HOUSES FOR DORCHESTER
by
Thomas C. Chalmers
Bachelor of Arts
University of California
Berkeley, California
1978
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE
IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
DEGREE
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE AT THE
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
JUNE 1987
Thomas C. Chalmers 1987
The Author hereby grants to M.I.T.
permission to reproduce and to distribute publicly copies
of this thesis document in part or in whole
Signature
of
Author
Thomas C. Chalmers
Department of Architecture
May 8, 1987
Certified by
Nabeel Hamdi
ssociate Professor of Housing and Design
-^
Toesis Supervisor
Accepted
by
Julian Beinart
Chairman
Departmental Committee for Graduate Students
MNSS, INST,
Cf
JUN 03 38
r ItR9 C
RA R IES
HOUSES FOR DORCHESTER
by
Thomas C. Chalmers
Submitted to the Department of Architecture
on May 8, 1987 in partial fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Architecture
ABSTRACT
The intent of this thesis is to develop a design for
thirty units of housing responding to the development
objectives
of
the
Nuestra
Comunidad
Development
Corporation (NCDC) in the Upham Corner district of
Dorchester.
It
is
about
controlling
variety
and
encouraging interaction within a context in which requirements for low cost dwellings prevail. It declares
that through an explicit separation of parts, and
calculated
provision of
excess capacity,
a living
environment will unfold in which form and process are
united in a way that makes variety and choice more
efficient, structures participation and encourages decentralized independent action through time. The form
of this environment is first presented through drawings
and text. A discussion of the meaning of variety,
control and levels in form and process leads to a
reinterpretation
of
the
design.
With
this
new
understanding, two models of form and process based on
varying patterns of control will be used to explore the
development and evolution of the site during its lifestages of design, building, use and transformation.
Thesis Supervisor:
Nabeel Hamdi
Title : Associate Professor of Housing and Design
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
-
Nabeel Hamdi: whose weekly guidance, clarity and
encouragement saw me through.
-
Jan Wampler: for his patient dedication and
inspiration by example.
-
Stephen Kendall: for his continuing assistance,
insightfulness and inspiration.
- Melvyn Colon, Ricardo Medina, and Arne Abramson of
Nuestra Communidad Development Corporation for
openly sharing their experience.
- To Joan whose unflinching love and support made all
of this possible.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Abstract
Acknowledgements
---.--.-.--.--. 3
Table of Contents
Preface
PART I:
THE DESIGN
The Setting
11
-Nuestra Communidad Development Corporation
-The Site as Context
--
16
..........
19
A Response
-Introduction
-23
-Appearance of the Site
-Site Plan
24
-Building Plan
28
-Building Axonometric
-Four Households
..........
------
29
-
30
.-----
Part II:
THE SITE EXAMINED
Goals and means: A Clarification of Terms
-Variety
-
35
.-
-Manipulation
-Personalization
-Adaptation
-Control
-Efficiency
-Parts and Levels
-Capacity
Parts and Levels
-Who
-When
-What
39
41
-.--.. . -42
43
.-
Part III:
FORM AND PROCESS EXPLORED
Introduction
-.
57
.
Traditional One Party control
-Participation and Design
- --.....58
-Sites, Buildings Units
-Rooms and Uses
-Building Elements
61
-Building
.
-Manufactured & Prefabricated Components
-Use and Transformation
-Personalization
-Adaptation
A Support and Infill Proposal
-Introduction
- ' -
- - -''66
-69
-A Support Design
-An Infill Design
-
----.
73
Implications of Support and Infill Decisions
75
-Defining the Support
-Support Types: A First Step
-.--
- -
77
-The Minimum Support
-Variation within The support Type
76
-
78
.-
-Support and Infill Systems
81
-Process, Plan and Detail
-82
- 83
-System Interfaces
-Partitions
-.---- - 84
-Stair Systems
--------
-Enclosure Systems
-
-Enclosure Detail
-Summary
Conclusions
Bibliography
86
88
-Equipment and Mechanicals
-Floors, Decks and Paving
85
--
-89
.
.
90
.-
-91
93
.-
PREFACE
This thesis grows out
of years of experience with
houses and people, as a builder, as a staff member of a
community development corporation, and as a student of
architecture.
portunity to
see
dardization
rising
were
Prior
and
costs
to
studying
first
hand
reduction
constantly made
the
in
and dwindling
design,
I had
the
simplification,
quality
that
resources.
over where
to
op-
stan-
accompanies
Tough
expend
decisions
the
limited
resources available.
Unfortunately design professionals were most often
disinterested
and
ill
equipped
to
contribute
to
the
process. When the profession did turn its attention to
the
problem,
directions:
the
a withdrawal
championship of
or the
response
total
development
panacea to what
of
was
to
often
the
role of
user control
new
in
two
extreme
advocate
through
(the
self-help),
technologies as a universal
remained essentially complex organiza-
tional and decision-making problems.
As one of a number of exceptions to this rule, the
work
of
SAR
interesting
in
in
the
that
Netherlands
it
proved
neither
particularly
upheld
technical
solutions, nor abandoned the professional skills of the
designer.
The
theoretical
framework
set
forth
by
SAR
See Bibliography
has
household
support
infill
the
about
implications
construction
and
of
a
making,
idea
The
processes.
management
the
technical
decision
design,
the
not
a social,
have
does
it
distinction,
technical
primarily
is
of
that
and
and
two levels,
into
differentiation
the
While
(infill).
from
(support)
community
the
of
design
that
idea
dwellings can be split
production of
that
the
premise
central
its
as
suggests that different spheres of power, community and
household, should be associated with different parts of
the building. The support would lie within the realm of
the communities' collective decision making process,
while
the
household.
infill
would
support
The
bearing elements
and the
be
would
elements
tend
infill
changeable elements. But the
support/infill
responsibility
the
would
be
to
lighter,
of
fixed
the
load
variable and
precise determination of
differ
in
each
context
being determined through negotiation or convention.
While this theory is rooted in a specific European
housing context vastly different from what we find here
in the United States, its essential significance lies
in its potential for managing variety of form and complex patterns of control while increasing overall efficiencies of production. Indeed SAR has stimulated a diverse body of theory and practice that recognizes the
problem as
primarily organizational
efficiently make decisions about who
(how to
in nature
does what, when),
established a framework for working, and elaborated
existing
design tools
and
methods.
These
ideas
on
seemed
to offer me a way to bring my evolving skills as a designer to the problems I had left behind.
It
is
thus my
intent
in
this thesis
to
apply
an
assimilation of my design skills, the fundamental ideas
behind the work of SAR and my experience designing and
building under conditions of rigorous constraints
design for housing.
to a
See Bibliography
THE DESIGN
PART I:
THE SETTING
The
setting
the
consists
design
Communidad
Nuestra
group,
for
of
Development
a
client
Corporation
(NCDC), a program that grows from NCDC's ongoing effort
to build affordable housing, and a site proposed for
the Public Facilities Department
development by
of the
City of Boston.
NUESTRA COMUNIDAD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Nuestra
Development
Comunidad
Corporation
was
formed in 1981 as a result of the efforts of La Alianza
Hispana, The Hispanic Office of Planning and Evaluation
(HOPE),
nomic
leaders,
and community
development
in
the
Dudley
to
do housing
and
eco-
street/Upham's Corner
area. Nuestra has four Principal objectives:
o The Development of the community's awareness and
involvement in the development process.
,
o The
development
moderate income
and
rehabilitation
owner occupied housing.
of
low
and
M
o The
optimal
use
of
vacant
land
to
restore
the
Z
health and viability of the neighborhood.
o
The
development
of
industrial
d
..
-reisi111
and
Ica
"h
commercial
satve a.
ning
enterprises that create jobs
and revenues
for the com-
munity.
The members
ing
to a crisis
of Nuestra
of
profound
see themselves as respondproportions.
Fifty
percent
of the land in their neighborhood, over 150 acres, lies
vacant. Of that, nearly fifty percent is owned by the
City of Boston and the rest is held in private hands.
Affordable housing is
very
high.
The
through other
rapid
in
short
urban
supply. Unemployment
growth
that
has
swept
areas of Boston is
mitment
to
five years.
situation Nuestra
expected to move into
build
120
units
of
has expressed
housing
over
a com-
the
JACOBS.
W1
__(
wwi
Snoh
"It
wiolg
-hxri l. m ngIan
re
theen
me
Wir
SSit"
or thedell.oo...
th ti
and
Skelhes,. blueprints
fr developabud
guideline
n
nw ou
bhilnt
pe
tbt a 17thla.
pnI bllnhS
oo
ityl CenturyRoslo. Whby
ou
Washington,
downo.
i~. ltiO. are Line0 -e.l; pre
ome
agin i
toBy beool.
holes;
Joen
S P1.0.bylbee0110 Sloe
I, .1.o bo. ll looall PtotY Irodo.
