
Lately, I've become very interested in live/work uses. This is not something that I have written much about over the years, but it is now on my mind for a few reasons.
One, many of us tried working from home for the first time over the last 21 months or so, and my understanding is that some people enjoy it. It's not my preference, but I don't represent everyone.
Two, photography is a hobby of mine and I've always thought it would be super fun to have a studio space to play around with on the weekends. If any of you have any suggestions or spaces available, please let me know.
Three, there are lots of urban conditions where retail doesn't work, but a bit more ground-floor animation would be nice. This is commonly how live/work uses have been used. That said, I can think of a number of unsuccessful examples of this in Toronto. It's tough to execute on.
And four, there are lots of instances of older non-conforming spaces throughout our cities serving this purpose: inexpensive spaces for people to live, work, and create in. Though often "illegal", I believe they are important for fostering new ideas.
Here's an example that I was reading about this morning in The Spaces and that triggered this blog post. It's about sculptor Andreas Anastasis and his live/work loft on the west side of New York.
https://youtu.be/tZobmZnlvds
I don't know what building this is and whether or not work functions are technically permitted (presumably they are), but it's an example of what I'm talking about. Take a spin through the video embedded above. If you can't see it, click here.
Should we be designing and creating our new residential spaces with multiple uses and this kind of flexibility in mind? Is there a big enough market for it? Does it devalue the pure residential aspect of the building knowing that your next door neighbor might have an office in their space, an artist studio, or a short-term Airbnb rental?
These are some of the things that I've been thinking about and I would love to hear thoughts in the comment section below.

The Spaces just featured 21 Scott Street in Bronte (a suburb of Sydney) as its property of the week. (The home is currently listed.)
Designed by MCK Architects, the home is also called the “Upsilon House” and was supposedly designed for a fashion-industry couple.
Two things should immediately stand out to you about the house. One is how long and narrow the site and house are.
Here is a lengthwise view of the main living floor:

It’s somewhere around 7 years behind schedule, but Hamburg’s Elbphilharmonie concert hall opened its doors this week for its first ever public performance. Designed by Herzog & de Meuron, it was initially scheduled to open in 2010 at a cost of €77m. Instead it cost €789m and its first performance was, well, this week. This is according to The Spaces.
If by chance you didn’t attend the official opening ceremony (and even if you did), I recommend you check out this interactive drone fly through. It’s a neat (and potentially transformative) way to see the building, experience its architecture, and understand its setting on Hamburg’s harbor. Make sure you turn on your sound. It is a concert hall, after all.
You can also watch the opening concert (January 11, 2017) here on YouTube.

Lately, I've become very interested in live/work uses. This is not something that I have written much about over the years, but it is now on my mind for a few reasons.
One, many of us tried working from home for the first time over the last 21 months or so, and my understanding is that some people enjoy it. It's not my preference, but I don't represent everyone.
Two, photography is a hobby of mine and I've always thought it would be super fun to have a studio space to play around with on the weekends. If any of you have any suggestions or spaces available, please let me know.
Three, there are lots of urban conditions where retail doesn't work, but a bit more ground-floor animation would be nice. This is commonly how live/work uses have been used. That said, I can think of a number of unsuccessful examples of this in Toronto. It's tough to execute on.
And four, there are lots of instances of older non-conforming spaces throughout our cities serving this purpose: inexpensive spaces for people to live, work, and create in. Though often "illegal", I believe they are important for fostering new ideas.
Here's an example that I was reading about this morning in The Spaces and that triggered this blog post. It's about sculptor Andreas Anastasis and his live/work loft on the west side of New York.
https://youtu.be/tZobmZnlvds
I don't know what building this is and whether or not work functions are technically permitted (presumably they are), but it's an example of what I'm talking about. Take a spin through the video embedded above. If you can't see it, click here.
Should we be designing and creating our new residential spaces with multiple uses and this kind of flexibility in mind? Is there a big enough market for it? Does it devalue the pure residential aspect of the building knowing that your next door neighbor might have an office in their space, an artist studio, or a short-term Airbnb rental?
These are some of the things that I've been thinking about and I would love to hear thoughts in the comment section below.

The Spaces just featured 21 Scott Street in Bronte (a suburb of Sydney) as its property of the week. (The home is currently listed.)
Designed by MCK Architects, the home is also called the “Upsilon House” and was supposedly designed for a fashion-industry couple.
Two things should immediately stand out to you about the house. One is how long and narrow the site and house are.
Here is a lengthwise view of the main living floor:

It’s somewhere around 7 years behind schedule, but Hamburg’s Elbphilharmonie concert hall opened its doors this week for its first ever public performance. Designed by Herzog & de Meuron, it was initially scheduled to open in 2010 at a cost of €77m. Instead it cost €789m and its first performance was, well, this week. This is according to The Spaces.
If by chance you didn’t attend the official opening ceremony (and even if you did), I recommend you check out this interactive drone fly through. It’s a neat (and potentially transformative) way to see the building, experience its architecture, and understand its setting on Hamburg’s harbor. Make sure you turn on your sound. It is a concert hall, after all.
You can also watch the opening concert (January 11, 2017) here on YouTube.
Based on the plans provided by The Agency (listing agency), the house is about ~3.9m wide. That’s because of its tight site. However, the clerestory windows that run the length of the house would provide ample light.
The other thing that should stand out is all of the exposed concrete. The Spaces calls it “soft brutalism.” I personally love it, but I recognize that it’s not for everyone.
In any event, it reminded me of a recent blog post by Witold Rybczynski in which he responded to the New York Times calling Habitat in Montreal a brutalist building. His rebuttal: that’s a gross over-simplification. Brutalism, in its truest sense, is about dramatizing the “rough character of concrete.”
But I particularly enjoyed how he ended the post:
“There is another litmus test of Brutalism. Buildings like Habitat remain popular with their users. If people don’t hate it, it can’t be Brutalist.”
If that’s the case, then 21 Scott is certainly not Brutalism in my book.
Images via MCK Architects
Based on the plans provided by The Agency (listing agency), the house is about ~3.9m wide. That’s because of its tight site. However, the clerestory windows that run the length of the house would provide ample light.
The other thing that should stand out is all of the exposed concrete. The Spaces calls it “soft brutalism.” I personally love it, but I recognize that it’s not for everyone.
In any event, it reminded me of a recent blog post by Witold Rybczynski in which he responded to the New York Times calling Habitat in Montreal a brutalist building. His rebuttal: that’s a gross over-simplification. Brutalism, in its truest sense, is about dramatizing the “rough character of concrete.”
But I particularly enjoyed how he ended the post:
“There is another litmus test of Brutalism. Buildings like Habitat remain popular with their users. If people don’t hate it, it can’t be Brutalist.”
If that’s the case, then 21 Scott is certainly not Brutalism in my book.
Images via MCK Architects
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog