The Incremental House

The Incremental House This thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Architecture in the School of Architecture and Interior Design of the College of Design, Architecture, Art, & Planning by Paul Neidhard Thesis Chair: Vincent Sansalone Second Chair: Ed Mitchell ii iii Abstract Houses are one of the most paradoxical structures; they are conceived as unchangeable but are often changed. This is done because houses are expected to meet our needs as homeowners and consumers. But houses are often underutilized, and their primary function as a utility for living has been altered drastically so that they have become status symbols, glorified storage units, and symbols of what we want to be. Through an understanding of the way houses are utilized and an analysis of prototypical houses, this thesis seeks to define a new way of living and building a house. It seeks to understand the way people live in and use their homes. In an effort to combat continuously changing demands and expectations for ever more and better in homes, it seeks to define an approach to building a house incrementally, through construction, changes in the way we live, or modification. This creates a home that becomes adaptable, accessible, and economically and socially responsible. This thesis proposes a strategy for building houses incrementally and develops two narratives for how this could unfold. These narratives are exercises in behavioral architecture; they are not the ideal home but they respond to the habits and pitfalls of their users. iv v Copyright - Paul Neidhard 2019 vi vii Table of Contents Abstract ii Table of Contents vi Introduction 1 Home 4 The Rooms 6 The Reality 12 The Reinterpreting 16 Critique 54 Hejduk 55 Wexler 57 Zittel 59 Project 62 Proposal 66 Urban 67 Rural 68 Bibliography 71 Illustrations 72 1 2 Introduction Buildings are often conceived as unchangeable but are often being changed. Houses are the epitome of this paradox. They are our home, our shelter. They often serve people before us and after us; this gives them permanence. But houses are expected to change and respond to our desires and tastes. They are constantly being changed over time, here and there or all at once. Houses end up trying to fulfill every whim of a possible homeowner rather than being intentional or flexible. In America, the average size of a family is decreasing, currently it is just over 2.5 people. Meanwhile the average size of a house is increasing, currently the average new-built home is over 2,600 square feet.1 This means that any family member has about 1,000 SF to themselves. In 1973 each person had roughly 500 SF to themselves.2 This divergence is a result of a number of cultural and economic shifts that took place during and after the postwar economic boom that changed the way Americans live. Starting in the 60s, a number of changes happened that were both cultural and economic. Culturally, more and more women began working. Meanwhile the country became more consumerist, leading to more things filling the house. This drove a change in what fills a house and how it is occupied.3 Additionally, the dream of owning a home has become increasingly that; a dream. Costs of homes have increased because builders ignore changes in market demands, knowing that it is easier to wait out a shifting market then to adapt to it.4 To combat the issues presented in a traditional housing market, this thesis proposes an incrementally-built single-family home. By building as needed, houses will provide enough space but no more than is necessary. Additionally, it allows the user more financial flexibility by not forcing them to immediately pay for space that is unnecessary. 1. US Census Bureau. “Characteristics of New Housing.” Census Bureau QuickFacts. August 23, 2011. Accessed October 10, 2018. https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/highlights.html. 2. Ibid 3. Rybczynski, Witold. “Living Smaller.” The Atlantic, February 1991. Accessed October 15, 2018. https://www. theatlantic. com/magazine/archive/1991/02/living-smaller/306205/. 4. NTF HOME 5 6 During the post war boom, necessity drove homes to be built rapidly and The Rooms consistently. William Levitt became the most successful developer of this. Levittowns utilized a handful of plans and built consistent, bare-bones homes. They were 750 sf each, with two bedrooms and a bathroom.5 Some had space for expansion, none had basements. They were a starting point. What followed was growth. Economic prosperity allowed people to regain the space they had been living without. The number and sizes of rooms increased throughout the sixties and seventies. Technological changes and consumerism led to an increase in the number of appliances in kitchens, making them larger and necessitating more counter space.6 One bathroom was no longer enough for a family and thus the number of bathrooms began increasing and powder rooms became commonplace.7 Along with shear growth, there were numerous societal changes that affected the way we utilize the space in homes leading to a further increase in size. A number of rooms have become commonplace in homes that serve effectively the same purpose as rooms that already existed, such as family rooms with formal living rooms. Rooms like the dining room, that were once used on a daily basis, are now used once or twice a year.8 Still, other rooms serve a positive psychological service to the occupant.9 5. Rybczynski, Witold. “Living Smaller.” 6. Ibid. 7. Ibid. 8. Arnold, Jeanne E., Anthony P. Graesch, Enzo Ragazzini, and Elinor Ochs. Life at Home in the Twenty-First Century: 32 Families Open Their Doors. Los Angeles, CA: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press, 2012. 61. 9. Ibid. 109. 7 8 GARAGE From 1971 to 2017 the percentage of homes with a two-car garage has increased from 39% to 65%. 3-car garages were not even recorded by the Census Bureau until 1992 and now make up 20% of the garages in new homes. The number of homes with no form of garage or carport has gone from 26% to 7%. All of the garage space, despite the fact that cars are no longer kept in 75% of garages. They have been allotted for storage space. Life at Home in the Twenty-First Century Center on Everyday Lives of Families As rooms proliferated, their uses became more specific, but they were ultimately This affects the kitchen and dining rooms specifically; dining rooms are almost the same: spaces for living. Houses often had a formal living room but in a never used and have been rendered functionally obsolete.12 They are often desire for informality, family rooms took hold, eventually supported by rec only used for special occasions like holiday dinners but for the other 360 days a rooms, tv rooms, play rooms, and so on.10 These rooms, in essence, all provide year, they sit empty. Even though it would make sense to eliminate the dining a place for people to spend time doing some form of an activity; gathering, function and re-purpose it for something more beneficial, it is often kept as a watching tv, playing ping-pong, etc. This proliferation of rooms speaks to the dining room and sits unused as a relic. privatization of family life and the desire for leisure to happen at home when possible. Kitchens have also felt the effects of these societal changes. While many families may not use the kitchen for cooking or preparing meals, they have Perhaps the event that had a greater effect on the way we live in our homes become the command centers of the home, effectively serving as a place for was when women began to work in the 60s. For many, this meant that meals gathering, conversing, working, and occasionally cooking.13 Kitchens have were now prepared or eaten outside of the home. For others it meant that the increased in size in newer homes because of these recent changes in use but nightly ritual of preparing and eating a meal together was abbreviated if not also because kitchens are seen as reflective of the quality of the home and have eliminated.11 become driving factors in their value. 10. Rybczynski, Witold. “Living Smaller.” 12. Arnold, Jeanne E et.al. Life at Home in the Twenty-First Century. 61. 11. Ibid 13. Ibid. 81. 9 10 Another major factor in the value of a home is the master bedroom. The master bedroom has become a sanctuary. It is often one of the largest rooms in a house - complete with its own bathroom with tub and shower, and walk- in closet. These rooms are seldom used more than standard bedrooms and bathrooms, and rarely during waking hours.14 However, these spaces are often kept clean and organized which suggests that these spaces hold some sort of positive psychological significance to the occupant of the house.15 They have become a sanctuary. The amount of space that we devote to storage has also increased drastically. In many ways the modern house has become a repository for stuff. One of the immediate identifiers of an older home is its perceived lack of storage space, but one of the most defining characteristics of the late 20th and 21st centuries was the increase in consumerism. Americans buy a lot of stuff and they need a place to put it. As a result, houses often become storage rooms or curio cabinets. They either become overwhelmed by the quantity of things contained within them or they serve the primary purpose of displaying the objects within.

Load more