GlobeSt gton
Dem
the
he mking
.
his
adttention has
L
10,u
been paid t' YH
a
n lesscit
;r:Qte
Ii1001
S
likely to deveinp
Cordr
and
fus
dramati-ed
M IDL
o uth End
o
.. Ct
b.
d
idmw
elec
Sweep
a. units
tc Pb
lain ral!
Re.
1=11
Np
Ing by, 4monet
______
.
,drarnaii
vtiopoool
A"'tot'lly
officliaIn- races. w bwned
a.ly when theOrangeLinecome0s100 I bry .111 do ooylbing
Cou
lanodshe
In I1he
downWasiigtonStreetrl.
i
dlrp1.o
Bny.
'If
tee Cho,
Windilgthrlogh omooof
l he Tho7 .ythatbersusedicted hothe
-swill
etchanging
neighorhoods
Mghbrh..d.
ne
lg W.hlngl
statewIJr
ihIhe-d Washington
Street has lgoohaoboo
:"mban renewil
fo
I
i
i
les
joltr
Iorh
di agree on irl
si
next
.
i
deveinnmegr
Stere
MiMn M y
and
l site-lii
trhe
tn
One.
e
Agiter
'*I(
tbe
t.
They
incg
lh-
uenian
aln
that
1010.
eti
dogdoowigh.
he "
t
n
nhee
happen10hd ne
or d
aid S.p"n Cy. I
-iii.ott"I
ioti '-:~ho
dntod. "All
meod-flpot
pI
u tju
'
o t lde
can
thng
.ru
yn,
mesi dan
h
loo
Iio f
tr
nn.0l
i n n n r
III
the voe
Ing di .. I Itu
h Ciy
M.hin
do blame~d
tt
wo C'nce -yigothatoo aosthe
moiby miet planot ett.u
iioi
tth penins
talt ws7d
thighu
percent
,i, fly,-orO iig Ih- CORRIDOR.
Pre.
hv~~~~~~
residents. Nuestra thus has as its primary goal the acquisition of land and development of affordable housing
before land speculation puts it out of reach. In rethis
i
,
ISmSnyderof1
stayl'(
after
datys."
M
is
the Roxbury area in the future, raising land prices and
housing costs, and ultimately displacing the present
sponse to
District bracing
for development
111MI,
'.0
iy
nh
ati
hPe for
A $,gme.tnt of the ree ted Ornge Line runisalong Washinton
Street past HolyCross Cathedral.
El
Coi
n
he
ly
early
By
Nuestra
1985,
a three-bed-
designed
had
room, two-story townhouse and commenced construction of
ten units
trict
of
housing
and
Dorchester.
manufacturer
were
losses.
easily
on scattered
capable
of
A modular
modified,
sites
Precut
Upham Corner dis-
components
allowed
quick
in the
for
lower
assembly,
panelized
system
encouraging
little
participation
standardized
to
owners
selected
were
between
minimize
$20,000 and
by
was
costs
and
lottery,
theft
to
be
customization
though in realand
staff
with
a
labor,
thought
individual
developed
$30,000.
skilled
by
minimizing
during design and adaptation over time;
ity
supplied
units
time.
annual
were
Future
incomes
Financing consisted
of a
$15,000 per unit grant from the City of Boston, interim
construction loans, and MFHA
owners. Nuestra
low interest
intended to control
loans to
A raising
of houses,
a liffing
Of spirits
the
speculation by es-
-I
=
tablishing a household
land,
association
that would
own
*0
-opatm -
b.ijd hi
the
hii~g
leasing individual lots to the homeowners.
isfied with the limitations of the scattered site town-
W"
significant
of
process
was
impact on the housing
production
difficult
The
had
eluded
to manage. The
them.
too
slow
to
make
a
shortage. Efficiency
Scattered
sites
were
number of units was too large
for the contractor they had, and
ncawunid& aPM
M"i6M
-..d.
too small to attract
-7
m
Nmhd
VI
=
0
hiam ..
to I
do_ _
dey bim
a--
approach.
-
*
With just two units completed, Nuestra was dissathouse
-
ta
JOmte
"A-
M.
"@
BO
_
_a
After deca
1m1hi~Ition.
ther
~~;I~build...
M
mail
way to go.
I. he
.m vus.bfi (ax
y
=
s
5
46osim "upof im 46 P__
in
-
im
b.iqh.titb
a
se.m~ihi
larger
staff
more
efficient
searched
for
operations.
tracts
of
land
In
response,
that
would
the
permit
"
we
larger developments of 30-40 units.
At around the same time the
lwelnow utenquea
urge the dy to comey more land to us so that
can build 40 or 50 houses a yea:"
-Nuestra
the City
of Boston
M
director Melvyn Colon
stated
a commitment
to
sachusetts
Housing
Finance
Apen- resourc
-d.,.
ii,. ,,,mhaqe
hs
distributing vacant city land to help meet the goals of
community development corporations like Nuestra. The
department met informally with community leaders and on
July 10, 1986 presented tentative guidelines for discussion of the development of the Dacia Block and other
sites in the Nuestra neighborhood. Public hearings were
pending,
and
a
formal
request
W
Public Facilities De*which
partment of
htfomthe Mas.
mr
for
proposals
was
DACIA BLOCK
ex-
pected in late 1987.
City of Boston - Raymond L. Flynn, Mayor
Public Facilities Department- LisaG.Chapnick, Director
oivd ft
DACIA BLOCK DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
Nuestra's
preliminary
proposal
for
the development of the Dacia Block Site
called
new
for
housing.
units
three
a
construction
were
to
to
had
1,500
square
version
include
units
of
single
been
30
majority
be
bedroom,
modified
they
The
of
housing
foot,
family rowhouses,
of
building.
basements,
of
the
townhouses
The
units
one
or
two
were
baths,
laundry and utility room. Occasional one
or
two
bedroom
four bedroom
throughout
the
units were to
the
units
apartments,
site.
were
development
trances,
parking,
was
be
larger
scattered
percent
for
low
households.
to
private
a
be
Seventy
to
moderate-income
and
include
yards,
reconstructed
and
Site
street
off
of
en-
street
public
play
ground, and a community garden, as shown
on the program sketch. The defensibility
of
the
open
space
prime significance.
was
considered
of
THE SITE AND CONTEXT
The
by
Block
designated
site,
Boston
the
and
Hill
Blue
in the Upham District of
Howard Avenues
densely
Originally
Dorchester.
North
Facilities
Public
between
lies
Department
Dacia
the
settled by the lower middle class in the
1880's,
the
deteriorated
stock
and
been
has
Approximately
arson.
the
housing
land
contain
is
only
now
a
has
decimated
by
percent
of
fifty
vacant.
handful
of
greatly
Whole
blocks
houses
with
large open areas in between. The houses
that
brick
do
remain
row
include
houses,
short
triple
blocks
deckers,
ornate single and two family homes.
of
and
J4I
CONT
DACIA BLOCK
75
e5
s0
70
IFxw--W
DEWEY ST
90
-A
oDC
FF ST
18
A RESPONSE
INTRODUCTION
is
"Design
evaluation
the
possible
the
of
playful
and
creation
Lynch 1981
something
of
forms
strict
including how it is made."
We are
accustomed to
a design with a
associating
and
completed form represented in drawings
models. But
as that quote by Kevin Lynch suggests it should be possible to express a design that deals with form, process
and institutions together in one whole. This design may
be written
as
as well
and
drawn
speculation
involves
about not just the possible form, but how it got there,
how it is managed and how it is changing. For this reason,
the
written portions
of the
thesis are as much a
part of this imaginary world as the form itself.
For
instance,
we
might
imagine
faced
that,
with
the challenge of building many new houses and planning
the
whole
of
development
city
blocks,
even
neighborhoods, Nuestra might seriously reevaluate their
previous
designed for
larger
and
design
infill
numbers
it
building
strategy.
When
houses
on scattered lots were combined
might
become
clear
that
an
in
effort
p. 290
would
be
required
realm
of
the
add
and
site,
a
the
develop
fully
more
to
and
richness
public
of
level
variety that one expects on a neighborhood scale. Their
old
houses,
ors,
focusing
leaving
provements to
the
same
exterior
quality
on
pleasant
interiim-
site
and
finishes
simple
individual homeowners was inadequate.
time, as more houses
At
developed at once,
were
not be matched with houses as early on in
owners could
the
resources
scarce
and
plain
building
consciously
of
approach
planning
participation
and
com-
more
became
involvement
owner
at
efforts
and
stages,
design
and
plex. Nuestra might come to feel that more independence
was needed
what
happen
might
commitment
to
the
within
short,
In
units.
community
the
both
site and
on the
between what was happening
individual,
the
and
their
once unevenly weighted towards the individual, shifted,
becoming more complex and rich with conflict.
include
not
quality
the
just
(and
expects
capacity
viability
for
in
from good
the
this
rapidly
nothing new in this;
of
"Good"
for
change,
changing
but
also a rich
for
continuing
context.
these are well accepted
environments
and
quality
of
neighborhoods
old
developments),
future,
richness
and
in healthy
environment that one sees
be seen to
community might
This commitment to the
design.
