I recently came across a project by a design studio named Framlab that presented a new paradigm for urban housing. OpenHouse, as it is titled, aims to “investigate the capacity of residential environments to alleviate loneliness and social isolation. The project approaches urban housing design through the lens of environmental psychology and cognitive neuroscience, exploring parameters of geometry, ecology, and modularity as means to forge connections and build trust among residents.” I was immediately enthralled by this project. A housing project that not only answers practical needs but aspires to holistically support our societal and individual well being? Sign me up.
But one question has been running through my mind. Is this actually possible? Will this actually come to life?
I have seen many project proposals like the one described above in recent years - projects that offer a new language for living, that rethink not just what we live in, but how we live in it. In other words, that attempt to redefine the actual experience of living. But many of them don’t get realized and remain mere proposals. Lack of funding, political and social disagreement between the actors involved, and overall lack of effort may be to blame. Oh and that thing we call capitalism too. It continues to be the driving force behind powerful decision-makers, including those that design our built environment.
It seems odd, also, that in the era of covid-19, we are innovating in such a way as to promote physical interaction and socialization in habitually private spaces - what with the “health” and “safety” concerns. It seems even more improbable considering the current socio-political climate we live in. We have become so sensitive and fragile as individuals that it translates into immediate pushback for single mistakes (re: cancel culture), to extremism and tribalism, to refusal to engage with let alone acknowledge differences. We are so divided that it seems impossible that we will ever come together under one roof. Literally.
BUT, all of this does not mean that these projects are impossible to bring to life, or that we should brush them away. As you know, I am a firm believer that design has the ability to course-correct the negative path we set ourselves on - in terms of systemic and wide reaching issues. So I believe in these types of projects and I wholeheartedly support their creation. It excites me every time I see or read about something like OpenHouse. Yes, people who care about each other, I think. And that makes me smile.
When you think about the idea of co-living - which is often what these urban housing projects are based on - you may feel skepticism. You may imagine poorly maintained, ill-designed spaces that feel uninviting and sometimes even dangerous. But it doesn’t have to be that way. Co-living seems to me like the future of urban housing, however corny that sounds. It is a model that can enable beneficial social connection, while preserving privacy and self-care. OpenHouse, for instance, proposes adapting transition spaces - such as hallways and stairwells - to make them more fun and functional. Installing furniture that encourages gathering or studying, or designing a specific lighting experience that invites the user to pause and dwell. In essence, it is about using the negative space between living quarters - space that is usually wasted since most people don’t actually stay and spend time in hallways and stairs - to create a positive habitat. Isn’t that the message behind all of this? Transformation as an act of resilience and perseverance. Turning struggle into fruit. Basic support to fulfillment.
I believe so.
This is my wish for the future of living, physically and symbolically. I wish for us to live in symbiosis, not just with each other, but with spaces that encase us.