ed/gy primer

ED/GY MAY 2016 1

Ethical Dwellings for Generation Y

ED/GY May 2016

Contents

Building a formal hierarchy from the public to the private

Reusing an existing tower, insertions create new dwellings

Referencing and Thank yous

1

7

4

10

13

11

14

12

15

2

8

5

3

9

6

Introduction

Who we are. Our position. And the context in which we are working

Exploring alternative models of home ownership and procurement

Understanding how people live collectively and build community

Setting the brief for a dwelling which responds to change

Why we need to advocate for a new way of living in London

Proposing a new form of procurement and ownership

Proposing a new idea of family and community

Sequential understanding of space from individual to tribe

Examining the current policies surrounding home ownership

Exploring the potential gains from the economy of sharing

Historic lessons on the private and communal parts of the home

Proposing a fragmented dwelling across a low rise suburban block

Financial Case Studies

Spatial Precedents Tribe History of Domestic Life

Future Habits Spheres of Influence Low Rise

Mid Rise High Rise End Notes

ED/GY Model How Are We Saving?

Policy BiasWhy?

1Why?

We are millennials living in London. Our generation is living and working differently from any previous generation. Our needs are not met by current housing stock nor can we realistically expect to follow previous generations into home ownership. We are being squeezed out of the city. ED/GY advocates for change.

London School of Architecture6

We are ED/GY: Ethical Dwellings for Generation Y. Amid the current housing crisis in London, Generation Y are losing out. We cannot afford to buy, and yet we are low priority for social housing1. Many of us are trapped in this difficult situation with no realistic, equitable options available. We have a responsibility to address the issues facing our generation: we are millennials trying to solve the housing crisis for millennials. We have formed to challenge the current bias in public policy that favours home ownership at the expense of public good and common interest2. We will use our agency, as spatial thinkers, to act beyond the design and delivery of buildings to create transformative urban proposals and social change. To do this we must be canny: exploiting and manoeuvring within the current systems to leverage opportunities for the good life in today’s crisis. For ED/GY, the home is not an asset, it is a place to dwell and belong. We offer a model of collective ownership that allows long term residents to build equity at a rate they can afford. In opposition to traditional ownership, ED/GY’s proposal facilitates the pooling of resources between larger groups of millennials –unlocking access to our developments for those who cannot get on the ladder in the current market.

Introduction

ED/GY homes will facilitate the evolving ways that we want to live. In a growing global city, we recognise the economies of sharing and the social benefits of a strong community. We present generous communal living arrangements with choice, a measured balance between the individual and the communal. Our dwellings respond to the new rituals and patterns of living that Generation Y are shaping. ED/GY recognises the potential of intensifying London’s edges, bolstering existing communities with the vibrant energy of young, hard-working millennials. We will create attractive places to live, work and play with the metropolitan intensity and density that is required to support a rich and diverse community. We have tested our research and its spatial implications at three scales: low-, mid- and high- rise. Without a specific site, our propositions are strategic re-imaginings of existing typologies envisaged as applicable to sites across London. The dwellings we propose are designed for sharing: for us it is a luxury not a compromise.

ED/GY MAY 2016 7

We reject the home as an individual’s asset

We reject financial models that we cannot afford

We contest the policy bias towards ownership

We reject selfish developments that snub the city

ASSET

£££


Strategy

ED/GY will:

Define an attractive collectiveownership model

Identify Generation Y’s emerginghabits, customs and rituals

Champion sharing as a benefit nota compromise

Design developments that engenderour values and principles

ED/GY MAY 2016 9

Spatial Strategy

ED/GY will:

Create a domestic realm that allowswithdrawal from the city

Choreograph a hierarchy of spaces that transition from individualto communal

Integrate developments into thewider community

Make proposals at low-rise, mid-riseand high rise

Use low-cost and sustainableconstruction methods and materials


HOUSING CRISISThe current housing market has inflated the average house price to fourteen times the average income in London3.

fig.2

ED/GY MAY 2016 11


Why?

ED/GY has been formed by millennials otherwise known as Generation Y - those born between 1980 – 2000. The concept of millennials designing dwellings for millennials may appear insular and inward looking on the surface, however there is a clear need to address housing for our generation. Millennialls are a large demographic of London’s population but with the average London house price at fourteen times the average London income we are likely to be known by the moniker ‘Generation Rent’ for the foreseeable future. As well as affordability, it is an issue of appropriateness. Our initial research highlighted that current housing stock cannot facilitate the new patterns in which millennials are and will be living. Motivated by this dissatisfaction, ED/GY began to research and investigate millennial living situations to build our case for working to deliver ethical dwellings for Generation Y. ED/GY collaborated with David Segal of Segal Insight to create a questionnaire to learn about millennials aspirations and patterns of living to enrich our spatial propositions. With a sample size of over 200 responses we were able to use key findings from this data to inform our brief and spatial propositions.

Islington £737 pcm (top) Chelsea £780 pcm (bottom)

fig.3

fig.4

ED/GY MAY 2016 13

1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001 2005 2009 2013

AVERAGE HOUSE PRICE

AVERAGE INCOME

0-4 10-14 40-44 50-54 60-64 70-74 80-84MILLENNIALS

House prices are now at 14x average income,making it financially crippling to own a home

Millennials are the quickest growing demographic in London

Statistics taken from the ONS, 2014-20154

Popuation LondonPopuation UK


“Actually, by far the most likely way I will ever get a house in London is by waiting for my parents to die and then inheriting their owned house.”

Qualitative Data

Image above right: Max, live at home graduate

To understand the needs and desires of our chosen demographic ED/GY undertook a number of interviews of millennials in typical situations, to attain qualitative data and to understand the breadth of millennial experience that expands beyond our own. By asking a standard set of questions - covering ownership, financing, housing history and forecasted futures - we were able to establish needs and aspirations of this generation. Common themes that arose were issues of affordability and frustration with the lack of agency over their own living arrangement and spaces. There was a distinct sense of frustrated compromise in almost all of the interviews. There were also interesting spatial themes arising, like the benefits of communality in shared accommodation and increasing varied working patterns. The interviews became a testing ground and springboard for ED/GY to undertake wider demographic research to acquire quantitative data.

ED/GY MAY 2016 15

“If anything, high house prices have for a lot of my friends, forced us to move in earlier together with people, than we might otherwise have done because it’s cheaper to live together. It’s weird, it forces you to nest a bit earlier.”

“We’ll stay in London a few more years and then consider moving to Copenhagen where we can actually buy now. It will be a very serious option if we have children; it’s difficult to afford a family in London and have access to a good education.”

“Having the living room and the kitchen as communal spaces is not only OK, I really enjoy it. That dead time of cooking or washing up is so much better when you’re chatting with housemates. I’m fine with sharing but do think a mix of shared and private spaces is best.”

“I do work at home. I am lucky to have a job in which all I need is an internet connection and where once or twice a week I am able to work from home. That is something that I would require from any future job.”

“I hate the fact that landlords are not regulated and my landlord makes my life difficult. Therefore I want to be my own boss. I feel in England the only way to be in charge is by owning.”

“I want something with character; but somewhere I can change and renovate the interior design.”


Own outrightOwn with mortgageShared ownershipPrivate rentingLiving with friends/family (not free)

Living with friends/family (for free)Other

WHAT IS THE CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION FOR MILLENNIALS?

WHAT IS ‘GENERATION RENT’S ATTITUDE TO HOME OWNERSHIP?

An overwhelming majority of our respondents were privately renting - over 70%. In our sample 47% of the top earning millennials - those earning over £50k - were privately renting.

94% of those privately renting aspire to home ownership, however only 11% can currently afford to buy. This confirms our initial statement that ‘the system’ is failing millennials - those unable to afford but also a low priority for social housing.

Quantitative Data

I already own a homeI would like to buy and can afford to nowI would like to buy but cannot afford toI would like to buy but I don’t think I will ever be able afford toI would like to buy later in lifeNot interested

ED/GY MAY 2016 17

Kitchen

Storage Bedroom

Bathroom

Outdoor

Hallway

Living with friends/family (not free)

WHERE DO MILLENNIALS VALUE SPACE IN THE HOME?

WHY DO MILLENNIALS ASPIRE TO HOME OWNERSHIP?

WHICH LIVING ARRANGEMENTS WOULD MILLENNIALS BE HAPPY WITH IN A PROSPECTIVE DWELLING?

Our respondents value generous living space as the most important place in the home followed by the kitchen, bedroom, bathroom, storage, outdoor and hallway. This trend is regardless of age, income, and gender. This indicates that ED/GY dwellings should prioritise generous living spaces.

Many of our sample are used to sharing and are happy do so. Of those earning £30k or less, 45% would be happy to share all amenities aside from a private bedroom. 63% of this group would be happy to share living space, with a kitchen / bedroom and bathroom as private. This indicates that there is scope to explore spatial hierarchies ranging from individual to communal.

Long term housing security was ranked as the most important reason for aspiring to home ownership. This indicates that despite being known as a ‘transient generation’, the surveyed millennials desire long-term security.

Living

Financial investmentCapacity to decorate

To settle downTo pass it on to children

Pride

Housing security

Private unit, individual amenities

LIVING ARRANGEMENT

0-19k 20-29k 30-49k 50k

INCOME £ (BRACKETED)

Private unit, communal entrance

Private unit, shared amenities

Private bedroom / bath / kitchen, shared living

Private bedroom, all other amenities shared

Shared bedroom, all amenities shared

The more millennials earn, the less they are willing to share, *Over 80% of the sample earn less than £50k, 5% of survey sample preferred not to disclose their income.

86% 93% 96% 94%

81% 92% 87% 88%

73% 68% 47% 18%

73% 59% 27% 5%

54% 41% 13% 0%

8% 5% 0% 0%


Policy BiasRight to Buy

TENANT

COUNCIL

GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT

RENT

COUNCIL

HOMEOWNER CASH MONEY£££$$

OWN

per month per monthafter 3 years after another 3 years

BUY AT DISCOUNT

PRIVATE LANDLORD

PRIVATE LANDLORD

SELL AT FULL

VALUE

REDUCED SOCIAL RENT

RENT SUBSIDY

TENANT

RENT

“AFFORDA-BLE” RENT

RIGHT TO BUYRight to Buy allows social housing tenants to purchase their homes at a discount rate after three years5. This reduces the amount of truly affordable housing, as the government only requires them to be replaced by houses that are 80% of market rate (the new definition of affordable), if at all6.

ED/GY MAY 2016 19

TENANT

COUNCIL

GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT

RENT

COUNCIL

HOMEOWNER CASH MONEY£££$$

OWN

per month per monthafter 3 years after another 3 years

BUY AT DISCOUNT

PRIVATE LANDLORD

PRIVATE LANDLORD

SELL AT FULL

VALUE

REDUCED SOCIAL RENT

RENT SUBSIDY

TENANT

RENT

“AFFORDA-BLE” RENT


Policy BiasStarter Homes

PRIVATE LANDLORDDEVELOPER

DEVELOPER

HOME-OWNER

CASH MONEY£££$$

after 5 years

SELL AT FULL

VALUE

BROWNFIELD SITE BROWNFIELD SITE

HOME-OWNER

HOME-OWNER

HOMEOWNERS

£450k £450k £450k

£450k +INFLA- ££ £££££

STARTER HOMESStarter homes are a replacement for social housing sold under Right to Buy. Only the top third of eligible first time buyers in London will be able afford them, even at a 20% discount7. These homes can be sold at full market value after five years8 giving larger returns to people already able to afford property, as well as pushing up house prices.

ED/GY MAY 2016 21

PRIVATE LANDLORDDEVELOPER

DEVELOPER

HOME-OWNER

CASH MONEY£££$$

after 5 years

SELL AT FULL

VALUE

BROWNFIELD SITE BROWNFIELD SITE

HOME-OWNER

HOME-OWNER

HOMEOWNERS

£450k £450k £450k

£450k +INFLA- ££ £££££


Policy BiasHelp to Buy

HELP TO BUYIncreased accessibility to finance allows people who have the 5% deposit in cash to buy beyond their means, pushing house prices, and the British dream of homeownership, further out of reach for people without access to a cash deposit9.

GOVERNMENT

BANK

ASPIRINGHOMEOWNER

5%DEPOSIT

55%MORTGAGE

MONTHLYREPAY-

40% LOAN

ED/GY MAY 2016 23

Change of Use

B1

C3

C3

OFFICE

NEW BUILD ADHERING TO MINIMUM SPACE

STANDARDS

NO MINIMUM SPACE STANDARDS

CHANGE OF USEThe change of use-class from B1 (office) to C3 (residential) can be done under Permitted Development10. Space standards are not enforced in a development of this nature11 so it is a desirable option for developers as it increases profit margins. It results in substandard space offered at high prices (because of increased value of land) and longer commute distances caused by a reduced local diversity of use-class.

2Precedents

To build our understanding of how communal living has been achieved spatially and financially we have explored a series of case studies and economic models. We seek a model of design and delivery that is both economically and socially sustainable, a place for millennials to enjoy the good life.


POCKET LIVING‘AFFORDABLE’ DUE TO SQUEEZED SPACEPocket Living target those that cannot get on the housing ladder. However, their answer to achieving affordability is to squeeze the size of the home rather than innovate spatially or financially. Through relying on government policy on starter homes and Help-to-Buy while lobbying for smaller space standard; Pocket are adding fuel to the housing crisis.


fig.6

ED/GY MAY 2016 27

STARTERHOME

STAR

T BU

ILD

Land

DeveloperCouncil

Feas

ibili

ty

DeveloperArchitect

Fund

ing

DeveloperBank

Spat

ial d

esig

n

DeveloperArchitect

Cons

truct

ion

DeveloperContractor

STARTER HOMESARE FAILING TO FOSTER COMMUNITY

Mar

ket S

ale

DeveloperEstate Agent

Repa

ymen

tPr

ofit

DeveloperBank

Mor

tage

Help

to b

uy

Resident

Acce

ss to

a h

ome

Life

time

of d

ebt

Resident

MORTAGEHELP TO BUYDEPOSIT

COM

PLET

E BU

ILD

10%40%50%

STARTER HOMESARE INFLATTING HOUSE PRICES

STARTER HOMESARE TOO FOCUSED ONINDIVIDUAL OWNERSHIP

STARTER HOME FINANCIAL MODELFinancially Starter homes seem more affordable at first but Help-to-Buy and starter home policy actually puts the house buyer at massive financial risk and could lead to a life time of debt. Starter homes are also not meant to be long-term residences which often means smaller homes and built of less robust materials as the hope is you will move quickly up the housing ladder

Starter Home



RURAL URBAN SYNTHESIS SOCIETY (RUSS)BUILDING NEIGHBOURHOODSRUSS is a contemporary interpretation of Walters Way, seeking to create a new Community Land Trust with self built homes and a communal garden12. The homes are designed to be affordable with RUSS owning 20%, and then a shared ownership agreement where you buy 10% and rent the rest of the property, until the resident buys more when they can afford to. Rents are controlled by RUSS and they have a scheme wide mortgage with the Ecological building society (access to property will cost no more than a third of a residents wage).

fig.7

ED/GY MAY 2016 29

CLT

mem

bers

hip

CLT

STAR

T BU

ILD

Land

Council

Resident

Fund

ing

Bank LoanCharity Council

Spat

ial d

esig

n

CLTArchitect

Cons

truct

ion

CLT Self builderContractor

CLT KEEPS 20%OF EACH PROPERTY

NEIGHBOURHOODS OVER HOMES

MEMBERSHIPREQUIRES 5 YEARS IN ONE BOROUGH

Mar

ket S

ale

CLT

Repa

ymen

tM

aint

enan

ceCLTBankCouncil

Neig

hbou

rhoo

dCLT

Cons

ulta

tion

CommunityDe

posi

tResident

Self-

Build

Community

Buy P

rope

rty

Resident

Acce

ss to

a h

omeResident

Com

mun

ity

Community

COM

PLET

E BU

ILD

80%

20%

Community Land Trust

COMMUNITY LAND TRUST (CLT)FINANCIAL MODELCLT model of ownership is designed to be truly affordable to build diverse communities of residents who wish to live in a borough and not move for a lond period of time. CLTs are unique cases to individual sites and councils and almost impossible to transfer. CLTs maintain ownership of between 20-60% of each property in order to keep control of rents and tenancies of a site13.



ZANDERROTHBENEFITING FROM LIVING TOGETHERBaugruppen is “a solution for the moment, when the city is not acting as it should.” - R5014. The Baugruppen model is the most successful model of co-funded, co-authored and co-lived housing in Europe. The model is based on a multi-family collective pooling their finances and collaborating with a designer to design and build a home which fits their needs socially, financially and aesthetically. The model doesn’t yet have a policy framework in the UK with multi-family mortgages or self-build financing being limited.

fig.8

ED/GY MAY 2016 31

Mul

tifam

ily co

mm

unity

BAUGRUPPEN

STAR

T BU

ILD

Land

Baugruppen

Residents

Fund

ing

BaugruppenBankAccountant

Spat

ial d

esig

n

BaugruppenArchitect

Cons

truct

ion

BaugruppenContractor

BAUGRUPPEN POOLSMORTAGES TO BUY LAND AND BUILD HOMES

HOMES FOR SPECIFIC NEEDS

MULTIPLE FAMILIESPOOL RESOURCES TO GET THE HOME THEY WANT

Repa

ymen

tM

aint

enen

ceBaugruppenBank

Neig

hbou

rhoo

d

Baugruppen

Writ

e th

e br

ief

Residents

Pool

Mor

tage

s

ResidentsBank

Pay

Mor

tage

s

ResidentsBank

Use

pool

ed fu

nds

Residents

Parti

cipat

ory d

esig

nCommunity

Acce

ss to

a h

ome

Resident

Com

mun

ity

Community

COM

PLET

E BU

ILD

100%

Baugruppen

BAUGRUPPENFINANCIAL MODELThe Baugruppen financial model relies on the financial framework and policy being in place for families to buy into. In the UK we are lagging behind Europe in how we own homes and live collectively. Baugruppen empowers a community to get funding and build the housing they need. The model provides specific housing and can be affordable through good design15. However, the model still relies heavily on the residents going into debt with mortgages, and residents can sell their home for profit at anytime which could cause a transient community unlike a CLT.


Spatial Precedents

MONTE CASSINO St. Benedict of NursiaHill top above Rome, Italy, 529

The source of the Benedict order; a cenobitic monastery when communal life was the dominant way of living. Envisioned as a self-sufficient community to remove the necessity of monks leaving the monastery’s limits. The introverted space of the cloister gives a sense of sharing, while the rectangular plan of the charter house reflects basic communal activities. The dormitories were large rooms divided into individual areas by fabric, reminding that individual space is always a collective space.

KIBBUTZ Socialist-Zionist communitiesRural IsraelFirst Kibbutz in 1910; 270 Kibbutzim in 2010

Founded as a rural egalitarian community; shared ownership of its means of production and consumption. Early Kibbutz provided little expectation of privacy, where the entire community resided in one large room with external washing facilities. This arrangement has evolved alongside Kibbutz ideology into four-bed cells, family units, and - with the recent approval of private property - into private lots. The communal dining room remains at the heart of the concentric layout of the gated community.

fig.9

fig.10

ED/GY MAY 2016 33

DROP CITY Gene Bernofsky, JoAnn Bernofsky, Richard Kallweit and Clark Richert.Southern Colorado, US, 1965-73

Recognised as the first rural hippie commune. Art students acquired a seven-acre plot of land to live and work together; their artistic output taking the form of buildings. Inspired by Buckminster Fuller, they built DIY geodesic domes (a first for domestic living) using waste and salvaged materials16. The publicity and tourism following their Dymaxion award (1966) was in opposition to the isolation the group originally sought, and the project was eventually abandoned.

THE RYDE Cockaigne Housing GroupPRP Architects Hertfordshire, England 1962

A high density development in relation to its suburban context: 28 single story homes (based on the new Parker Morris standards) were built in place of the site’s original allocation for 12 homes. Overlooking was avoided through high fenced private gardens and internal courtyards. A community hall and garden could be reached through a door from every back garden, meaning that there was no mediation between the very private and the fully communal.

fig.11

fig.12


Spatial Precedents

HOUSING UNION BUILDING (HUB)University of Alberta Students UnionDiamond and Myers Architects, R.L. Wilkin ArchitectEdmonton, Canada 1969

The HUB was an innovative approach to low rise, high density, student housing17. An enclosed pedestrian street, housing apartments and commercial businesses, was built over an existing street to connect campus buildings. Glazed public staircases facing the thoroughfare fostered a strong sense of community, while varying degrees of communality were offered through one, two, and four bed apartments.

CHRISTIANIAAnarchist communityCopenhagen, Denmark, 1971

A self-proclaimed autonomous settlement on the site of former military barrack: 850 residents over 34 hectares. The fence was initially removed by to create a children’s playground, and evolved into building a community from scratch in response to a lack of affordable housing and social facilities. The area has a unique status that is regulated by special Christiania law (1989). The community is self-governed through neighbourhood forums within the existing military buildings, while homes are constructed out of salvaged materials.

fig.13

fig.14

ED/GY MAY 2016 35

WALTER’S WAYLewisham CouncilWalter SeagalLewisham, London 1979

The design of Walter’s Way derived from an approach to simplify the building process so that it could be undertaken by anyone, quickly and cheaply. Accordingly, the homes were set out on a modular grid determined by standard material sizes; making them easily adaptable to suit a growing family. The introduction of porches and double height spaces opened up a dialogue with neighbours, fostering a strong community.

JYSTRUP SAVVÆRKVankunstenJystrup, Denmark 1982

21 residences are connected to a central common house by a glazed internal street. Shared facilities (including a workshop and guest bedrooms) make up 40% of the development; while subtle level changes, roof terraces, and family gardens provide privacy. The location of mailboxes in the common room means that that residents filter through the shared space on their way to and from work18.

fig.15

fig.16


BEDZEDPeabody Housing Bill DunsterSutton, England 2002

The first large scale eco-community in the UK: 100 homes, office space and communal facilities. Units are orientated to provide north light for working and south light for living. However, a lack of interest has led to the conversion of workspaces into homes, and the majority of residents installing blinds to avoid overlooking. Roads are constrained to the perimeter of the development, allowing car-free ‘home zone’ streets to become semi-public gardens where residents can socialise, albeit preventing the community’s integration with the city.

R50 BAUGRUPPENifau, Jesko Fezer and Heide & Von Beckerath Berlin, Germany 2013

19 units across 6 floors, with a double-height community space and laundry facility on the ground floor, and a rooftop terrace. Perimeter balconies form a secondary circulation route and shared communal space that connects the three apartments on every floor; where passing bedroom windows creates an intimate relationship between neighbours. The economical finish of the concrete shell and modular wooden elements allows the architecture to become appropriated by its residents19.

Spatial Precedents

fig.17

fig.18

ED/GY MAY 2016 37

COPPER LANE Lewisham CouncilHenley Halebrown Rorrison ArchitectsLondon, England 2014

London’s first co-housing scheme. The design approach maximises external space; six residences are clustered around a central court housing shared facilities, yet face out towards the perimeter communal gardens. Private and shared courtyards modulate degrees of privacy, while their sense of enclosure breeds social interaction20.

OLD OAK COMMON The Collective PLP Architecture London, England 2016

Recently completed 550 bed co-living space targeting young professional tenants. ‘Twodio’ describes a studio for two people, each with a bedroom reduced to 3m2, sharing a bathroom and a two-hob kitchenette. The squeezed individual living conditions are justified through access to ‘luxury’ branded communal spaces; including a gym, restaurant, co-working space and disco themed laundrette (featuring two disco balls and a dance floor). The £1100 a month tenancy is all inclusive; covering bills, wifi, cleaning, and gym membership.

fig.19

fig.20


History of domestic life

To assess the construction of the ‘home’ as we understand it today, requires the unpacking of the history of domestic life. Rather than tracing the evolution of the home through its relatively recent established room names, we have instead investigated the spatial manifestations of different domestic activities (Sleeping, Eating, Bathing, Working and Socialising)21. A selection of our findings that were most influential when reimagining the home.

SLEEPINGPublic bedUntil the 17th Century, for most ordinary people, the bedroom and bed was still a very public space, everything happened there - sex, childbirth, marriage, death.

Ham House - The Green Room Closet

15th Century Bedroom

The ClosetThe wealthy elite also had very public bedrooms, however these were paired with the closet. A very private space off the bedroom for complete solitude, prayer and isolation. The height of luxury.

fig.21

fig.22

ED/GY MAY 2016 39

COOKINGCentral HearthPrior to the 16th Century the hearth was the focus of the room and was usually positioned centrally. It was the main means of keeping warm and cooking but meant that smoke and cooking smells invaded the home.

Fitted KitchenThe post-war technology boom pushed to liberate housewives from kitchen drudgery. German kitchen design and labour saving layout of sink cooker and fridge (golden triangle) hoped to do this by reducing the amount one had to move in the kitchen.

Open Plan KitchenThe open plan revolution in the 1980’s is enabled by the invention of the extractor fan, food preparation becomes a performance.

Frankfurt kitchen

Open Plan Living 1960’s

Central hearth 16th Century

fig.23

fig.24


History of domestic life

SOCIAL LIFE Great hallIn the Middle Ages, agricultural communities lived together in large open halls, where they would eat, sleep, and gather around a central hearth together. Although open plan, a raised step with chair demarcated a clear hierarchy between the ‘chairman’ (landowner) and his workers.

Withdrawing room, Hardwick Hall, 1597

Kedleston Hall 1765

Withdrawing roomThe Elizabethan era saw the arrival of chimneys and glass windows, where wealth was demonstrated through grand houses. Guests were impressed with the grand chamber, and the most exclusive were invited to sit by the fire with the host in the ‘withdrawing room’.

The Grand CircuitKedleston Hall became infamous in the 18th C as the ideal country house. The main house was purely for show and entertaining, while the family lived in an entirely separate smaller wing. The ‘grand circuit’ comprised of a series of non-exclusive reception rooms open to all guests to explore and be impressed by unfolding views of the party across the entire house.

The Hall, Penthurst Place, Kent fig.25

fig.26

fig.27

ED/GY MAY 2016 41

BATHING Communal bathhouse Historically bathing has been a communal and social activity. What began as a spiritual act of cleansing the body and the soul, developed into an intensely social affair with the Roman baths. Now the communal practice of bathing is continued in Japan and Finland which see the use of steam baths and saunas as a daily or weekly ritual for friends and family. The tendency to see washing as a utility and an individual practice is a relatively young idea.

WORKING Pre-industrial workWork and life have always been related: the house was close to the workplace, and often they overlapped. The pace of work was set by the natural cycle of seasons and days. The First Industrial Revolution, and the waged work in the factories, created a spatial and temporal divide between life and work.

Angelus, Jean-François Millet, 1857

Post-industrial workIn the 1970s, with the rise of the post-industrial era, the service industry overcame the work in the factory. Communication technologies have eventually defined a new workplace in which employees are more connected to their job beyond the boundaries of the traditional workday and workplace.

Mr. Hulot, Jaquw Tati film, 1857

Roman baths, Pompeiifig.28

fig.29

fig.30

3Strategy

Having taken lessons from recent and historic financial and organisational models, ED/GY presents a strategy for collective ownership and communal living. Our proposal balances the economies of scale and social benefits of communal life with personal long-term security and financial interest.


Economies of Sharing

MODELWe looked at building costs to identify where we can save money and make the ED/GY model viable22. Compared to the typical developer model, we will save a considerable amount of money on land, by moving to the edges of the city. We will not pay S106, because we will provide affordable housing. By reducing the number of kitchens and bathrooms needed, we could specify better quality, long lasting materials.

TYPICAL DEVELOPER ED/GY

2% Marketing10% S106 contribution

38% Build cost

7% Site infrastructure

38% Land

5% CIL

MarketingS106 contribution

Build cost

Site infrastructure

Land

CIL

ED/GY MAY 2016 45

LONDONThe maps show the boundaries of London combined to land prices. London is here defined by connection to the city centre rather than institutional boundaries: London is made of the areas within 45 minutes commute to Tottenham Court Road, and it will expand in 2019 with the opening of the Crossrail 1. Our survey shows millenials are willing to commute less than 45 minutes each way daily.

+£45m£40<£45m£35<£40m£30<£35m£25<£30m£20<£25m£15<£20m£10<£15m£5<£10m£0<£5m

LONDON2019

LONDON2016

45 minutes from Tottenham Court Road

Crossrail 1Crossrail 2

GLA

BOUN

DARY

GLA

BOUN

DARY

fig.31


Material Palette

DOMESTIC / HONEST / ADAPTABLE We are shifting away from the rhetoric of newness and of radical forms. We instead see the potential of humble architectural expression which uses robust materials and building beautiful space with the most affordable materials. We are exploring materials which can adapt over time.

fig.32

ED/GY MAY 2016 47

R50 – Cohousing Ifau und Jesko Fezer + Heide & Von Beckerath


Construction

Murray GroveWaugh Thistleton

MATERIALITYED/GY is committed to using ‘structure as finish’ and embrace a raw aesthetic that minimises the use of secondary finishes. This emphasises dwelling as a process rather than a product, residents are empowered to personalise finishes how they wish. By primarily introducing ad-hoc, inexpensive materials, ED/GY are committed to designing and building in a way which embodies home as dwelling over asset25.

STRUCTUREED/GY is committed to designing with cross laminated timber (CLT) as its primary structural material. CLT structures reduce risk in the construction process, they can be modularised and are as much as 50% quicker to erect on site than a concrete frame23. CLT is sustainable too, considering carbon sequestration it is carbon negative (timber naturally captures carbon by absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere in its growth cycle)24.

fig.33

ED/GY MAY 2016 49

Svartlamoen HousingBrendeland & Kristoffersen

Maison LatapieLacaton & Vassal

Popadich Residences Pattersons

Circus BA IT MET

fig.34

fig.35

fig.36

fig.37


Millennials are struggling to accommodate themselves in the current market. With their prospects so low as individuals, we suggest that communal living, and the pooling of resources, is the best way for Generation Y to attain the good life. Communal living presents obvious advantages for young people in the city and for ED/GY it should be a luxury rather than a compromise. Collective purchasing power, domestic economies and financial economies of scale are obvious practical benefits. Socially, communal living could give a sense of belonging and extended family that ‘Generation Lonely’ report to be missing from their lives26. ED/GY advocates for tribal living - dwelling groups of 50 millennials who live, work and play together. This would be equivalent in size to a kin group or large extended family. When grouped with two other tribes, the size of the group would reach 150. This is the anthropological limit of an intimate community where members recognise each other and can maintain a sense of belonging, supportas well as continuity27.

