Search

Collective housing (CH) is undergoing a revival in Belgium. Since 2009, the Flemish Government Architect and his team have been advocating CH, stressing its importance as a task for architects given the demand for affordable housing and the need to reduce the environmental impact of housing. This support for CH has converged with the work of the non-profit citizen organization Samenhuizen ("Living together") and the ad hoc initiatives taken by individual households and architects. In the Netherlands too, where there is a longer tradition of CH, the phenomenon is once more on the rise because of the housing crisis. As it is a developing topic, the terminology used for CH is also evolving. Drawing on publications on the subject in both Belgium and the Netherlands as well as on interviews with relevant stakeholders, this article sheds light on two widely published cases in both countries (pioneering and current, greenfield and conversion). These cases are compared in regard to thematic areas, based on an extensive literature study on collaborative housing by Lang et al. (2018). In addition to such aspects as the balance between "individuality" and the "collective" we compare the role played by architects in both countries. Besides similarities, we show that the historical context, and especially the housing policy of each country, has a great influence and that the role of the architect is essential in the development of older and contemporary cohousing projects.

This article seeks to analyse the reciprocal influence between the post-war urban planning policies and the development of residential neighbourhoods in Lelystad between 1965 and 1990. This city has been designed ‘from scratch’ as the urban centre of the IJsselmeer Polders, the largest land reclamation project of the Netherlands. Lelystad’s neighbourhood development will be described and contextualised in the Dutch New Towns planning policy (1960–1985), which intended to avoid increasing congestion in the most densely populated area in the Netherlands: the Randstad. Lelystad is seen as a significant case. This New Town exemplifies the evolution in urban planning in The Netherlands in the second half of the twentieth century. Cornelis van Eesteren, who had presided over the CIAM (Congrès Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne) from 1930 to 1947, was responsible for the urban design in 1964, based on the principles of the Modern city and the functionalist design of residential neighbourhoods. However, Van Eesteren was dismissed, and his plan was modified. The successive urban plans, elaborated by the IJsselmeer Polders Development Authority (a public body for the development of the polders), adopted a technical and practical approach, and later moved to functionally integrated neighbourhoods, based on more organic ‘Woonerf’ theories. The research investigates the relationship between the general and the particular by studying the socioeconomic and political context that conditioned the Dutch New Towns and the specific urban and architectural characteristics of a selection of residential ensembles in Lelystad’s neighbourhoods. Furthermore, the research seeks to illustrate the relevance and the influence of both urban planning policies and the effective design of residential configurations.

This article seeks to analyse the reciprocal influence between the post-war urban planning policies and the development of residential neighbourhoods in Lelystad between 1965 and 1990. This city has been designed ‘from scratch’ as the urban centre of the IJsselmeer Polders, the largest land reclamation project of the Netherlands. Lelystad's neighbourhood development will be described and contextualised in the Dutch New Towns planning policy (1960-1985), which intended to avoid increasing congestion in the most densely populated area in the Netherlands: the Randstad. Lelystad is seen as a significant case. This New Town exemplifies the evolution in urban planning in The Netherlands in the second half of the twentieth century. Cornelis van Eesteren, who had presided over the CIAM (Congrès Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne) from 1930 to 1947, was responsible for the urban design in 1964, based on the principles of the Modern city and the functionalist design of residential neighbourhoods. However, Van Eesteren was dismissed, and his plan was modified. The successive urban plans, elaborated by the IJsselmeer Polders Development Authority (a public body for the development of the polders), adopted a technical and practical approach, and later moved to functionally integrated neighbourhoods, based on more organic ‘Woonerf’ theories. The research investigates the relationship between the general and the particular by studying the socioeconomic and political context that conditioned the Dutch New Towns and the specific urban and architectural characteristics of a selection of residential ensembles in Lelystad’s neighbourhoods. Furthermore, the research seeks to illustrate the relevance and the influence of both urban planning policies and the effective design of residential configurations.

Anne Lacaton has been a visiting professor at the TU Delft Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment during the Fall Semester 2016-2017, hosted by the Chair of Heritage & Design. In the professional field of Heritage & Design the starting point for design is not just a functional brief and a blank sheet of paper but the challenge of an existing spatial setting and cultural-historical context. It is a dynamic and innovative field in architecture that deals with the architectural re-interpretation, adaptive reuse and restoration of historic buildings. This book reports on her workshops and studios during her time at TU Delft. It presents re-use projects at different scales, in different situations and with different programs. These projects generated reflection along with pertinent and inventive ideas that made it possible to overturn the situations in a positive manner, to change the approach and bring forth interesting solutions, a new situational intelligence and a new intelligence towards thinking about architecture and the urban situation.In these projects, what is initially seen as obsolete and as a constraint or restriction through an opening of the mind and a change in outlook and approach, becomes an opportunity, a chance and an asset. If you look at a situation without a frame or filter and with an open spirit, a building that no longer has a purpose and is a hindrance becomes a liberty.The students adhered to this specific approach: No longer looking at something existing as imperfect, constraining, obsolete, not beautiful etc., but instead as a resource, a component, a stratum/layer and a basis for creativity.The idea of drawing value from everything existing, producing richness with less money but with the greater means and parameters offered by existing situations. Extending the story to do better and more of it. A process of regeneration, extension, adaption and re-use rather than replacement. This way of seeing, thinking, projecting, Heritage & Design