There
is
standards
Indeed,
Lynch 1981
oppor-
interpretations,
rich
enable
that
qualities
have
technologies
building
American
conventional
tunities for inhabitation and adaptability for changing
But this variety has become ever more costly.
needs.
The
parties choosing different
complexity of different
things
might
Rising
costs
quirement of
things
conflict
the
that
imagine
processes
and
able to tell
with
the
to
keep
costs
with
Thus
simple.
directly
individual:
Nuestra,
resources
standardize
products,
would
re-
primary
keep
down,
to
can
we
strained,
pressure
feeling
expensive.
and
inefficient
too
prove
simplify
want
to
be
contractor that every house was the
their
same, that he was building ten identical buildings.
New technologies, or cutting labor costs through
the core issues. The
self-help did not seem to address
problem was more general;
living
places under
tight
it was
one of making lively,
budgets:
to bring form and process together
capacity
for
change
and
how
to
design,
how
so that variety and
personaliztion
were
made
efficient, not just in the process (participation), but
encouraged
itself
form
the
so that
form,
the
in
interaction
and
involvement
and
opportunities
for
personalization, so that the form became the process, a
living thing that people can act with and make their
own.
NEN 2883
follows
that
response
The
grows
from
efforts
to
achieve such an environment. It is based on the premise
that variety and choice can be managed efficiently, enabling
to
participants
tradeoffs between conflicting
organizes
into
systems
and
priorities
set
resolve
demands. Such a response
distinct
levels
clearly
delin-
eating which things vary and which remain fixed. Such a
response
the
clarifies
boundaries
of
who
does
what;
that is, which decisions are made by which participants
(Nuestra
various
enabling
Staff,
stages
the
in
household,
the
project's
the
owner...)
at
And finally,
by
land
life.
independent yet coordinated action in design,
construction and use,
such a response supports a vari-
ety of patterns of control and form.
THE APPEARANCE OF THE SITE
As one moves through the Dacia block neighborhood,
clumps
of
isolated
overgrown
cluster
lots
of
give
tree
occasional shop.
two
family
buildings
way
to
lined
The
homes
a
empty
and
and
cared
for
new
of
pattern
large
large
dense
streets,
old
on
among
lots,
houses
and
an
single
and
deckers
and
ornate
triple
short blocks of row houses is gone, but the new pattern
maintains
a
sense
similar
of
rhythm
and
and
depth
commitment to the street. Individual rowhouses directly
face
reflecting
Small
they
the
individual
parking areas,
break
serve
homes set
stoops
and
character
of
their
street,
the
in
the
the
edge.
yards
residents.
the
houses
two
family
proximity to
close
street
front
Larger
back from the parking area offer a different
sense of place and suggest the depth of the block. From
the
road
one
can
peer
through
to
see
the
sheds
and
fences and life at the backs of these houses.
street a parking area turns into
Farther down the
the
block,
beyond.
through
with
Private
the
houses
more
paths
interior
of
fronting
lead
from
the
block,
the
a
small
alley,
linking
back
alley
moving
yards
with each other and the alley in front. Fences or walls
(LJLJ
0
20
4
(H
IC v-i
C
o
40
FF T
the
clearly define
the
edge
street
of
boundaries
quite
was
private
in
orderly,
While
yards.
rear
the
many
different things can be seen happening. There are decks
with
patio
to
doors
occasionally
an
extension
entire
of
an assortment
the ground,
to
with stairs
of
decks
floor
second
rooms,
living
the
sheds
and
Some
house.
yards are empty, in some there are gardens, and in some
collections of junk.
alley, on
Across the
that
extends
to
street.
opposite
the
side of a line of
up into an area of common land
block opens
the
trees,
the other
the
Near
alley,
a
small
childrens' play area and nearby a shaded seating
court
the
Across
favorite
of
cover
and
some
surveillance.
trees
playground,
and
an
the
street
paths
is
on their children.
breaks
into
area for
older
has
been
thinned
a
rock
children.
paths
and
lawn below, enhancing supervision
Farther
over
expanse
sporting a few small
off
play
trees
link the area to the
an eye
hill
the
lawn
outcropping, a
dense
private
the
to chat and keep
for adults
The
to
accessible
easily
towards
a
rise,
of
lawn
the
we
and
a
street,
find
fenced
a
beyond
larger
off
area
vegetable gardens. A parking area
offers neighborhood
to change a tire or tune up the car.
access and a place
At
one
corner,
a
building
larger
houses
a
small
variety store, and through what appears to be an active
daycare
play
center
can
one
dry
to
hanging
Clothes
area.
a rear
into
see
on
courtyard
a
and
floor
second
porch and a table and chairs on the third hint at the
life in the apartments above. The brick party walls of
provide an organizing framework
the adjacent rowhouses
their
articulated.
Siding
are
colors
others have
One
project.
that
and
materials
have second floor porches;
kitchens
facades
individual
within which
more
Some
vary.
living rooms or
entrance
a separate
shows
richly
for a ground floor tenant.
Within the houses the type, number and orientation
vary.
of rooms and uses
have
to
access
allows ground
skylights and a roof
informal,
others
living areas
the
are
basement.
terrace. Some
and
closed
the rear,
are in
Some households
adding
space,
attic
the
occupy
to
expanded
In some the slope of the land
open and
plans are
formal.
In
some
the
in others we find these
activities at the front. In each case these differences
reflect
responses
orientation of
to
the
how and where daily
this
in
conditions
unit,
the
and individual
activities should
turn contributes
the street.
of
to
site,
notions
of
about
take place.
the changing
the
And
character of
049
14
3
28
1J
4
8
16
32
29
FOUR HOUSEHOLDS
16
HOUSEHOLD A
o Owner occupied
single unit
o Three bedroom
o Mbr front with porch
o Living room front
o Enlarged bath
We
to
that
this
the
can
save
family
attic
for
left
future
but
added
a
the
kitchen,
the
rear,
paving
money
has
expansion,
have
imagine
and
and
they
deck
a shed
off
in
expanded
plantings
at the entrance.
HOUSEHOLD B
o Owner occupied
o Four bedroom
o Living rear
o Separate dining room
o Ground floor bath
o Attic retreat
o Roof deck
With three
ren
this
family
they
needed
space
they
The
living
the
rear
advantage
and
bath
attic
and
for
get.
is
in
take
the
yard
to
play
felt
to
be
for
the
finaly,
the
and
the
could
downstairs
retreat more
up
the
of
important
kids,
all
to
A
was
felt
area
access
areas.
child-
roof
top
than make
small
size
of the master bedroom.
HOUSEHOLD C
o Owner occupied with
in-law appartment
o One bedroom and two
bedroom
o Ground appartment
claims front yard
territory
o Upper appartment has
bedroom porch and
rear deck with
stairs to the yard
The owner,
a sin-
gle
mother
has
chosen
to
rent
the
first
floor
to
both
They
parents.
enjoy
sepa-
entrances,
rate
share
The
her
private
backyard.
the
attic
yet
serves
suite
for
pre-teen daughter.
as
a
her
HOUSEHOLD D
o Owner occupied
single unit.
o Three bedrooms
o Ground floor bath
o Formal living room,
dining room, study
o Attic family room
The
couple
who
house
both
this
own
work,
sometimes
frequently
and
home
for
as
their
attic
The
entertain.
serves
at
a play
area
three child-
ren. More expensive by
its
orien-
nature
of
tation,
the couple has
contributed
character
to
its
through
fine
and
de-
wooden
trim
tails,
and
elaborate
front yard plantings.
PART II:
THE SITE EXAMINED
GOALS AND MEANS: A CLARIFICATION OF TERMS
The environment described above embodies many valin various stages of realization, about what makes
a quality living community. For the purposes of this
thesis I have chosen a few values or performance guideues,
lines to use as a measure in the development and evolution of the design. Before returning to examine the design in detail I think it useful
to reflect on a few of
these.
used here
Variety, is
we
that
things
the
colors,
textures,
see
take
and
a
characteristics. There
these
sense
to
are many
differences:
the
describe
levels
one
other
of
multitude
Within
shapes,
different
on
that
form,
over
which
site
the
we
land
changes, the sun shines differently on different parts
through the days and seasons, types of buildings vary,
the
arrangement
rooms
within
of
the
dwellings within
dwellings
vary,
street edge is rough with porches
the
the
buildings
and
of
the
texture
or recessed entries,
or shapes are similar but materials change, or fleeting
interventions, a bed of flowers, a chair by the door
express
the
individual
inhabitation
of
the
place.
