We are used to live in spaces that are defined by very strict limits. Those limits separate the space into private or public in an absolute way causing the continuity of public space to be interrupted. Although, within the limits of private and public space, there are also the not so distinguishable and much more lenient limits, those of semi-private and semi-public space. The moment we take the first step outside our home to get to the street or to a public space of our cities, we continuously negotiate with those limits. The fight between public and private space can be noticed all around us.

All people have a need for a center in their lives, around which and by using it as a reference point, move and operate. In our opinion, if this center is moved from something absolutely private, such as a house, to something that we all have in common, such as the space between our home and public space, can provide us with new perspectives on our everyday life.

Taking as an example and as a structure model the atom, the smallest possible participle, which in many forms and chemical compositions is the basis of every living organism, we are trying to create our main component of the area where the co-housing will be developed. So, we define as a core and as a center of the development the semi-public and semi-private spaces, which we consider as a reference point for any activity during the day, and around which coexist the more private ones.

Going further in the analysis of the space as we are used to live in, we tried to determine what features are regarded as the most undesirable but also to think ways how we can reverse them by creating new living conditions. So we made some decisions, on which the design was based, and are the following:

  • Equitable distribution of communal space throughout the extent of the model dwelling. Allows creation of imprecise relations between units.
  • Diversification through public nodes. Injection mass gaps instead of separating. Creating identity through variation and diversity gaps.
  • Multiple unit connections with the public space. A network of movement nodes is preferred to a linear movement.
  • Integrated public areas adjacent to each unit. Any relationship that is created is unique.

Regarding the form of cohabitation that we propose, the main component is the sharing of indoor spaces that we use in daily basis. This sharing doesn’t work in a fix standard way, but it can be interchanged depending on the needs of the users. These indoor spaces along with all the outdoor common spaces create a system that runs through the entire development.

We try to find the best possible way to satisfy the relationships between full and vacuum by spreading the public spaces throughout the area evenly and by creating a system of multiple-choice movement. This is mainly achieved with the combination of rectangular blocks 14x10x60 that re combined in pairs, creating a layered system. The house area is developed in a more dynamic way within these rectangular.


  • grupo espanol says:

    following your form!

  • Leave a Reply

    Warning: include(/home/adu2020/webapps/wp_pilotprojects/wp-content/themes/adu_ppp/single-default.php): failed to open stream: No such file or directory in /home/adu2020/webapps/wp_pilotprojects/wp-content/themes/adu_ppp/single.php on line 43

    Warning: include(): Failed opening '/home/adu2020/webapps/wp_pilotprojects/wp-content/themes/adu_ppp/single-default.php' for inclusion (include_path='.:/usr/local/share/pear54') in /home/adu2020/webapps/wp_pilotprojects/wp-content/themes/adu_ppp/single.php on line 43