Tribal Living

ED/GY MAY 2016 51

Domestic Isolation

Tribal Living

sense of family

collective responsibility

shared childcare

lonely

isolatedstressedtiredover-workedstressed

social life

shared domestic chores

life events celebrated in the home


STAGE 1ED/GY approaches an ethical bank with the deposits and earning potential of the millennial group as collateral. Mini-bonds are issued to investors with a fixed term and rate based on the development type.

STAGE 2ED/GY develops for the millennial group with borrowed capital. Developments are bespoke to the group but - to reduce borrowing cost, risk, and make a profit - speed is paramount. In addition to development costs, ED/GY services the bank loan.

ED/GY Development Model

ED/G

Y

INIT

IATI

ON

COM

PLET

ION

Ethical Bank

Ethical BankConstruction

Committed Millennials


Crowd Investors

LOAN

INVE

STM

ENT

BOND

LOAN

REP

AYM

ENTS

DEVE

LOPM

ENT

COST

S

DEPO

SIT

DESI

GN

PART

ICIP

ATIO

NRISK

+ =

PROFITCAPITAL

ED/GY MAY 2016 53

LOAN

REP

AYM

ENTS

PRIN

CIPL

E +

INTE

REST

STAGE 3Mini bonds mature and ED/GY repays investors from development profits. Millennials move in and start affordable monthly payments. The committed group build equity, whilst the transient group pay rent. ED/GY covers maintenance, management and the bank loan.

STAGE 4The committed millennial group collectively own 80% of the development. ED/GY maintains 20% equity, continues to earn rent from the transient millennials and continues with the management as well as the maintenance.

OCCU

PATI

ON

END

OF L

OAN

TERM

Ethical Bank



Transient Millennials

Transient Millennials

Crowd Investors

MAI

NTEN

ANCE

COS

TS

MAN

AGEM

ENT

COST

S

PAYM

ENT

EQUI

TY

RENT

RENT

MONTHLY PAYMENTS

ED/GY equity

collectiveequity

20%

80%

10 YEARS

fig.38

BriefED/GY has forecasted current and future domestic activities of the millennials we aim to accommodate, including the predicted trends and lifestyle shifts that define our generation. These habits, customs and rituals occur cyclically across days, weeks and years and fall on a scale of individual to communal. The spatial organisation of individual to communal life is the essence of the brief for ED/GY. These are communal dwellings for families of friends.

4


Habits

Our daily activities are changing, the advent of technology is proving to both connect and alienate individuals. Eating, bathing, and even sleeping, however, could become much more social affairs through subtle changes in dwelling typology: the ED/GY proposals will address the increasing loneliness of life in a city like London, forming meaningful ways of encouraging communality.

2 A M T O 6 A M 6 A M T O M I D D A Y

EARN

SHIT

EAT BREAKFAST

CLEAN BODY

DRESS

TECH BLAST

SLEEP

FUCK

EAT LUNCH

EARN

ED/GY MAY 2016 57

M I D D A Y T O 6 P M 6 P M T O 1 2 P M

SHIT SHIT

TECH BLAST

GROUNDING

NAP

TECH BLAST

EAT LUNCH EAT DINNER

EARN EARN

INDIVIDUAL

COMMUNAL


D A Y 1 D A Y 2 D A Y 3 D A Y 4

WORK INDIVIDUAL

EAT OUT

WORK INDIVIDUAL

SORT RUBBISHFUCK EXERCISE

FUCK

WORK MEETING

COMMUNAL BATHING

The abolition of late-night licenses, increased pressure to work hard and play hard, and minimal disposable income due to extreme rent costs are altering the customs of going out in London, spaces to congregate and share with existing communities are essential: millennials are spending more time at home and at the pub than in the clubs. Increased communality in conjunction with apps enabling the ‘economy of sharing’ may introduce customs like swapping clothes.

Customs

ED/GY MAY 2016 59

D A Y 5 D A Y 6D A Y 4 D A Y 7

WORK INDIVIDUAL

EAT OUT

LECTURE

EXERCISEFUCK

FUCK

CLOTHES SWAP

SUNDAY SERVICE

SHARED CHILDCARE

BODY MAINTENANCE

WORK INDIVIDUAL

PARTY UP

WORK MEETING

INDIVIDUAL

COMMUNAL


Rituals

Celebrations and rituals have been increasingly pushed out of the home. Individual domestic life is isolated from work and play and measly space standards make even a small dinner party tricky in most current house shares. The economies of sharing grant ED/GY millennials the space to gather and celebrate.

Y E A R 1 Y E A R 2

IMPROVE HOME REFRESH POSSESSIONS

HARVEST HARVEST

BIRTHDAY

CIVIL PARTNERSHIP

SPRING CLEAN

HOME BIRTH

SUMMER SCHOOL

ED/GY MAY 2016 61

Y E A R 2 Y E A R 3

HARVEST HARVEST

BIRTHDAYBIRTHDAY

HOME BIRTH HOME BIRTH

SPRING CLEAN

SUMMER SCHOOL SUMMER SCHOOL

SPRING CLEAN

INDIVIDUAL

COMMUNAL


The holarchy of sharing defines spaces and activities shared between people in ED/GY dwellings. These are the levels we identified - from the individual to the city - how they are composed and what they share.

INDIVIDUALWithdrawing, bed, sink

FAMILY – 7-8 individualsWC, shower, kitchen, dining space

EXTENDED FAMILY – 2 familiesLiving/social space, winter garden, childcare, bathing

TRIBE – 50 individualsVariety of workspace, exercise, play, terrace/garden

VILLAGE – 3 tribes + CITYtown hall, public space, garden and terrace, laundrette, workshop, pub, shops

Holarchy of Sharing

ED/GY MAY 2016 63

COMMUNAL - PUBLIC ACCESS

TRIBE - SEMI - PUBLIC

EXTENDED FAMILY - INVITED

FAMILY - RESIDENT

INDIVIDUAL

KEY:

fig.39

ProposalWe present three ED/GY typologies for London: low-rise, mid -rise and high-rise. These are tactical re-imaginings of existing typologies envisaged as applicable models for sites across the city. They test the feasibility of our strategy and spatial implications of our brief. These are dwellings designed for sharing, for us it is a luxury, not a compromise.

5


The high-rise typology is suited to the inner city and is the most central of our proposals. As an expensive typology with high levels of construction and planning risk, new-build high-rise is impracticable for ED/GY’s delivery model. In London, there is currently a trend for office to residential conversion of existing high rise buildings under permitted development rights. Many of these developments seek to profit from the current madness of the residential market by atomising towers into luxury residential units, often marketed abroad. ED/GY proposes an alternative strategy for the city’s existing towers, allowing millennials to benefit from life in central London. A light touch, affordable solution - that treats all intervention as varying weights of furniture - allows us to establish a horizontal hierarchy from communal to individual space.

High-Rise

The floor plate is liberated with strategic organisation of services and a ‘mini-urbanism’ approach treats each floor plate as a small piece of city allowing depth, richness and varying character. Each floor is atypical and accommodates life, work and play throughout the tower. Sculptural enclosures that celebrate communal activities break the section, enabling a varied spatial quality. We have tested our strategy on Archway Tower, a office tower above Archway Tube Station, currently undergoing office to residential conversion.

Location: Central LondonCommute time: Under 20 minutesDensity: 1200 millennials/hectareSquare m: 8550Residents: 180 millennials

ED/GY MAY 2016 67

TYPICAL HIGH RISE SECTION

TYPICAL HIGH RISE PLAN

ED/GY HIGH RISE SECTION

ED/GY HIGH RISE PLAN

KEY:

COMMUNAL



FAMILY - RESIDENT

INDIVIDUAL


Intervention as Furniture

Partitions Furniture Concept: ‘Occasional Table’Polycarbonate, Plywood, CurtainsPartitions are devices which shape communal spaces without introducing permanent walls. Translucent polycarbonate partitions define space whilst allowing light penetration and plywood shelving includes surfaces to perch or work. Curtains offer flexible spaces which can quickly be expanded or subdivided. Both the shelving and partitions are free standing and can be adapted as required.