We
of
kind
the
with
form
of
richness
this
associate
balance or fit that we see in many older neighborhoods
and that we find lacking in many new developments. But
in the
let variety
become self conscious, to
it
itself. And
Thus
responsible.
and
differs
from
demand, assuring
that
is
meaningful
and
the
need
state that
this
create
we
recognize
not to explicitly
variety,
with
that we
we
that
variety
that,
become an end in
reconcile variety
necessary to
is
the degree of efficiency
the
it is very easy to
creation of new environments
to
but
organize
manage
to
like
so
design
so
is
the
that variety is efficiently achievable as desired.
If we use Variety to describe the form, it is also
distinguish the
useful to
use
the
ways that variety appears.
to
manipulation
word
I
interventions
describe
made during the design stages, major moves that set the
framework for later actions. Such later interventions
might
furniture,
term
fences
personalization.
adaptation to
occur
after
describe
can
that
etc.,
major
inhabitation
be
finally
And
and
plantings,
paint,
changes,
minor
involve
changes
described
I
use
the
to
reflect
a
by
the
the
term
form that
response
changing needs and desires on the part of the user.
to
The issue of Control is equally rich and confused
with
multiple
meanings.
Like
between
use
it
takes
on
a
we associate a condition of
qualitative aspect in that
congruence
variety,
and control
with
good
environ-
ments. We like to control our own environment, make decisions
about
things
us.
Places
to refer to those who make decisions
functional sense,
things, who control specific elements
elements
in
It
environment.
the
is
decision process
mately make
more
from control
control
to
those who
mean
ulti-
nothing
whereas a separa-
to context,
may have profound
here
contribute to
Participation may
decisions.
than a sensitivity
tion of
and
and groups
useful
distinguish participation and those who
the
are
specifically use the term in its
dangerous. But I will
about
that
and undefined are often unused and
territorially vague
of
affect
that
on
effects
the
form
and organization of the development.
The following thoughts concern ways
better
encourage
tralized
control
ments. The
to
support
crucial
the
that we
idea that
a
here.
variety
This
excess capacity,
qualities
variety
associate with
forms and
of
of
uses
includes
spaces
and
that we might
and
good
decen-
environ-
have a capacity
interpretations
is
provision
of
not only
the
the benefits of which must
be weighed
increased. costs,
against
ar-
thoughtful
the
form a
they
such that
spaces
materials and
ranging of
also
but
context for future action. A site has a certain capacity
for
buildings,
the
same
building,
unit
of
a number
furniture,
different
support
rooms
occupy
may
types
entrance may or may not encourage personal defi-
or an
nition.
This
is
separation of
the
is most
however,
provided,
of parts,
an assembly
useful as
whole.
capacity
ever
What
than a unibody
rather
and understanding
parts
of levels is absolutely necessary to encourage indepenIf the
dent actions by different parties through time.
is
window opening
dows,
thought
of
the win-
from
separately
it may be sized so as to support either a series
of double hung windows or a bay or even a pair of patio
doors. We can even say that by distinguishing the opening from the window and by
properly sizing the opening
we can both control variety (the
ways the
same, only the windows and panels change) and
arrangement
open
the
trol
(one
ings
early
up
party might
the windows
in
the
and so
to
different
decide where
design,
later on).
dardizing floor
options,
framed opening is al-
The
while
patterns
to
place
someone
same can be
of con-
the
else
open-
selects
said for
stan-
openings to support a variety of stair
on
throughout
the
design.
Finally,
we
must remind ourselves that we must do all this with efficiency, that we must balance
a gain
in
some
perfor-
mance with a loss in another. The cost may outweigh the
benefits,
and
ultimately
we
have
ways
of
limited
resources to
breaking
things down,
expend.
PARTS AND LEVELS
There are
of
describing
parts,
and
numerous
wholes
as
depending on one's
into what parts
and building
of the
aggregations
point of
do we
of
different
view. On what basis
disentangle the
many
actors
part of life history
systems that are all
environment we have described.
My interest has
been in understanding how we make decisions and control
variety. I therefore view the parts
process
of
decision
different people
at different
these
people,
making.
to
are
stages in
when
may
The
in relation to the
problem
decide about
life of
the
they
decide,
and
I have gathered
act
into
groups,
household
at
fessionals in
phases
of
each
end
the middle.
activity into
and
the
the
Site, who
the
they decide about?
broad
that
if
different things
can
three
is
which
things
the people
community
developers
are
and
and
who
the
pro-
I have collected the various
pairs of
related
yet distinct
mation.
Perhaps
regation of
use and
design and building;
activity/times:
parts.
into a kit of
the form
the
is
controversial
most
transfordisagg-
These parts
have been selected for their relevance to the decision-
elements
being
They
process.
making
that
we
controlled
decide
and
about
act
by
manipulated
and
configurations
represent
on,
capable
different
of
of
parties
at different times. Of course these distinctions do not
represent fixed boundaries,
are
pos-sible.
for
exploring
information
elements
Here
we
and
at the
the
at
will
variations
But rather
and
level
site
at
the
deployment
relations and dependencies
is
level
the
that
the
most
is
the
concern
us.
it
themselves,
site,
point
While
design.
presented,
elements
in
a starting
offer
they
manipulating
building
look
other interpretations
many
and
with other elements.
their
outline
WHO ACTS
Community
City of Boston
Public facilities department
Building department
Nuestra members
Neighborhood
Household association
Developers
Nuestra staff
Design professionals
Contractors
Households
Individual homeowners and tenants
WHEN THEY ACT
Lifestages in the development and evolution of the
site.
Designing
For our purpose we will concentrate on the process of
deciding about things, about choosing among the various possibilities that the design offers us.
Building:
This phase entails the assembly of things, the organizational and technical details of building the form.
Use:
The inhabitation of the form, including the character
and articulation that is brought to the form through
the myriad interventions that are a part of daily life.
Transformation:
A phase of adaptation of the form in response to evolving demands placed on it through use.
THINGS THEY ACT ON:
A KIT OF PARTS
BUILDING LEVEL
SITE LEVEL
Site Elements
Streets
Parking
Sidewalks
Paths
Front yards
Rear yards
Common land
Park
Playground
Garden
Buildings
Dwelling Units
Rooms
SPATIAL SYSTEMS
Bedrooms
Bathrooms
Kitchens
Living rooms
Dining rooms
Storage
MATERIAL SYSTEMS
Foundation systems
Party wall Systems
Bearing Members
Floor systems
Exterior wall systems
Roof Systems
Stair systems
Partition systems
Enclosure systems
Windows
Doors
Panels
Mechanical systems
DWV
Water supply
Heating
Piping
Baseboard
Electric
Gas
Equipment,
Finishes
Decks,Sheds,Fencing
THINGS THEY ACT ON:
A KIT OF PARTS
-i
/L
I.
-1
SITE LEVEL
Site Elements
1. Streets
2. Parking
3. Sidewalks
Paths
Front yards
Rear yards
Common land
Park
Playground
Garden
4
1~~~~~
1
I
:
5
............
. E.Z...
*
111
[0000U
B
ooo '
D%0
0
2
6
C
7
THINGS THEY ACT ON:
A KIT OF PARTS
4:A.
A:
SITE LEVEL
Buildings
o Corner multi-use
o Row house
o Free-standing house
~~
C
Dwelling Units
o Single family
o Two family
o multi-family
El
D
-
uo
cjg ~ -l-- 0
Cc:
... .. ... . .. ... ... . . . . . . .. . . . .
Rooms
.
-
. . -. . .
THINGS THEY ACT ON:
A KIT OF PARTS
BUILDING LEVEL
BEDROOMS
1-2
Fixed:
o Adjacent to exterior
zone
Variants:
o Size: single or
double occupancy
o Configurations of
1-4 bdrms
o Position at front,
rear or side
4--
BATHROOMS
20
4
Fixed:
o Plumbing wall and
toilet waste outlet
Variants:
o Alternate location
o Configurations of:
Standard
Reduced
Enlarged
Shifted orientation
I
KITCHENS
c-
Fixed:
o Unit: selected
counter lengths
Variants:
o Assemblies of units
o Position of assembly
Front
Middle
Rear
6
6
LIVING ROOMS
Fixed:
o Adjacent to exterior
zone
Variants:
o Position of:
Front
Side
Rear
DINING ROOMS
STORAGE
,-
6
--
THINGS THEY ACT ON:
A KIT OF PARTS
BUILDING LEVEL
MATERIAL SYSTEMS
FOUNDATION SYSTEMS
PARTY WALL SYSTEMS
BEARING MEMBERS
w
t
STAIR SYSTEMS
FLOOR SYSTEMS
Varying stair
assemblies
o Joist directions
allow easy cantilever and adjustment
of stair opening.
o Standard interior,
varying edge con
dition.
