The proposal addresses three scales of approach inherent in a residential statement: the urban scale, the scale of the building group and the scale of the housing unit.
The proposal and the city
The image that inspires the project is that of a space where two architectural pieces of different shapes have "fallen", whose common condition is a presence of their own that seeks its own prominence from a satellite view, but tries to escape from long perceptions/ perspectives for the citizen, who accesses them with a certain element of surprise.
The proposal and the building complex
With regard to the two building pieces, they form an ensemble with a skin that tries to move away from a simple façade concept in order to serve as the exterior aspect of a complex system that can be seen functioning on the inside.
The two volumes therefore share an architectural system that must be read simultaneously in plan and in section in order to be understood. With a design that takes into account the diversity of the users' lifestyles, types of housing, sunlight and other considerations, the common scheme of each volume responds to a core of collective life on different levels, perforated both vertically and horizontally to allow natural lighting, include communication cores and look out onto the public space, respectively.
With a seemingly complex structure that is not generated as a superposition of identical floors, only the three-dimensional structure based on 3.30 metre bays is a constant parameter. Different containers of varying heights move away from or towards the central core, while reaching the limit of the envelope in the north or recessing in the south, while being able to generate different types of housing compatible with each other thanks to the ribbon of equipment and facilities that snakes around the perimeter of the complex along the direction of each container.
The landings, corridors, courtyards and other unnamed spaces resulting from this diversity generate different living spaces, covered or not, with geometries where users can develop their lives in ways not envisaged by the architects, being responsible for the collective negotiation that guarantees the compatibility of uses, which are surely surprising.
Perfectibility, flexibility and, above all, the timely withdrawal of the designer are the starting conditions for new ways of living that move away from the concept of public/private property and stimulate different time-spaces.
Therefore, we appropriate the best solutions that have worked in the physical and virtual reality of our imaginary, and guarantee the best housing for those who do not have all the capacities, for the young, the elderly, the family, the gay couple, the immigrant students and ourselves -who are quite rare-.
Where do you live?
I live in the house I need; how and with whom I want now; chatting sometimes with the old men from the fifth floor, at the barbecue on weekends with those from the second floor; running with my dog in an oasis that surrounds me from where I can see the moon of the city where I want to die.