Sculptural Intervention Furniture Concept: ‘Built In Bookcase’CLT, Hardwood Timber FinishesThe most communal spaces are the largest interventions in the tower. They strategically break through the existing structure to offer distinct spatial qualities. These celebrated spaces in the program have a bespoke materiality. They are multipurpose, permanent features of the strategy.

Individual Withdrawing Rooms Furniture Concept: ‘Sofa’CLT, Acoustic Insulation, Birch Plywood FinishWithdrawing rooms are the most individual, private spaces in the tower. A variety of sizes cater for a range of millennials, from the most transient to the most permanent. With CLT structure as finish, the rooms can be easily personalised. Although semi-permanent, they are free standing and can be moved if part of the tower requires adaptation or re-purposing.


Mini-Urbanism

Liberate the plan by consolidating bathrooms near the core. Sculptural insertions respect the existing structural grid.

Individual Withdrawing rooms are clustered into ‘family’ groups who share and take ownership of the spaces directly in front of them.

Shelves and curtains, the lightest touch insertions, are used to shape and hold the progression of spaces from the very communal to the most individual.


Holarchy of Sharing

Arriving on an ED/GY High-Rise floor brings residents or guests from the circulation space to the communal eating and cooking areas. These are shared between the ‘extended family’ on each floor. Each cluster of individual withdrawing rooms share a porch space and a living area. The special spaces are for the benefit of all residents.

COMMUNAL



FAMILY - RESIDENT

INDIVIDUAL

KEY:

ED/GY MAY 2016 73

ED/GY MAY 2016 75


The ED/GY mid rise typology derives from the holarchy of spaces between the individual, the tribe, and the city. This gradation is employed in section between floors; as an integrated piece of city at ground level, through to 150 individual withdrawing rooms on the top storey. Accordingly the journey through the building spans between the civic, public, and domestic staircase. Moreover, the relationship between private and communal is graded on each floor through courtyards, arcades, porches and level changes.The building is centered around a courtyard and allows the form of the block to adapt to the perimeter of any feasible site.

Location: Barking and Dagenham, Brent, Hounslow, Redbridge, Waltham ForestCommute time: 40 minutes to Central LondonDensity: 150 millennials/hectare(Tower Hamlets 128 persons/hectare)Square m: 6,000Residents: 150

Mid-Rise

ED/GY MAY 2016 77

TYPICAL MID RISE SECTION ED/GY MID RISE SECTION




FAMILY - RESIDENT

INDIVIDUAL

KEY:


COMMUNAL SPACE INDIVIDUAL SPACE

The ED/GY Mid-rise block intends to counter “an island of nice” through creating new connections between surrounding streets at ground level with parkland and valuable community amenities: a town hall, workshop, pub, laundrette, and corner shop. A civic stair leads to a semi-public first floor that provides facilities, including workspace and communal bathing, to be shared between three tribes (150 people). Each tribe (50 people) has a staircase leading to the second floor that is separated into covered terraces for extended families (16 people). Every terrace is shared by a pair of families that facilitates spillover from family activity when greater communality is desired. The facing family areas (8 people) house cooking, living, washing facilities, and a domestic staircase leading to individual withdrawing rooms on the top story. These are the most intimate spaces of the building, that while limited in plan are generous in section to accommodate an entrance porch beneath a raised bed, from where a high level window establishes a visual connection back to the city. COMMUNAL



FAMILY - RESIDENT

INDIVIDUAL

KEY:

ED/GY MAY 2016 79

00

01

02

03

0 5 10 20

ED/GY MAY 2016 81


London Borough: Connection To The City

ED/GY MAY 2016 83

Ground Floor: Tribal Community & City


Second Floor: Extended Family

ED/GY MAY 2016 85

Third Floor: Individual


ED/GY Low-Rise not only proposes an alternative to the terraced house, but also a reinterpretation of the suburban street. Fragmenting the home into a series of activities across a walking distance block. Encouraging engagement and integration with the community through our habits, customs, rituals. Creating a piece of city of metropolitan intensity in one of the outer boroughs, where low-density housing can offer interesting ways of meeting people, in the place of hermetically sealed family houses. These low-rise dwellings seek to imbue a deep subjectivity by creating a sequence of spaces from the intensely communal to the completely individual. ED/GY see the dwelling as an opportunity to ground ourselves and make everyday life something to celebrate.

Low-Rise




FAMILY - RESIDENT

INDIVIDUAL

KEY:

Location: Woking, Brentwood, Slough Commute time: 45 minutes to Central LondonDensity: 160 millennials/hectareSquare m: 544Residents: 16+

ED/GY MAY 2016 87

INTERACTIVE STREET / FLIPPING THE HOME

PUBLIC LIFEINTERACTIVE STREET / FLIPPING THE HOME

SLEE

P

SLEE

P

SLEE

P

SLEE

P

EATSLEE

P

WA

SH

SLEE

P

PLA

Y

WO

RK W

OR

KEAT

BATHINGPLAY PLAY

LIVE EAT

ENTRY

SLEE

P

SLEE

P

SLEE

P

SLEE

P

PLAY MEET

WORK WORK

COOK COOKEAT EATLIVE LIVEPLAY PLAYTRAVEL

TRAVEL

TYPICAL LOW-RISE

ED/GY LOW-RISE

TYPICAL LOW-RISE SECTION

ED/GY LOW-RISE SECTION

The proposal flips the terraced house, shifting communal activities to the street and explores using the variety found in the rear extensions of terraced houses to create a diverse street frontage.

The section before/after diagrams highlights the extreme privacy of the existing terrace typology, with the projected communality of an ED/GY intervention.


PUBLIC LIFEPUBLIC LIFEINTERACTIVE STREET / FLIPPING THE HOME

A PIECE OF CITY / GENEROUS TO COMMUNITY

WORK

TRAVEL

WORK

EAT

WORK

WORK

WORK

WORK

AMASS

WA

SH

LIV

E

EA

T

SL

EE

P

WA

SH

PA

SS

LIV

E

EA

T

SL

EE

P

PLA

Y

GR

OU

ND

ING

B

ATH

ING

WA

SH

PA

SS

LIV

E

EA

T

SL

EE

P

WA

SH

PA

SS

LIV

E

EA

T

SL

EE

P

WA

SH

PA

SS

LIV

E

EA

T

PLA

Y

TRAVEL

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

SLEE

P

WA

SHLI

VE

ENTR

Y

AM

ASS SL

EEP

SLEE

P

ENTR

Y

WO

RK

LIVE

PLA

Y

EATSLEE

P

SLEE

P

WO

RK

LIVE

PLA

Y

Vibrant Streets

PROPOSED SECTION

TYPICAL SECTION




FAMILY - RESIDENT

INDIVIDUAL

KEY:

ED/GY low-rise aims to create a piece of city, bringing disparate activities together into the intensity of a single street, reducing stressful commutes and dormitory towns by integrating work and play.

ED/GY MAY 2016 89


Fragmenting the Terraced House

Current low-rise typology

Spare room

Prefabricated CLT withdrawing rooms containing the basic facilities required for a self-build mortgage are the DNA of low-rise. The rooms can be configured to form work or living space for individuals, couples or families.

Couples Pair Meet and Greet Work parking

PREFABRICATED WITHDRAWING ROOMS

FROM NAMED ROOMS TO BEHAVIOURS

Fragmenting the home into a series of behaviours: individual and communal

Individual = solid/warm/intimateCommunal = light/cool/open

Individual

Communal

Semi-public

ED/GY MAY 2016 91

Sixteen Bed Dwelling

Through a spatial strategy of give and take we have designed a dwelling for 16 millennials: offering more communal space and intense private spaces. The transition from communal to individual is translated materially into light and heavy timber structure.

