkJT8P8HAQ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Tinker, C. (2013). SME housebuilders key to beat housing crisis. [online] Building. Available at: http://www.building.co.uk/sme-housebuilders-key-to-beat-housing-crisis/5062131.article [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

the Guardian. (2016). Crime in the community: when ‘designer’ social housing goes wrong. [online] Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/jan/04/crime-community-designer-social-housing-winnipeg [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

Winston, A. (2016). Architects “are never taught the right thing”, says Alejandro Aravena. [online] Dezeen. Available at: http://www.dezeen.com/2016/01/13/alejandro-aravena-interview-pritzker-prize-laureate-2016-social-incremental-housing-chilean-architect/ [Accessed 22 Apr. 2016].

ImagesAll images are authors own unless stated other wiseP6 -Gorbels image. (n.d.). [image] Available at: http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/threads/68150-Visiting-the-UK-OT/page2 [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].-Ardler Multis. (1976). [image] Available at: http://retrodundee.blogspot.co.uk/2010_03_01_archive.html [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].-Cumbernauld town centre. (2016). [image] Available at: http://www.glasgowarchitecture.co.uk/cumbernauld-town-centre [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].P10 -New homes chart. (2016). [image] Available at: http://www.economicshelp.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/housebuilding_464.gif [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].p12- All images obtained from https://www.taylorwimpey.co.uk/, www.barratthomes.co.uk/Scotland and www.stewartmilnehomes.comp15- Quinta monroy concept. (2016). [image] Available at: http://www.cienladrillos.com/2008/02/17-la-vivienda-crecedera-una-ingeniosa-solucion-capitulo-1[AccessedApr. 2016].p16 -Villa Verde housing. (2013). [image] Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/447381/villa-verde-housing-elemental [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].p17-Quinta monroy montage. (2014). [image] Available at: http://arquiblog.uniandes.edu.co/blogs/arqu3920-1/files/2014/08/5757_arq102-02-01.jpg [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].quinta monroy images. (2016). [image] Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/10775/quinta-monroy-elemental [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016]. p19 - Anon, (2016). [image] Available at: http://www.houseplanninghelp.com/hph107-what-does-it-take-to-create-sustainable-neighbourhoods-with-jon-broome/ [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].-segal frame. (1973). [image] Available at: http://architecture-blog.pidgeondigital.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Segal-8301-10-130204.jpg [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].-street of walter’s way. (2016). [image] Available at: https://i.guim.co.uk/img/media/36f0cb5b13379b670b6bce108b340a811c373d58/0_0_3349_5027/3349.w=700&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=c10a80e71ffe5141614b651374dfbebd [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].p30 - Maison Loucheur. (1955). [image] Available at: http://40.media.tumblr.com/556068c591456fb964425d57b27bde0b/tumblr_ne9y87pDzH1rbnlmvo1_1280.png [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].proctor matthews. (2003). [image] Available at: http://www.building.co.uk/reality-check/1029446.article [Accessed 23 Apr. 2016].