Informal Spaces

Next 21 in Osaka, Japan utilize many of the principles of Habraken.  The 18 residential units located within the building were designed by 13 different architects with a system of rules, while the exterior, structure, interior finishes, and mechanical systems were designed as independent systems. Because of this each unit has a level of autonomy that allows its user to make changes.

 The Gentler Strasse Houses in Munich are another representation of a support and infill project. The 7 row houses were constructed with a visible load bearing system. The architects Otto Steidle and Doris and Ralph Thut believed that by having the non-load bearing and load bearing elements differentiated the user would be able to make changes to the living unit without having to consult with architects or engineers because they would understand what was structural. The building was designed as a whole allowing for layers of collective interaction and shared facilities.

 Tila Housing Company in Helsinki, Finland is a more modern example of this building ideology with the frame completed in 2009 and the infill completed in 2011. It’s five story concrete and steel frame houses 39 units which were equipped only with a bathroom at purchase. The building attempts to frame housing in an architectural manner and still allow for the changes of the occupant.

Multifunk by ANA Architecten is a building which highlights flexibility of use. In a society where the user is always changing having spaces that can change at the same rate is pertinent. Unlike the previous buildings this one does not work on the same level of support and infill; instead it is designed with multiple functions at the onset. The units within this building have the capability to be either offices or apartments. The designers looked at the needs for both types of created a construction that could support either interchangeably.

41 Box Street is a small property in Brooklyn, NY and was designed with flexibility in mind. Here like the previous project the building occupants were not known specifically as residential users. The building was originally constructed to house a plumbing contractor on the lower level. The owners and designers however, anticipated a zoning change that would allow for the possibility of either office, live/work, or residential space to exist on the property. The building structure was then designed to allow for all of these programs to work depending on the user. A planning module was created to help in the creation of these spaces in future adaptations.

These examples show how the idea of occupant involvement and flexibility have changed over time. During Habraken's time it was about allowing the users to have input into how their space would be developed over time. This stemmed from the idea that housing had historically been a product of the occupant not the architect. Recently user and occupant needs have brought the idea of flexibility to the forefront again; however it now has more to do with how a building can adapt to new uses over time.