METROPOLITAN INTENSITY


Developing a piece of city

Housing should be an integral part of the city not a sealed ‘island of nice’. We propose a development strategy which gives back to the community, through providing one public structure per 16 bed dwelling. Creating a diverse experience of individuality and communality across a walking distance block. Creating a heterogeneous street with a metropolitan intensity.

SATURATING THE STREET WITH LIFE

TOWN HALL

DWELLING

ED/GY MAY 2016 93

WORKSHOP

DWELLING


The new terraced house typology provides residents with the option to live as communally as they like, with spaces ranging from super-private to open ground floor communality. Rear gardens provide space for spare rooms for sleep or work.

THE NEW TERRACED DWELLING

ED/GY MAY 2016 95


The CLT withdrawing room will be used as adaptable live or work spaces depending on their configuration. The new terrace typology draws inspiration from split levels and public realm that encourages positive loitering. Shared semi-enclosed space will spill into front gardens stimulating streetlife.

VIBRANT STREETS

ED/GY MAY 2016 97


Reappropriating existing houses for public amenities such as town halls, workshops and baths gives back to the community. The town hall is created by knocking through existing structures and wrapping with a lightweight envelope, providing a space for congregation of multi-family community.

SHARED HOUSE

ED/GY MAY 2016 99


Bibliography

Aureli, P.V. (2014) Less is enough: On architecture and asceticism. United Kingdom: Strelka Press.

Awan, N., Schneider, T., Jeremy and Till, J. (2011) Spatial agency: Other ways of doing architecture. New York, NY: Routledge.

Bryson, B. (2010) At home: A short history of private life. London: Doubleday.

Catling, C.S. (2014) Damned if you do, damned if you don’t: What is the moral duty of the architect? Available at: http://www.architectural-review.com/rethink/viewpoints/damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-dont-what-is-the-moral-duty-of-the-architect/8669956.article (Accessed: 31 May 2016).

Caviar, S. (ed.) (2014) SQM the quantified home. Switzerland: Lars Muller Publishers.

Dorling, D. (2015) All that is solid: How the great housing disaster defines our times, and what we can do about it. United Kingdom: Penguin Books.

Foster, D. (2016) Help to buy is riddled with loopholes that the privileged can easily exploit. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2016/mar/11/government-help-to-buy-housing-scheme-house-of-cards?CMP=share_btn_tw (Accessed: 31 May 2016).

Moore, R. (2016) Slow burn city: London in the Twenty-First century. United Kingdom: Picador.

Parvin, A. (2016) Housing without debt. Available at: https://medium.com/@AlastairParvin/housing-without-debt-5ae430b5606a#.eg7sa5wuf (Accessed: 31 May 2016).

Schoenauer, N. (2003) 6, 000 years of housing. 3rd edn. United States: W. W. Norton & Co.

Self, J. (2016) ‘Work on, work on, but you’ll always work alone’. Available at: http://www.architectural-review.com/archive/work-on-work-on-but-youll-always-work-alone/10002024.fullarticle (Accessed: 31 May 2016).

Smith, G. (2016) Outrage: ‘Architects are complicit in the commodification of UK housing’. Available at: http://www.architectural-review.com/archive/outrage-architects-are-complicit-in-the-commodification-of-uk-housing/10001742.fullarticle (Accessed: 31 May 2016).

Wainwright, O. (2016) A wholesale power grab: How the UK government is handing housing over to private developers. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2016/jan/05/housing-and-planning-bill-power-grab-developers (Accessed: 31 May 2016).

Woodman, E. and Greeves, E. (2008) Home/away: Five British architects build housing in Europe: The development of housing in Britain 1870-2008. United Kingdom: The British Council Visual Arts Publications.

Zogolovitch, R. (2015) Shouldn’t we all be developers? United Kingdom: Artifice Books on Architecture.

ED/GY MAY 2016 101

Image References

Fig.1-Bristow, G. and Bethell, C. (2015) Fuck Foxtons Placard Available at: http://www.vice.com/en_uk/read/housing-crisis-march-bristow-910.

Fig.2-Carrilho da Graça, D. (no date) London is Changing Available at: http://www.londonischanging.org/.

Fig.3-Bloom, D. (2014) Budge up! Step inside London’s smallest flats. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2654275/Budge-Step-inside-Londons-smallest-flats-reach-hob-BED-theyre-snapped-hours-hundreds-pounds-month.html.

Fig.4-Bloom, D. (2014) Budge up! Step inside London’s smallest flats. Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2654275/Budge-Step-inside-Londons-smallest-flats-reach-hob-BED-theyre-snapped-hours-hundreds-pounds-month.html .

Fig.5-Simon, P. (2001) Sufi Dancing, hippie commune style Available at: https://productsandportfolio.petersimon.com/cgi-bin/store/imageFolio.cgi?action=view&link=Counter_Culture&image=COMMUNE_DAYS_031.jpg&img=0&search=commune&cat=all&tt=&bool=or&tfile=tn_COMMUNE_DAYS_031.jpg&numtolist=1800&sortfiles=2 .

Fig.6-Pocket Living (2016) Pocket - new developments - Willingham terrace NW5, Camden. Available at: https://www.pocketliving.com/buy/development/11 .

Fig.7-Architype (2015) RUSS Available at: http://www.architype.co.uk/blog/community-self-build-group-gets-approval-to-develop-south-london-homes/ .

Fig.8-Menges, S. (2011) BIGyard Zelterstraße 5 Zanderroth Architeckten Available at: http://cargocollective.com/thisispaper/zanderroth-architekten-BIGyard-Zelterstrase-5 .

Fig.9-Hollas, F.E. (2012) Abbey of Monte Cassino Available at: https://monkschronicle.wordpress.com/tag/abbey-of-monte-cassino/ .

Fig.10-DigitalGlobe (2015) Nahalal, Israel Available at: http://www.dailyoverview.com/page-20/ .

Fig.11-Richert, C. (1968) Drop city Available at: http://www.clarkrichert.com/drop-city/

Fig.12-Grondplan (no date) The Ryde Available at: http://ground-plan.co.uk/research/the-lived-experience/chapter-1/ .

Fig.13-HUB, Edmonton Archives EA-340-594 (no date) Housing union building (HUB) — 1969-1971 Available at: http://capitalmodernedmonton.com/buildings-by-area/hub/ .

Fig.14-Dinamarca - Christiania (2016) Available at: http://cavalinhoselvagem.blogspot.co.uk/2014_01_01_archive.html .


Image References

Fig.15-Turner, J.D. (2015) Walter’s Way Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/sep/16/anarchism-community-walter-segal-self-build-south-london-estate .

Fig.16-Jystrup-Savvaerk - Vandkunsten (2014) Available at: http://storiedellarte.com/2014/02/labitare-condiviso.html .

Fig.17-Chance, T. (2010) BedZED Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/tomchance/1008213420/ .Fig.18-Alberts, A. (2015a) Gallery of R50 – Cohousing / ifau und Jesko Fezer + HEIDE & VON BECKERATH Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/593154/r50-nil-cohousing-ifau-und-jesko-fezer-heide-and-von-beckerath/54cb088de58ece9901000333-r50_aa_dsc8017-jpg .

Fig.19-Marinescu, I. (no date) Copper Lane - Henley Halebrown Rorrison Available at: http://hhbr.co.uk/work/copper-lane/ .

Fig.20-Behnke, T. (2016) Old Oak The Collective Available at: http://bizforward.de/consumer-trends/co-living-working-lifestyle-neues-wohnkonzept-in-london/ .

Fig.21-Unknown (no date) 15th Century Bed Available at: https://planetamadera.wordpress.com/page/12/ .

Fig.22-Green Closet - Ham House (no date) Available at: http://thebrimstonebutterfly.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/ham-house-part-two.html .