------------
-
---------
EXTERIOR WALL SYSYTEMS
o Wood frame with
Standardized oversized openings to
support a variety of
window and door
configurations
ROOF SYSTEMS
o Standardized treatment with variation
at the front edge
and side.
-
-
ENCLOSURE SYSTEMS
WINDOWS
DOORS
PANELS
o A kit of window,
door and panel parts
capable of many assembly configurations
o Dimensionally coordinated to wall
openings.
I I
Ell
_E1
-L
-
-
-
- .
- ..
El
7~1~1~
H
lm
K LIII
t
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS
DWV
WATER SUPPLY
HEATING
PIPING
BASEBOARD
ELECTRIC
A standardization of systems
on certain levels with
capacity to support variation
on other levels.
Fixed:
o Chase location for all
services.
o Main Stack and toilet
branches.
o Water supply stubs to each
floor.
o Hydronic piping stubs in
strategic locations.
o Electric junction boxes on
each floor.
Variants:
o Vent and waste connection
from fixture positions to
main stack.
o Water supply connections
from fixtures to supply
stubs.
o Hydronic baseboard or
connecting piping between
supply and return stubs.
o Electric fixtures and
wiring.
PART III:
FORM AND PROCESS EXPLORED
INTRODUCTION
the
at
looked
Having
terms
in
design
of
its
physical parts, actors and time periods, let us proceed
in exploring different models of form and process,
based on varying patterns of control during the life of
the project. For it is only when we bring these three
explore
we
section
first
fully come
and potential of the design. In
to realize the meaning
the
that we may
together
aspects of the design
how
separation
this
of
parts and careful testing of capacity enhances variety
and
one-party
traditional
under
efficiency
control
patterns. We suggest that while Nuestra desires to
maintain ultimate control over final decisions, they
wish to both respond to the demands of other parties in
a participatory
the
during
that
phase,
building
individual
encourages
through
time.
Then
explore
how
the
coordinated
process,
design
will
we
design
decision-making
over
different
that
Nuestra
things.
chooses
to
and
some
delegate
an
environment
and
expression
create
identity
extend
this
enables
among
Specifically
distinctly
control
discussion
independent
to
yet
different
parties
will
suggest
we
separate
elements
57
and powers into two levels, the community / support and
the household / infill. This model will be developed at
length,
with
support
and
a
transformation
the
of
design
into
a
ONE PARTY CONTROL
infill
and
proposal
a
study
of
the
W
E-
o
technical
implications
of
support and
specific
these
SPATIAL
infill organizations.
SYSTEMS
3ite
Buildines
Dwelling
Units
Rooms
MATERIAL SYSTEMS
Structural systems
FORM AND PROCESS UNDER ONE PARTY CONTROL
___
Facade systems
Stair systems
Partition systems
Mechanical
PARTICIPATION AND DESIGN
s
stems
Equipment,
Finishes
Decks,Sheds,Fencing
,
It is the nature of community based social housing
that
parties
many
necessarily
a
compete
complex
for
in
influence
decision-making
what
is
agreement
and
ONE
PARTY
CONTROL
-
WITH PARTICIPATION
process. The
wishes to
of
the
section that follows assumes
be as responsive
parties
various
that Nuestra
as possible to
involved,
the demands
permitting
without
inefficiencies and delays to threaten the affordability
of the housing. We will explore how the design responds
to
potential
situations
delay
decisions,
others
to
vary
design phase.
and
fix
where
some
Nuestra
elements
would
while
structure participation
like
to
allowing
during
the
SPATIAL SYSTEMS
S9ite
Buildings
Dwelling Units
Rooms
MATERIAL SYSTEMS
Structural systems
Facade systems
systems
Partition systems
Mechanical systems
_.....
Stair
Equipment,
Finishes
DecksSheds,Fencing
.........
SITES, BUILDINGS AND UNITS
often
city
the
and
residents
neighborhood
community,
the
with
discussions
Preliminary
revolve
around such major issues as building densities, the use
and character of open spaces, and the number and types
of units that will be provided. Offering a set of parts
that are easily manipulable prevents indecision at
levels
these
buildings,
spaces
open
ways,
different
be negotiated without
grouped
together
in
may
replace
a cluster
of
fixing
issues
These
even change.
may
or sites
other
be
may
types
Building
levels.
at
work
design
restricting
from
may
number of and
the actual
type of units.
ROOMS AND USES
Offering
number
of
different
uses
types we
can expect,
about
interviewing
Detail
with
the
same
the
way.
and
and
design
work,
mix
for
a
enabling
site
of
and
unit
allocations and
uses
even
prospective
While
general
actual household
rooms
capacity
a
arrangements
establish
decisions
independently.
in
works
building
decisions
room
different
with
type
building
a
can
cost
homeowners
be
made
estimating,
can
all
proceed even as negotiations with other groups hold up
final site decisions. Or conversely, early decisions on
the site and building level do not restrict these
lower level decisions.
BUILDING ELEMENTS
Working
efficiency
and
helps
a
with
of
structure
to
parts
with
decision making.
participants,
speed
the
relationships
clear
process
and
brings
process,
design
the
participatory
defined
Well
elements
building
manipulability
and
to
kit
educate
reduce conflicts.
The form itself makes this possible. Wall openings with
a capacity for different windows enable participation.
Variety and individual expression are byproducts of
such
a
process,
not
self
conscious
goals
in
themselves. Developing a physical kit of parts in model
form, that can be readily assembled and rearranged over
over
by
different
effective
in
structuring
and
making process.
parties
the
would
be
participatory
simple
and
decision-
BUILDING
Now let
to
us
pursue
imagine
alternative
trol
during
They
have
ploying
that Nuestra
the
supporting
of
construction
stated
local
patterns
an
in
labor
self-help
em-
and
where
ropriate, but they also require
ficiencies that
con-
process.
interest
unskilled
owner
wishes
in
app-
the ef-
large construction
org-
anizations or the use of lower cost manufactured
components
can
bring
to
the
job. How might the design help reconcile
these conflicting goals? Simply, the explicit disagregation of the design into
parts,
with
relationships
clear
and
tested capacity allows different parties
to
independently
act
with
less
inter-
ference and conflict. Nuestra could hire
a
major
firm
construction
for
large
scale repetitive tasks, organize its own
crews
of
local
labor
to
complete
lower
skilled tasks and subcontract components
to
prefabricators
with
less
confusion
over who is responsible for what.
MANUFACTURED & PREFABRICATED COMPONENTS
can
We
purchase
could
Nuestra
conditions
right
the
under
that
imagine
manufactured or prefabricated components
that
could
to
attached
be
shipped
the
site
built
units
that
manufacture
windows
skin
doors.
and
bathbe
Companies
parties.
fitted
cut and
could be
around
stressed
Many
shell.
conceivably
could
purchased by outside
and
whole
make whole
prefabricators
housing
room
then
panels
that
into openings
Manufactured
stair components are common market place
items
could
and
be
bought
and
prefabricated into stair units.
o Combines
efficiencies of mass produc-
tion of repetitive units with uniqueness
of site solutions.
o
Allows
detailed
repetitive
primary
contractor
fitting,
to
adjusting
fiddling with many
reduce
and
different
systems.
- Requires a reordering of subcontractor
relationships.
-Requires detailing of connection joints
USE AND TRANSFORMATION
The
configuration
continues
and
to
support
control
environment
over
of
enabled,
form
design
truction are complete.
is
design
individual
the
after
the
of
and
Such
structured
action
cons-
interaction
and
efficient through the same
the
made
more
capacity and
isolation of systems that enhanced efficient
the
manipulation
design
will
and
briefly
of
elements
construction
summarize
phases.
two
This
in
significant
low-income
input
during
phases
is
for
post
to
changing
for
opportunity
especially
of
response
the
housing
where
design
and
often
limited,
occupancy
adapneeds.
interaction
in
is
provision
individual
construction
and
resources
personalization
adjustment are scarce.
We
situations,
personalization at the front and
tation
during
and
PERSONALIZATION AT THE FRONT
"A house can only be considered a 'home'
to
the
give it
extent
that
the
occupiers
can
their own meaning...'homes' de-
velop in spite of rather than because of
the house design."(Marcus, 1986, 63)
The design contributes to expressions of
individual identity through:
o Territorial definition:
o Individual front yards.
o Recessed entry area.
o Framework to initiate fences or
walls.
o Management agreements that encourage definition.
o Separation of parts:
o Component windows doors and panels
facilitate changes.
o Deck over entry convertible to
living area.
o Entry paving distinguished for individual definition.
ADAPTATION IN RESPONSE TO CHANGING NEEDS
A dwelling's capacity to respond to
changing
its
occupants
promotes
long
term
in
the
income,
support
size
and
We can
in their
special
physical
alterations
change.
or
in
their
space
need for
activities
Many of these changes
no
expect changes
families,
of
via-
that is
bility, especially in a context
rapidly changing.
of
aspirations
and
needs
the
and
to
uses.
require little or
Some
require
reconfiguration
of
minor
ele-
ments, others stimulate major additions.
