Description
Access describes the path from the public to the private sphere and the space it occupies, which begins with two thresholds: the first is the transition into the building; the second leads into one’s own apartment. In between lies an entire sequence of spaces with horizontal and vertical connections, which can present a generous face to the public sphere, which may promote or discourage encounters among neighbours and be experienced as inviting or inhospitable. In conjunction with the open spaces such as balconies and terraces, the access also represents connection to the outside – it is, one might say, the prelude to a building. It is also a filter that controls and manages intimacy and allows for highly diverse ways of life in close proximity to one another.
The word “to access” is ambivalent in terms of potentiality. To begin with it simply describes an architectural space which allows residents to enter their private sphere; beyond architecture, however, it also describes a kind of taking stock, a step-by-step build up of understanding and acquiring insight into complex contexts. According to the “promenade architecturale” postulated by Le Corbusier, which provides the basis for exemplary designs such as the Villa Savoye in Poissy (1929), the entire configuration of the design is derived from the path into and through the house. To the user, the promenade architecturale is revealed as a scenic sequence of spatial perceptions; however, it is also an element that establishes a hierarchy, a kind of unwritten user manual with which the structure of the house unfolds and becomes accessible to the user by virtue of his movement – step by step.
The Question of Function
But what is the function of this space if one thinks beyond its pure circulation role and wishes to explore all its potentials? The access space is a spatial and social buffer between a complex, anonymous public space, and the intimate, individual environments of the residents. Sociologists have coined the term living environment for such spaces – an area that surrounds the residence, protects it, while still being a part of it and at the same time providing an additional sphere of activity for the residents.
To regard the access space as no more than a thoroughfare is to misjudge its potential. After all, it offers ideal conditions for neighbourly contact, for in contrast to the public space the number of local residents is manageable – an important prerequisite for people’s willingness to socialize. Moreover, encounters take place of necessity, as it were, and repeatedly; neighbourly routines can therefore develop and become established. For children, especially, the access space also functions as an open space – located beyond the boundaries of the parental apartment but still sheltered. Thus it becomes part of their living environment in a most natural fashion – and it becomes a space in which they linger.
The question whether the access space is a merely a passage space or whether one also enjoys spending time in it, is first and foremost in the hands of the residents. They might be able to live in the building without the access space as social interface; however, when the space invites this type of use by virtue of its architecture and program, it is readily utilized as such. The invitation to linger is thus an offer with no strings attached. If it is accepted, the access space can become a place for casual meeting, communal identification, and representation for all residents.
On the other hand, the access space is invariably located in a field of tension, because efficiency dictates that it should occupy as little area as possible. This is a dilemma, especially evident in social housing development predating the 1990s where the dictum of economic efficiency resulted in access spaces that were spatially, functionally, and qualitatively impoverished. Too many units were attached to a single access system. As a result, the access system became anonymous and inhospitable and was one of the reasons for the social problems arising in buildings of this kind.
Forms of Access and Circulation
Shaping the circulation in terms of space and program is one of the great challenges in housing. In this context, how the access space is assessed also depends on how habitation is understood and on the question of where habitation begins: in front of the building, behind the front entrance or only behind the apartment door?
Depending on the urban context and the building typology, the access spaces vary in expanse and complexity: within detached typologies and larger housing estates, the buildings are often surrounded by additional houses, green spaces, common areas directly in front of, and, in some cases, shared programs within the buildings that should be regarded as part of this space and its potentials. Apartment towers often feature lobbies in the entrance area, which deliberately delay the transition into the private sphere and invite residents to linger for a while. The access space tends to be more compact in urban infill developments, where details can play a key role: whether there is a canopy or not, whether the entrance door is recessed and thus sheltered from the elements, how the threshold is designed, how spacious, bright and inviting the space on the inside of the front door is, whether the landings are large enough to encourage social interaction, or even whether there are opportunities along the way through the building to sit down for a brief chat.
Stairs
A set of stairs is probably the smallest common denominator among all access systems of residential buildings.
To begin with stairs are a mundane, functional building component; however, they also serve to stage the passage into the house. In baroque architecture, stairs evolved into complex, three-dimensional spatial configurations and became the stage for social encounters. The path towards the destination was artificially prolonged in order to endow the event of the encounter with time and space.
In ordinary housing, stairwells can be designed in such a fashion as to consciously shape and publicly present the connection of residents with their environment. In Alvaro Siza’s housing development “Full Stop and Comma” in The Hague, the stairs define the character of the building to a large degree: access is via a portico – a wide set of stairs leads directly from the street to a loggia-like space, which is open towards the cityscape and from which all apartments are accessible through front doors that are exclusive to each unit.
“Full Stop and Comma,” Schilderswijk, The Hague, 1988; raised ground floor with six separate front doors
Vertical Access Systems
The most commonly used stairwell in housing consists of several stacked flights of stairs that give access to a specific number of apartments at each landing: thus there are stairs that provide access to a single unit, two, three, and more units per floor. Horizontal access systems are preferred for buildings in cases where the number of units per level is too high. There are numerous subcategories to these models; there are buildings with interior or external stairs, which are combined with horizontal corridors or are housed in a separate building section. When they are constructed as a shaft, vertical access systems of this type can contribute toward the structural integrity of the buildings and increase the design flexibility within the apartments.
The ten-story residential building by Henri Ciriani in The Hague demonstrates the possibilities for variation of this type. The apartments are organized into four units per floor; what is remarkable in this case is how the space around the sets of stairs expands into an open atrium reaching across all floors between the two building wings. On each floor, bridges connect to the landings and lead to the loggias projecting into the atrium, and it is these loggias, which serve as entrance areas into the units. Beyond the loggias, the atrium opens onto the city, while the comings and goings of the residents become an event in its interior.
The same access type is interpreted in an entirely different manner in the project e_3 by Kaden Klingbeil: for reasons of fire safety, the stairwell lies in a building component set apart from the apartment units. Given the fact that they are a wooden structure, the escape route had to be constructed in reinforced concrete and distanced from the main building. The open gap gives each apartment a third facade and allows more flexible interior spaces thanks to the separation of the stairwell. Moreover, the access via a footbridge is pushed into the urban space and thus emphasized. On three floors, the apartments are accessed via generous, recessed open spaces, which enhances the sense of possessing one’s own level and home in the city.
Morgenstond, Dedemsvaartweg, The Hague, 1994;four units per floor in open atrium, entries to apartments via bridge and private terraces
e_3, Berlin, 2008; access to apartments via footbridges and recessed open spaces
Circulation as Separation – The Invention of the Circulation Core
In the enclosed circulation cores of larger and higher buildings, vertical access systems are taken to the extreme: effective skeleton structure in steel or reinforced concrete and elevator facilities allow for extremely tall buildings even for residential uses and a steady repetition of the horizontal footprint of the building. It is the use of elevators in access cores, which radically reduces the amount of time residents spend in this common interface. In this sense, the vertical circulation core is the symbol of an autonomous treatment of each floor and its inhabitants. The floors inhabited by “others” are merely perceived in a fleeting glimpse through the opening and closing elevator door; residents only disembark on their own floor.
Horizontal Connecting Spaces
External access areas such as galleries or “Streets in the Air” and internal corridors such as the “Rue Intérieure” are horizontal access systems. Vertical access areas connected to these systems are usually subordinate to them.
A gallery is generally speaking a path projecting from the building, usually on the outside, which is connected to one or several vertical circulation cores. Many of the built examples fall into a predictable pattern: the gallery is often located on the north side and serves as a noise barrier. It is sometimes set slightly lower than the floor level, or else, accompanied by horizontal windows set high into the wall to ensure privacy. Parallel to the gallery, kitchen, entrance hall, and sanitary block are often placed as an intermediary zone between the gallery and the more private living areas, which are located on the sunny south side. This type of access is often employed in conjunction with maisonette units: within a spatial unit comprising several stories, galleries provide access to the entrance area on one level of the maisonette, which continues on the floor above or below. On this floor, front-to-back interiors are thus possible. On the lower floors, maisonette units can be arranged with ground floor entrances allowing for access across private front gardens similar to a row house.
The “back-to-back-crossover”-unit is one of the more complex typologies, which can be connected to horizontal access systems: multistory units are stacked in a crossover pattern and are accessed from both sides via galleries, which can be located on different levels. This form of access is interpreted in a particularly complex manner in the Marquess Road housing estate in London. The apartments are accessed to the right and left as if from a street, with repeated changes in direction in order to create manageable groupings of neighbouring housing units.
Marquess Road, London, 1976; schematic sections
“Streets in the Air” and “Rue Intérieure”
The social potentials and their significance for functioning residential communities have been debated and developed ever since horizontal access and circulation systems were employed for the first time.