Fig.23-Frankfurt Kitchen - Schütte-Lihotzky (2010) Available at: http://www.metropolismag.com/September-2010/The-Modern-Kitchen-Again/ .

Fig.24-Armstrong Cork Company (1956) Excelon Tile Styles 762 and 765 Available at: http://www.plan59.com/decor/decor058a.htm .

Fig.25-Hollingsworth Wharton, A. (1915) Penshurst Place Available at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penshurst_Place#/media/File:The_Hall_at_Penshurst_Place_from_Ancestral_Homes_of_Noted_Americans_by_Anne_Hollingsworth_Wharton_(1915).jpg .

Fig.26-NTPL and Guttridge, N. (no date) The withdrawing chamber at Hardwick hall, Derbyshire Available at: http://www.ntprints.com/image/357260/the-withdrawing-chamber-at-hardwick-hall-derbyshire

Fig.27-Dennis Gilbert (no date) The Marble Hall at Kedleston Available at: https://nttreasurehunt.wordpress.com/category/kedleston-hall/ .

Fig.28-Alma-Tadema, L. (1909) A Favourite custom Available at: http://www.wikiart.org/en/sir-lawrence-alma-tadema/a-favourite-custom-1909 .

ED/GY MAY 2016 103

Image References

Fig.29-Millet, J.-F. (1859) The Angelus Available at: http://www.jeanmillet.org/The-Angelus,-1857-59.html .

Fig.30-w-Tati, J. (1954) Les Vacances de Monsieur Hulot -Screenshot Available at: http://www.treehugger.com/interior-design/office-future-may-well-look-giant-rock.html .

Fig.31-Our estimates

Fig.32-Alberts, A. (2015b) Gallery of R50 – Cohousing / ifau und Jesko Fezer + HEIDE & VON BECKERATH - 17 Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/593154/r50-nil-cohousing-ifau-und-jesko-fezer-heide-and-von-beckerath/54cb08c7e58ece5c5e000313-r50_aa_dsc8078-jpg .

Fig.33-Pryce, W. (2014) Murray Grove, Waugh Thistleton Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/science/lofty-ambitions-for-cross-laminated-timber-panels.html?_r=0 .

Fig.34-Fowelin, J. (2005) Svartlamoen housing: BRENDELAND & KRISTOFFERSEN Available at: http://www.bkark.no/projects/svartlamoen-housing/ .

Fig.35-Ruault, P. (1993) Maison Latapie - Lacaton & vassal Available at: https://www.lacatonvassal.com/index.php?idp=25 .

Fig.36-Rojas, J.A. (no date) Gallery of CircusBA / it met - 5 Available at: http://www.archdaily.com/776510/circusba-it-met/5637f4bbe58ece6e6400006d-circusba-it-met-photo .

Fig.37-Devitt, S. (2011) Popadich Residence - Pattersons Available at: http://www.dwell.com/my-house/article/rock-boat .

Fig.38-Friends TV Show (no date) Available at: http://www.mtv.com/news/2052730/friends-couch/ .

Fig.39-Mattsson, P. (2015) Demonstrators on the London March for Homes Available at: http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/articles/21777 .


Endnotes

1 - Osborne, H. (2015) Generation rent: The housing ladder starts to collapse for the under-40s. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/jul/22/pwc-report-generation-rent-to-grow-over-next-decade

2 - Foster, D. (2016) Experts say housing bill signals end of the road for affordable housing. Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2016/jan/05/expert-views-housing-bill-end-affordable-housing

3- Bullock, S. and Quirk, B. (2015) City villages: More homes, better communities. Edited by Andrew Adonis and Bill Davies. p. 23

4- Office for National Statistics. (2015) Annual mid-year population estimates: 2014. Available at: http://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/2015-06-25

5 - Right to buy: Buying your council home (2016) Available at: https://www.gov.uk/right-to-buy-buying-your-council-home/overview.

6 - Osborne, H. (2016) Only one in 10 homes sold under right to buy are replaced in England. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/mar/24/right-to-buy-homes-sold-england-councils.

7 - Jefferys, P. (2015) Who can afford a starter home? | shelter blog. Available at: http://blog.shelter.org.uk/2015/10/can-you-afford-a-starter-home

8 - Stone, J. (2016) Government’s flagship starter home housing policy will only help 5 per cent of renters, analysis finds. Available at: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/governments-flagship-starter-home-housing-policy-will-only-help-5-per-cent-of-renters-analysis-finds-a6903016.html

9 - Affordable home ownership schemes (2016) Available at: https://www.gov.uk/affordable-home-ownership-schemes/overview

10 - Smith, L. (2016) ‘Planning: Change of Use’, House of Commons Briefing Paper, (01301).

11 - HL 100 - building better places (2016) The Stationery Office

12 - Dayes, K. and Chair, R. (2015) About. Available at: http://www.theruss.org/about/

13 - About CLTs Available at: http://www.communitylandtrusts.org.uk/what-is-a-clt/about-clts

14 - Don’t call it A commune (2015) Available at: http://www.metropolismag.com/May-2015/Dont-Call-It-A-Commune/

ED/GY MAY 2016 105

Endnotes

15 - Eliason, M. (2014) Baugruppen: To form a more affordable urbanism. Available at: https://www.theurbanist.org/2014/05/20/baugruppen-to-form-a-more-affordable-urbanism/

16 - Spatial agency: Drop city (2011) Available at: http://www.spatialagency.net/database/drop.city

17 - Capital Modern. (2012) Housing union building (HUB) — 1969-1971. Available at: http://capitalmodernedmonton.com/buildings-by-area/hub/

18 - ABV (2014) Vandkunsten, architects: Jystrup savværk cohousing community, jystrup, denmark 1982-1984. Available at: http://abv.dk/2676/vandkunsten-architects-jystrup-savvaerk-cohousing-community-jystrup-denmark-1982-1984/

19 - Metropolis (2015) Don’t call it A commune. Available at: http://www.metropolismag.com/May-2015/Dont-Call-It-A-Commune/

20 - Moore, R. (2014) Copper lane review – an appealing, harmonious, cost-effective model for communal living. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/aug/31/copper-lane-review-cohousing-stoke-newington-henley-halebrown-rorrison

21 - BBC Four (2011) If walls could talk: The history of the home. Available at: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b010p5z5

22 - Parvin, A. (2016) Housing without debt. Available at: https://medium.com/@AlastairParvin/housing-without-debt-5ae430b5606a#.mta5wzxo1

23 - Risen, C. (2014) The world’s most advanced building material is... Wood. Available at: http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/world%E2%80%99s-most-advanced-building-material-wood

24 - Waugh Thistleton Available at: http://www.waughthistleton.com/project/dalston-lane/

25 - Lafitte, S. Naked house concept // naked house community builders. Available at: http://nakedhouse.org/nakedhouse.html

26 - Gall, R. (2013) The loneliest generation? Available at: https://socalledmillennial.com/2013/10/02/the-loneliest-generation/

27 - Krotoski, A. (2016) Robin Dunbar: We can only ever have 150 friends at most…. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2010/mar/14/my-bright-idea-robin-dunbar


Thank you for reading

ED/GY MAY 2016 107

cbn 2016 ED/GY Ethical Dwellings for Generation Y.This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/

Design Think Tank Leaders

Matt Dalziel Will Hunter

ED/GY TeamRaphael ArthurChiara Barrett Ian Campbell Jack Idle Phoebe Nickols Fabio Maiolin Fiona Stewart

Graphic design / Art directionLallu Nykopp EditorsLallu NykoppBen Breheny

With special thanks toLiddicoat & GoldhillHaworth TompkinsPDP LondonInterrobangMikhail Riches Hut ArchitectsCarmody GroarkeIf_Do

David SegalRoger Zogolovitch Rae Whittow-WilliamsChris PaddockDavid Lomax

ed/gy primer

Documents