Again, provision of excess
separation
of
parts
capacity and
contributes
to
an
efficient transformation process.
o Tested plan capacity and placement of
services support additional baths, expansion to the attic, or subdivision
of rooms.
o Changing the orientation of stairs,
exchanging a window/panel for a door,
and adding entry partitions, offers a
first floor office or inlaw apartment.
o A foundation framework in the rear
yard and a structural roof deck
support external expansions in the
form of decks, sheds and horizontal
and vertical additions.
A SUPPORT AND INFILL PROPOSAL
INTRODUCTION
As
the
commitment
previous
to
discussion
enhance
fundamental to
occupant
makes
choice
and
the organization of the
design offers
a far
greater
clear,
a
control
is
design. Yet the
potential to
realize
this
goal than in merely enhancing participation or enabling
post
occupancy
Nuestra
personalization.
chooses
to
Let
explicitly
us
imagine
integrate
that
occupant
involvement into the design and building phases of the
project.
They
do
this
by
clearly
distinguish
two
spheres of control throughout the scope of the project,
for
they
recognize
by
best made
are
as
best
a
that
while
representatives
left
to
individual
representative
of
of
certain
the
community,
households.
community,
the
decisions
are
others
Specifically,
Nuestra
might
decide to define a support, over which they would exert
control
during
The
homeowners.
associated
controlled
The
with
by
be
under
surface
rights
specific
individual
long
lots
and
the
of
its
to
a
future
managed
by
the
lease
to
the
term
infill
would
be
in
an
households
After
transferred
and
owned
support,
would
association,
be
consisting
association,
household
construction.
would
ownership
construction,
households.
and
design
components
owned
and
arrangement
similar to that of the typical condominium. Each housethe association
to
fee
a monthly
both
pay
would
hold
type that they lease, and a mort-
based on the support
gage to a lender to cover the cost of all infill compo-
lease
reducing
port,
to
payments
cost of
the sup-
a minimum.
Further-
the
subsidize
to
be used
funds may
Government
control.
and
ownership
their
under
nents
more, since the support is non transferable, the benefits of the subsidies would be passed on to future owners. The sale price of houses would be rstricted to include the cost of infill improvements plus a reasonable
rate of return on the investment. Together, these feathat
insure
help
would
tures
remains
housing
the
affordable in the future.
two
infill
parts,
have
variants.
which
Design
controlled
by
of
This
the
Nuestra,
the
responsibility
kit
the
include
could
select
would
be
support
though
into
to
capacity for a number
would
households
split
similarly
be
support and test its
from
packages.
would
would
Nuestra
levels.
design the
of
process
design
The
as
we
of
infill
exclusively
have
seen
the
design easily enables participation and contribution to
design decisions by outside parties. Once
the building
support is designed, decisions about site organization,
occupancies,
independently.
uses
Thus
and
at
infill
any
designs
point
during
can
be
this
made
period
households in choosing
Nuestra could assist individual
deciding
infill
packages.
Decisions
options
infill
the
about
designing
and
patterns
occupancy
on
houses,
Infill packages
available would be made clearer through the use of kits
of parts in models and drawings. The costs of various
quickly
be
could
packages
to
assembled
for
check
4J
W
0
compatibility with family budgets.
the
support may
and
even
may
complete
be
of
selection
precede
well
the households,
infill
before
as
the
of
Construction
infill.
the
from
completion,
to
support
the
of
construction
distinguished
the option to control
likewise have
Nuestra would
designs
are
for
the
completed.
may
arrangements
different
Many
be
made
actual construction of the infill packages. Nuestra may
choose to have the support contractor continue through
the
infill
infill
they
phase,
contractor
may
the
for
contract
entire
with
project,
a
separate
family
the
may look for its own infill contractors, or individuals
may opt to do portions or all of the work themselves.
present
In the section that follows we will first
a
support
design
for
examine the support and
of
the
and
type,
organizational
and
support proposal.
the
rowhouse
infill plans
then
explore
technical
building
type,
for one variation
some
significant
implications
of
the
Support
A ROWHOUSE SUPPORT
o0
4
16
69
A ROWHOUSE SUPPORT DESIGN
The
row house
support
shown on
the previous
page
represents an assembly of three basic support variants
within the rowhouse type, and provides the context for
the
particular
support
variant
we
will
examine
in
detail on the following pages. These drawings represent
TECHNICAL SYSTEMS
Foundation systems
Party wall Systems
has the capacity to hold a number of
which
a support
in
alternatives
and
location
the
of
function
spaces,
Bearing Members
Exterior wall systems
Roof Systems
and
in
If
elements.
and
form
the
at
first
of
placement
at
looked
we
many
physical
design
the
as
a
Floor systems
Partition systems
Enclosure systems
unibody whole, then disentangled it into parts in many
levels,
support
we
have
reassembled
now
community and household. While
and
plans
infill
it
will
into
two
two patterns of
based on
and infill,
it
levels,
control,
reviewing these support
become
clear
that
this
Windows
Doors
Panels
Mechanical systems
DWV
Water supply
Heating
Piping
support/infill distinction is primarily organizational,
not
technical in nature,
in that we will
find many of
Baseboard
Electric
Gas
the
same
building
systems
within
both
support
and
Stair systems
Equipment,
infill.
Finishes
Decks,Sheds,Fencing
SUPPORT VARIANT I.A
The support is made up of systems and portions of
systems
that
alone
are
incomplete
but
when
combined
with the infill systems result in a finished house.
defined
the
support
includes
complete
As
foundations,
SHELL
INFILL
party walls, exterior facade walls and roofs. The party
walls
contain
movement
an
through
opening
on
each
during
support
the
floor
its
construction,
and offer potential horizontal connections
The
exterior
window, door
left
without
walls
facade
openings,
and panel
The
siding.
framed
are
the only window element
roof
and are
includes
facilitate
to
during use.
oversize
with
sheathed
one
but
skylight,
in the support. The floors are
framed with standard stair openings,
sheathed,
layered
with gypcrete, and ready for floor finishes. A plumbing
partition
comprises
the
Party walls and ceilings
plaster, and primer. /
'
only
interior
wall
framing.
are finished with blue board,
Mechanical
sys-
11
tems are split between
support
and
infill.
Support
DWV
includes
the
main
plete
stack
with
com-
tees
for
drains and vents and a
main branch for a wall
outlet
toilet.
Sepa-
rate
hot
supply
piping run from
the
to
and
basement
each
run
to
positions,
zoned
each
calculated
are
boxes
walls
in
are
for
run
wall.
independently
infill.
floor.
circuits
partition
port
baseboard
each
floor
junction
Piping
separately
on
Separate
service
floor.
for hydronic
is
cold
to
the
Supwir-ed
from
the
tt
U
U
INFILL VARIANT I.1
The assembly of systems
infill
is
package
components drawn
the
determined
the
by
Nuestra
and
finish
on
siding
the shell piping. Additional
fixtures,
as
in
the
and
necessary
chase
at
additional
from
the
and
list
of
households with
This
includes
and panels, windows,
exterior
the
Hydronic baseboards and connecting
shutoffs
plan
staff.
partition framing on the interior
doors
a
the individual
up by
of
assistance
that together make up the
facade.
piping are joined to
supply lines are run from
each
waste
floor
to
and vent
fixture
the
plumbing
lines
are run
location
to
the
tee in the main stack.
is
wiring
Infill
junc-
from the support
within
boxes
tion
any
and
partitions,
other connections
ween
shell
and
tures
are
and
bet-
infill
Wall
applied.
are
finishes
kitchen
and
made.
is
wiring
run
bath
fix-
equipment
Stairs
installed.
and floor finishes are
completed.
decks,
cing,
tings
job.
Exterior
patios,
fen-
and
plan-
complete
the
sheds
IMPLICATIONS OF SUPPORT AND INFILL DECISIONS
DEFINING THE SUPPORT
We
may
the
define
support
as
a configuration
of
elements that is capable of holding a number of different
it
infill arrangements
to
common
is
standard
around
a
packages. We
and
number
level
lower
say that
schemes
different
of
specific
which
may
(the
elements
vary), that it is usually longer lasting, responds more
immediately to conditions of the site and context, and
relationships
as
distinguished
contractual
and
control
common
under
falls
from
the, infill.
In
reaching a balance between what is support and what is
infill,
we
to
attempt
its
restricting
the
maximize
capacity
for
support
without
within
variation
the
infill; Or conversely we try to maximize the support's
capacity
support
short
we
for
to that of
are
variety, of
so as
infill
variants,
a meaningless
moving
through
without
reducing
"universal"
a process
fixing elements on one
of
space.
the
In
controlling
level, the support,
to permit reasonable variation and choice on the
second level, infill.