Alison and Peter Smithson adopted the term “Streets in the Air” – borrowed from the idea of the urban street based on traditional images – to describe their generous galleries. To the architects, the term expresses their program: on the one hand, the building is interpreted as a small piece of a city in its own right, and on the other hand, it illustrates the idea that access areas can serve as urban spaces for socializing with neighbours. Although their project Robin Hood Gardens in London ultimately revealed the limitations of access systems of this kind – the galleries proved to be inhospitable and anonymous due to the sheer number of units and the exposure of the galleries to the noises of the high-traffic surroundings – the spatial relationship between housing unit and gallery is nevertheless exemplary. Nearly 2-m-wide, the galleries expand into even wider bays in front of each entrance, creating a kind of forecourt. The apartment doors are set sideways into the resulting niche, further enhancing this entrance area. The apartment stairs lie parallel to the gallery and create a buffer between horizontal access and the housing unit. Internally, the stairs connect the common rooms, kitchen, and living rooms, which are deliberately located on different levels to avoid a strict separation of common and private spaces.
Robin Hood Gardens, London, 1972
Alison and Peter Smithson also proclaimed these “Streets in the Air” as a deliberate alternative to Le Corbusier’s “Rue Intérieure” – the interior access corridors in the Unité d’habitation, which was also created as a result of his research on urban living. Le Corbusier established that it would require a minimum of 1,600 residents to create a functioning piece of urbanity and it was from this assumption that he derived the scale of the Unité – complete with retail strips, communal establishments and the aforementioned “Rues Intérieures.” Located on every third floor, they provide access to the left and right to maisonette units, which occupy the entire width of the building on the floor above or below. In contrast to the galleries, these interior streets have virtually no relationship with the outside: running the entire length of the building, with low ceilings and dark, they failed to achieve the effect of a lively streetscape.
Unité d‘Habitation, Marseille, 1947 – “Rue intérieure”
Van den Broek Bakema’s residential high-rise in Berlin also features an internal street. However, in this case it receives natural light from two sides and opens onto a two-story shared loggia on the south side with sun decks and playground terraces. The number of units along each corridor is manageable in this case. Spatially and programmatically, the access area is thus consciously designed as a communal area.
Residential tower Hansaviertel, Berlin, 1958; shared loggia at the southern end of internal streets
Hans Scharoun describes the gallery as a space for living and socialization rather than merely a mundane access and circulation element. The galleries of “Juliet,” part of Scharoun’s “Romeo and Juliet” twin housing complex in Stuttgart, can be overlooked and controlled from every vantage point thanks to the curved shape, which seems to almost form a circle around a courtyard. By means of the intelligent shaping of the gallery balustrade and the exterior walls of the apartments, which usually run parallel to each other, each entrance lies in a triangular bay, enclosed on two sides and seemingly giving each unit an anteroom of its own. At the landing to the vertical access at the center, the gallery widens into a generous front-to-back space, with a large balcony facing towards the other side inviting contact among neighbours.
Romeo and Julia, Stuttgart, 1959
Evolution
In their approach to pathway spaces innovative housing designs go beyond these access typologies; by defamiliarizing, combining and developing them deliberately in conjunction with other typologies, and by also addressing the issue of their spatial quality and communal potential.
One example for the combination of several access systems is the supersuperblock Mirador; it integrates horizontal and vertical access routes, which – again and again – lead to communal spaces. Access cores project openly into the cityscape and lead to loggias cut into the corners. Internal streets provide access to maisonette units and, at the very top, become part of a multistory atrium open towards the sky. At the center of the high-rise, several access routes open simultaneously into a dramatic five-story courtyard, which can be used by all residents as a common space offering an urban panorama.
Mirador, Madrid-Sanchinarro, 2005: longitudinal section with various access systems and 4-story open communal garden at a height of 40 m
Taking the private sphere within an access space into consideration and providing each unit with its own anteroom can also become a unique quality of the common access space. In the “Kölner Brett” by b & k+ in Cologne, the access area is deliberately set apart as an independent sculptural element, with the result that access to the units is only possible via bridges. At the same time, the gallery is noticeable for its width and inviting spaces for spending some time; they integrate balconies, patios, and even planted containers.
“Kölner Brett,” Cologne, 1999
In the atrium-like access space of the courtyard building by Diener & Diener in Amsterdam, the vertical access elements are arranged at the peripheral gallery in such an intelligent way that one has to pass at most one other unit on the way to one’s own apartment. The placement of the eat-in kitchens at the transition between public and private sphere has the effect that life inside the apartment merges naturally with the communal life of the building as a whole.
KNSM- und Java-Eiland, Amsterdam, 2001
At best, the circulation is therefore simply a space, which is so attractive that one happily accepts a delay en route to one’s own apartment and is thereby drawn into the building‘s community – in just passing by and only when having the desire to do so.
Internal Links
Originally published in: Oliver Heckmann, Friederike Schneider (eds.), Floor Plan Manual Housing, fourth revised and expanded edition, Birkhäuser, 2011.