Written by:
Sophia de Sousa
Our December Chat was Designing for Transient Communities co-hosted with Elly Mead of Hawkins\Brown. In it, we explored the challenge that even the most inclusive and engaged design processes grapple with the knowledge that many of the people they are engaging in decision-making will have moved on before the project is completed. In our current landscapes, our local populations are constantly shifting, whether as displaced communities, students, key workers, those moving for employment opportunities or simply those looking for pastures new. Our Chat brought together a mix of people working in a range of sectors, from different parts of the UK and abroad and representing a range of cultures, to explore these questions.
Key Themes
It was interesting how quickly the conversation was enlivened by this range of perspectives, and also how some very clear common themes and threads emerged. We could not get away from the role that economics plays in informing the movement of people from one place to the other, whether by choice or necessity. We also talked about the role of design, development and regeneration in shaping places where people move to, remain or leave. We considered the adaptability of homes and neighbourhoods to cater for people and families, welcoming and supporting different needs and cultures at various stages of our lives. Inevitably, this led us to talk about the spaces that are crucial to building and nurturing communities, whether for those who stay in a place over time or spend only a short period there.
The Role of Economics
It is difficult to talk about transient communities of any kind without talking about homes and housing. Our conversation immediately recognised that in the UK, economic factors, and particularly the affordability of housing, plays a hugely influential role in determining where we live, whether by choice or necessity. Similarly, the quality of the social infrastructure such as employment opportunities, schools, healthcare, cultural and recreational amenities in any place is both affected by and influences the local economy. This too, informs whether people (who have the choice) move into or remain within an area.
One of our group shared a particularly insightful story about the Ukrainian families fleeing the war, who moved to Britain and were hosted by families when they arrived. They tended to be hosted by families in affluent areas, as these were the people with homes large enough to accommodate multiple guests for an extended period of time. This meant that these hosted Ukrainian families set up new lives in affluent areas, enrolling children in local schools and registering with local services. Sadly, many were not able to stay in the area once they left their host families due to affordability or lack of available homes. This created a new layer of forced transience for these Ukrainian families.
It was also noted that house building is a huge profit-making industry in the UK, and that we tend to see homes as investments. One of our participants commented on the very British notion of the “housing ladder”, and the expectation that the first home we buy is only a step towards bigger and better homes as our economic prowess and equity increases.
We were keen to explore how we might shift this and “place human values over monetary value”. We noted the increase in social value objectives and indicators being written into large-scale development and regeneration and wondered what mechanisms might help shift a greater percentage of the profit margin to be invested back into communities through social value initiatives? Given that the metrics for measuring social value are still framed largely in economic terms, perhaps we need new criteria for assessing social value and impact.
Design Makes a Difference
We talked about the role design can play in both accommodating and preventing the movement of people in and out of homes and neighbourhoods. We recognised that people have changing needs at the various stages of their lives, and that different cultures use and occupy spaces differently. Whilst any design decision might not satisfy everyone’s needs, there are architectural, urban design and landscape approaches that can help build community, and build flexibility and adaptability into homes. Designing for “stickability” is not just about the flexible design of individual homes. It is also about the range of different homes on offer and our freedom to adapt the homes we have.
One of our participants pointed out that in many countries and cultures, rather than moving to a new home when needs change, people tend to adapt the home they are already in to suit their new situation. We noted that the UK planning system is both highly regulatory and adversarial, and can make the prospect of adapting a home far more complicated than in other parts of the world. So perhaps both design and our planning system should do more to enable us to adapt and evolve our individual and shared spaces.
The Value of Communal Spaces
Shared spaces, whether at a building, street or neighbourhood level, also became a focus for our conversation. Such spaces can play a crucial role in creating an economy of scale but also support social networks and incidental meetings with others. Examples of co-housing projects illustrated the logic of shared guest facilities, for instance, meaning that rather than every home having to have a spare room for the occasional visitor, several homes could share one. The same principles apply to event rooms or halls, laundry facilities and other shared spaces, which can not only create cost, environmental and space saving incentives but also, very importantly, create opportunities to build social and support networks.
Returning to economics, we identified markets as a potentially powerful example of a shared space that would benefit both the transient and established communities within a place, and help support their integration. Markets can be a vital space to trade local produce and share local traditions, but also a safe space through which new communities can share theirs. They might offer an interesting pathway into establishing more permanent roots within a community and at the same time, to contributing foods, crafts and customs into a changing demographic at a particular moment in time. As one of our participants put it, with the right infrastructure and shared spaces, the local economy can be a stabilising force when the people within it change. By the same token, that changing demographic can help adapt and bring stability to the local economy.
Wrapping up
This Chat became an unexpected space to compare cultural norms regarding our relationships with our individual homes and our shared spaces in different societies. It illustrated that as our populations become more mobile, and as the needs of each of us changes as we go through life, our places need to be better able to adapt, support and nurture. We can not measure their success using economic metrics alone. Ultimately, we need to keep talking, trying both established and new ways of living and co-habitating, and be willing to reconsider and adapt. Design, planning and development should be creative forces to help us do this, rather than limiting possibilities.