SUPPORT TYPES: A FIRST STEP
In
reviewing
thing we
the
notice is
site,
the
that what
first
we recog-
nize as building types in the design defines a highest
affects
sions.
many
level
of
Thus,
the
of variation that
lower
recognizing
level
three
deci-
support
types will constitute our first move towards defining
a support. The first may
be said to be the two family free standing building
in which we
expect to
find
a side by side division of territories.
The
second
type
is
the rowhouse,
which
permits a vertical division of territories,
remains primarily single
yet
fam-
ily in orientation. Finally, the corner
type offers both a vertical and horizontal
division
the
most
From
of
varied
these
three
territories,
uses
types
and
we
enabling
occupancies.
have
chosen
the rowhouse type for our case study.
THE MINIMUM SUPPORT
In
reviewing
the
material
identified as components
we
find
and
that
However,
rowhouse
find
we
a
party
remain
members
the
throughout
of the design,
foundations,
bearing
systems
walls
constant
support
variation
type.
floor
in
projection at the front of internal rowhouses
and
houses.
It
common
at
the
Those
are identical
support
the
contractor
minimum
the
in dimension and
levels.
level
these
identify
systems of elements
and offer exactly
lower
end
some
the variation in
as
projections
support:
the
to
is useful
forms preceding
floor
of
side
that
position
the same capacity for
It
that
that
is
at
Nuestra
the minimum
can
everything
same, standardized, uniform.
assure
is
the
VARIATION WITHIN THE SUPPORT
When we examine the floor system we
our
find
three
at
margin
similar
facade,
end
the
and
front,
the
in
margin
foot
a
within
stated,
Simply
allocations.
infill
and
support
over
decision
first
our
confront
and
type
building
the
within
variation
first
a
the
floor projection can vary. This results
in
a
of
number
the
space
that
of
capacity
actual
wall
the
affected,
obviously
is
space
interior
of
character
the
variations. While
exterior
and
roof
for
level elements
different uses and lower
remains the same. Our question is one of
and
control
should
organization:
the
community or the individual decide about
the form, and what
of
If
decision?
this
decides
are the implications
about
bay
the
the
individual
projection,
this
requires that the infill include a much
greater percentage
would
otherwise
conflicts
with
of the
be
the
building than
necessary.
general
goal
This
of
maximizing
infill,
the
and
shell and minimizing the
raises
a
whole
host
of
technical problems related to postponing
major
enclosure
exterior
to
the
infill
phase. Furthermore we can argue that the
driving
force
the
behind
variation
at
the front is to improve the character of
the
street
of
the
and
for
individual
identity
not
an
decision. At the street,
the
a
houses,
individual
place
the
community
controlled
individually
vari-
ation is in the lower level moves within
a structure
by
provided
the
rear,
While
in
the
major
alterations
community;
for
potential
weighted
is
individual control.
the
towards
Thus we place
floor
systems, exterior wall systems, and roof
systems
in
the
This decision
of
realm
support.
the
requires that the
support
contain a degree of variation within it,
a
condition
traditional
which
thinking
may
conflict
which
defines
with
the
support as constant. It is my contention
that
accepting
a
limited
level
of
variety within the support is acceptable
and
requires.
American
context
Physical
capacity
contractual
main
and
relationships
re-
a
new
and
same,
the
un-
is
patterns
control
changed,
North
the
that
adaptations
the
of
one
constitutes
support type is unwarranted.
SUPPORT VARIANTS
type,
row-house
the
Within
variants,
support
following
the
find
we
then
their
varying
distinguised
by
treatment of
the outside edge.
...
SUMMARY
In
model
as
summary,
follows:
support
types.
detail,
we
we
have
Within
Examining
find
that
defined
the
the
site
general
we
recognize
rowhouse support
variations
support
a
within
the
three
type
in
support
result in three basic support variants. And finally, in
the household plans we see four possible combinations
of row house support variants and infill packages.
SUPPORT AND INFILL SYSTEMS:
PROCESS PLAN AND DETAIL
If
power
as
we
stated
through
a
earlier,
deliberate
responsibilities
and
capacity,
need
then we
these characteristics
and
infill
physical
have
thoughtful
to
examine the
in
this
its
TECHNICAL SYSTEMS
parts
and
Foundation systems
provision
of
Party wall Systems
Bearing Members
of
implications of
For while the support
primarily
are technical
systems
organizational
in
consequences of reordering
manner.
Systems
may
require
independently,
systems
Exterior wall
Roof
INFILL
. ...
______
Floor systems
Partition systems
Enclosure systems
Windows
Doors
if
to
they
be
are
to
configured
act
differently
to
provide
the
Hechanical systems
DWV
Water
desired
systems
Systems
SHELL
Panels
adjustment
may
a
is
gains
design
separation
in detail.
distinction
nature, there
the
capacity,
differently
to
elements
join
may
properly,
have
and
to
be
detailed
processes
and
procedures may have to adjust to these changes. In the
next section we will try to chart some of these issues,
looking at plans, and considering the technical and
decision making details inherent in the design.
DecksEhedslienill
supply
Heating
Piping
Baseboard............
Electric
Gas
Stair systems
Equipment,X......
Finishes......
......
SYSTEM INTERFACES
Charting
the
nodes
of
intersection
between
different systems in support (shell) and infill assists
in
isolating
different
situations
configurations
implications
of
where
may
special
be
different
called
support
distributions may be quickly compared.
SYSTEM INTERFACES
SHELL-INFILL
0
M0&
Uj.J
04
0
-4
4*
W W40
0z
.0J....OU0
SHELL
Foundation systems
Party wall Systems
Bearing Members
Exterior wall systems
Roof Systems
Floor systems
Partition systems
I
Enclosure systems
|
Windows
Doors
Panels
Mechanical systems
DWV
Water supply
Heating
Piping
Baseboard
Electric
Gas
Stair systems
Equipment.
Finishes
Decks.Sheds.Fencing
0
0
details
W40
0
.d40c
and
for.
or
The
infill
PARTITIONS
Interior
delayed
plete
Additional material
partition
until
framing
support
(including
is
is
o Blocking in support floors,
com-
ceilings and walls to sup-
Gypsum board
port partition variants.
on support walls and ceiling).
Details
o Increases capacity for plan
o Attachment of infill parti-
variations,
alternative
uses
tion to support surfaces and
and occupancies.
o Allows for
infill panels.
independent
con-
o Proper sizing and alignment
trol over design decisions.
o
Enables
independent
const-
ruction methods, manufacturing
at connection points.
II II
of components, self-help.
o Increase
efficiency without
uniformity.
o
Facilitates
Requires
future
alter-
minor
duplication
of action (some walls are part
of support also).
-May
cause
Column
Party wall
U
fl
o Finishing details at joints
with disimilar materials
ation.
-
Panel
damage
to
support
surfaces.
-Requires special detailing at
some intersections.
Partition Composite
STAIR SYSTEMS
The support contains oversized
floor
for
openings
with
different
rations,
capacity
stair
configustairs
ins-
with
talled as infill.
o
Enables
uniform
floor
fra-
ming and variety in stair/plan
layout.
o
Supports
prefabrication
of
stair assembly.
o
Reduces
stairs
damage
during
to
finish
support
const-
ruction.
o
Allows
floor
coordination
finish
with
thickness
and
material.
-
Requires
ruction
city
for
temporary
stairs,
though
horizontal
on each floor
const-
capa-
movement
minimizes
stair
use.
-Requires detailing of attachment at support.
ENCLOSURE
Additional material
Enclosure of oversized support
o plywood to cover openings.
openings
Details
and
with
panels
windows
is
delayed
doors
to
the
o Attachment of windows, doors
infill phase.
o
Enables
to
and panels to party walls.
enclosure
respond
to
elements
variations
in
occupancy use and plan.
o
Absence
support
of
windows
phase
may
during
limit
o Connections between enclo-
loss
sure units.
of glass due to vandalism.
o
Allows
dividual
expression
of
identity on
o Trim details for adjustment
in-
the fac-
ade.
o
Facilitates
future
of different units
II 11
within
standard opening.
alter-
ation and expansion.
-
Requires temporary enclosure
and
weather
proofing
of
the
support.
-
Requires
special
detailing
at intersections.
-
Requires
that
either
be part of infill,
detailing of
made.
siding
siding
or special
joints
be
o Panel fabrication: site
built, prefabricated, degree
of finish.
DETAIL
Support:
Plan Capacity:
Exterior wall with finish skin
and window openings.
Infill:
Window, door, and panel units,
finish skin where required
Problem: How to design support and
infill components so as to maximise capacity and efficiency.
Capacity Requirements
1. To provide for plan variations as infill and distinct from support
deci-
sions.
2. To allow for window style variations
independent of support decisions.
3. To support a range of choice in window manufacturer
independent
of
sup-
port decisions.
8.0
Plan Capacity:
A. Vertical variation
1. Sliding doors
2. Swing doors
3. Living / dining windows
4. Bedroom windows
B. Horizontal Variation
1. Sliding glass doors
2. All other units
C. Range: horizontal and vertical
II
L
Capacity
for
Variation
in
10
Window Style and Manufacturer:
o Window widths type 2,3,4.
Shell
opening is sized for
largest, and trim
o
A,B
C.D
variation
adjusts for differences.
E
o Window style and manu-
F
facturer:
A:
B:
C:
E:
F:
Pella double hung wood
Pella double hung clad
Pella casement wood
Anderson double hung clad
Anderson casement clad
A Window/Panel Infill Assembly
o Support opening has capacity
for type 2, 3, and 4 enclosure units: doors or
win-
dows and panels.
o Infill shown is of type 3
window with
choice of two
panel finish options.
R.O
EQUIPMENT AND MECHANICALS
A
support
tical
partition
chase
and
contain
mechanical
nodes
ver-
o Separate zones for heat and
primary
services
connection
Additional Material
for
circuits for electric on
and
each floor for independent
infill
servicing.
equipment.
o
o Excess heat piping to sup-
Concentrates
major
mechani-
port plan variants.
cal system installation in the
o Electric junction boxes for
support,
support / infill interfaces.
o DWV piping in plumbing wall
allowing
standard-
ization and restricting infill
operations
to
minor
adjust-
II II
ments and connections.
o Enables
form
and
and
decisions
location of
baths
to
be
about
the
kitchens
made
during
the infill phase.
and chase that may not be
used initially.
Details
U
U
o Requires wall outlet toilet
and above floor outlet tub.
o Detailing of electric and
o Facilitates alterations
equipment connections at
-
party
Requires an amount of excess
material
in
piping,
waste and
venting.
-May
require
change
in
tra-
ships and task sequencing.
Requires
o Detailing of electric connections, infill control of
ditional subcontract relation-
-
wall.
detailing
attachment at support
of
support fixtures etc.
FLOORS
In
DEC1S, PAVING
,
the
earth
left
support
outside
unpaved,
above
the
waterproofed
shed
water,
the rear
phase,
the
the
Additional Material
entry
the
is
floor
deck
entrance
is
and
and
sloped
to
footings
in
support a variety of
infill
deck
and
extension
configurations.
o
Allows
standardization
of
the support and promotes indi-
o Footings for extensions,
decks and sheds.
o Waterproofing of deck over
entrance if used as interior
space.
Details
o Attachment of extensions,
decks and fencing at
support.
o Treatment of shared terri-
vidual identity at the entry.
tory at party wall exterior:
establish procedure for
o
alteration and addition.
The
configuration
of
the
deck over the entry allows for
use as
or
a
space
either an outside deck
continuation
depending
of
on the
inside
infill
package.
o Rear Footings bring a degree
of
in
order
in
form
and
savings
cost and disruption to fu-
ture expansions.
o Deck /
kit:
interior conversion
SUMMARY
These
brief
accounting
support
explorations
of
and
the
infill
do
costs
not
and
represent
benefits
They
decisions.
are
of
by
a
full
specific
no
means
complete or authoritative. Rather they are intended
to
suggest
to
the kinds
of
design considerations
germane
the support and infill distinction in this design. The
details at connection points, the additional materials
called
be
for,
and any
carefully
reorganization of
considered
ways of working.
and
trades,
compared
Additional costs,
if
to
need
to
traditional
any may
then be
balanced against both the initial savings in efficiency
and the long term
support.
More
benefits of future
work
needs
to
be
viability
carried
of the
out
in
understanding these technical and economic implications
within
the
North
American
context.
However,
Lucez, 1985
Kendall and Chalmers, 1986
European
experience seems to suggest that any additional cost is
outweighed by initial savings in efficiency alone, with
added benefits when one considers savings over the life
Habraken, 1985
of the support.
Lukez, 1986
CONCLUSION
In
about
this
a way
together
work
of
I have
working
develop
attempted
with
a design.
a
to
unite
particular
The
idea
and
an
idea
context
context
and
fuel
the design and give
it form, while the design offers a
setting
to
idea.
from
In
this
fuses both
form
which
explore
respect
form and
itself,
the
I would
application
hope
that
process to suggest
but
how
it
might
of
the
not
the
design
merely the
have
originated,
developed and changed over time.
The
idea
Netherlands,
derives
which
participation
from
the
declares
can
be
work
that
managed
of
SAR
variety
efficiently
in
and
the
user
through
a
design and building strategy that delineate two levels
in
the
control
(support)
one
in
developer
user
to
which
the
space
the
goal
to build a
extending
low-cost
the
explored
design of rich
distinct
and
household
of
directly
housing
idea
what
material,
(infill).
a
the
The
community
community
context
is
non-profit
viable community in an open and
responsive way
build
first
and
of
to
it
conflicts with the need
with
limited
this North
might
mean
resources.
American
to
capacity and organize
both
In
context,
I
develop
a
its systems
into
levels, clearly delineating which things vary
and which
remain fixed.
ganization
might
ticipation,
and
I then
encourage
increase
suggested how this or-
variety,
efficiency
structure
under
par-
traditional
ways of working.
Finally
I
presented
a
proposal
based
on
the
support and infill distinction, suggesting that placing
certain
elements
others under
user
under
control
satisfaction,
control
of
of
the
community
the households
lead
to
an
might
informal
and
increase
richness
of
form, promote long term viability, and increase overall
efficiencies.
systems
A review of
idicated
some
specific
support
organizational
and
and
infill
technical
implications for the design and building process.
Research and application of the SAR principles has
been conducted for more than twenty years in Europe,
while
questions
American context
as
to
are
its
applicability
just beginning
to
in
the
be asked.
North
This
work constitutes a mere introduction to the issues that
need
to
be
addressed,
and
more
work
is
fully asses the its potential contribution.
required
to
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. General
Allen, Edward, The Responsive House, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1972.
Eichler, Ned, The Merchant Builders, MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA, 1982.
Hatch, Richard C.,ed. The Scope of Social
Architecture, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New
York, 1894.
Lynch, Kevin, Good City Form, MIT Press, Cambridge,
MA, 1981.
Macsai, John, Housing, John Wiley and Sons, New
York, 1982.
Marcus, Clare Cooper and Wendy Sarkissian, Housing
As If People Mattered, University of California
Press, Berkeley, Ca. 1986.
Mayer, Martin, The Builders, Houses, People,
Neighborhoods, Governments, money, W.W. Norton and
Co., 1978.
Moore, Charles, Allen, Gerald, and Lyndon Donlyn,
The Place of Houses, Holt Reinhart and Winston, New
York, 1974.
Moudon, Anne Vernez, Built for Change: Neighborhood
Architecture in San Francisco, MIT Press,
Cambridge, Ma. 1986.
2. Support and Infill
Habraken, N.J., Supports: An Alternative to Mass
Housing, The Architectural Press, 1972.
Habraken, N.J., Variations: The Systematic Design
of Supports, MIT Laboratory of Architecture and
Planning, Cambridge, MA., 1976.
Habraken, N.J., and Hamdi, Nabeel, with
Hellinghausen, Testa, and Woods, Infill Packages in
Housing Rehabilitation, a report of the Design and
Housing Group, MIT, 1983.
Habraken, N.J., Transformations of the Site, Awater
Press, Cambridge, MA, 1983.
Habraken, N.J., The Appearance of the Form, Awater
Press, Cambridge, MA, 1985.
Habraken, John, "Reconciling Variety in Large-Scale
Projects", Large Housing Projects:
Design
Technology and Logistics, Aga Khan Program for
Islamic Architecture, MIT, Cambridge Ma. 1985.
Kendall, Stephen, "Teaching With Supports", Open
House International, vol. 7, no. 4, 1982.
Kendall, Stephen, and Chalmers, Thomas C.,
Shell/Infill: A Technical Study of a new Strategy
for 2x4 Housebuilding, Design and Housing Program,
Department of Architecture, MIT, 1986.
Kendall, Stephen, "Who's in Charge of Housing
Renovation", Architecture, October, 1986.
Kendall, Stephen, "The Netherlands: Distinguishing
'Support' and 'Infill', Architecture, October,
1986.
Keyenburg, A Pilot Project, Stichting Architecture
Research, Eindhoven The Netherlands, 1985
Lukez, Paul, Form, Finance and Use Over Time, MARCH
Thesis, MIT, Cambridge, Ma. 1985.
Lukez, Paul, New Concepts in Housing: Supports in
the Netherlands, NETWORK, Department of
Architecture, MIT, 1986.
Plans and Details According to NEN 2883, Dept. of
Architecture, TH Delft, Group van Randan, 1981.
van Randan, A. "Nodes and Noodles", Open House
International, vol. 3, no. 3, 1978.