|
|
|
Domicile
One is 75 feet in diameter and can house four
to five
families. It is designed to sit on two typical urban
house lots so the density increase is better than
two times. With the combination of outside Permaculture
[link] and inside Greenhouse, the vast majority of
food needed by the Domicile inhabitants can be grown
on site.
|
|
The
Dome and the gravel bed below frost line and the
“double shell construction of the superstructure
provides anenvironment valve that keeps
the interior temperature between 57 and 75 degrees
prior to active
treatment. Interior construction is therefore
concerned with utility, arrangement, beauty, sight-lines,
sound abatement and minor air cooling and heating
- not with raw weather. This allows a flexible interior
environment without the worry of water proofing and
major temperature swings - an economy in construction,
maintenance and energy costs. In addition, the way
the dome shape meets the ground is made restful
[link] by
the earth berms and landscaping - both of which
are energy-food providers, as well as providing
security
and privacy.
|
|
In
this environment, recreation facilities, libraries,
expensive office equipment, large living spaces, greenhouses,
libraries, cooking, tooling, cars and so forth, are
provided in the commons. Individuals and
families will have their own space and facilities
providing whatever mix of personal tooling and commons
redundancy desired by each. Individual lifestyle choices
can replicate virtually all or practically none of
these common facilities - this is a personal
economic decision.
|
|
Rules
of engagement [link] will determine the use of commonwealth items,
as well as,
other interactions among those living and working
within the environment.
|
|
Most
of the common areas will be in the lower part of the
Dome. In the illustration above, the cross section
is cut through the swimming pool and the greenhouse
structure which is shown on the right (south) side
of the structure - both of these will take up only
a small portion of the lower area which will also
have Living Room, recreational, dining and other similar
facilities. On the various platforms inside the Dome,
different houses are constructed according
to the requirements of their owners. Almost any combination
of group or personal space - and tooling - can be
provided. These dwelling units can be large or small,
simple or elaborate as fits each occupant. They can
be modified over time employing common materials and
prefabricated components.
|
|
The
1967 concept sketches
(reproduced in May 1973) [link] show another version
of the interior and one example of how Domicile can
sit on
a typical urban site. These sketches also indicate
and Entry building and Office where reception
and the Domiciles business can take place without
unnecessary invasion of privacy. Access to the Dome
proper from the Entry building is through a partially
underground tube. This leave the sight free for
other
uses and proves both added security and protection
from the weather.
|
|
A
great deal of the site is left free for recreation,
food growing and privacy. Domiciles can be clustered
(with connecting tubes) allowing even more land
freed for
a variety of uses. The land use aspect of this schema
is efficient and ecologically sensitive. Domiciles
can be adapted to serve a variety of co-housing
programs. See: Ken Norwood (Rebuilding Community
in America) of the Shared Living Resource Center
in Berkeley, California (800 475 7572).
|
|
This
design concept is driven by three values often
missing
in todays approach to housing: community, economy
[link] and stability of family. Families
do not have to be biological based (only). They will,
in the future, often
be based on many other affinity principles.
|
|
Domiciles
were conceived from the beginning to be both living
and work environments. They were designed on the
premise of the KnowledgeWorker and knowledge economy,
or in
todays terms, Free Agent economy.
This means the environment will not be abandoned
half the day and will be managed as a 7/24/365
enterprise. Preliminary figures indicate a several
times increase
in the quality of living at about a 50% decrease
in monthly overhead for a family. This radically
alters the cost of living to an individual and family
and significantly increases their life options.
|
|
The
actual social systems employed to govern the environments
can be highly varied from a hotel model
to, condominium to commune with many variants in
between.
|
|
It
is is the realm of economic freedom that the Domicile
concept shows its strongest face. Do this thought
experiment. Fly over the city and look
into the offices and houses. How much redundancy
of effort, tools and resources do you see? How much
of
this wealth is latent, rarely used? It all
took, recourses, time and energy to produce. It
takes energy to keep.
This translates into hours for each of the owners.
Frozen hours of their life - not effectively
employed. The amount of this largely
unnecessary redundancy is staggering
- the
cost, a significant portion of a households
revenue. This leads to a society of wage-slaves.
In economic downturns, people realize the
traps that they have put themselves into by uncritical
acceptance of a consumer society and its present
attendant design strategies. Yet, few realize that
their situation is systemic - the in-the-moment economy
is blamed rather than the design strategies of their
architecture and their attendant living habits.
|
|
Why
this over building and under utilization? The answer
is simple. So that each resource will be available
on demand to the user. USE is the
principle that must be addressed - not unnecessary
control or ownership. More than adequate use can be
provided by proper analysis and rules-of-engagement
supported by smart scheduling systems.
The most constrained resource for the majority of
humans is time. Time for learning, play, recreation
and funding new ventures - be they personal business
or nonprofit. There are three aspects to procuring
a basic lifestyle: income and costs are two of them.
Social costs and opportunity loss is the other. Domicile
addresses the cost side of this equation. It challenges
prevailing ideas concerning what it costs to live
in a stable community and accomplish a healthy, beautiful
well-tooled way of living and working.
|
|
Many,
buy lower quality products than they require and
desire
because they cannot afford quality - every unnecessary
purchase makes this condition worse. The low quality
purchase generates a downward positive feedback loop:
low quality is, in the end, bad economics [link].
|
|
Because
of schedule constraints, many spend money for goods
and services that used to be self-provided. This can
translate in to more day-to-day freedom but too often
it means a reduction of options and an increase in
job dependency. The costs associated with most packaged
goods is mostly the packaging itself and the advertising
necessary to sell it. Many of these home products
can be safely and easily be provided in a simple home
lab for a fraction of the cost and a few hours of
month. On the scale of a Domicile this makes great
sense. These can be jobs for those working
at home or taking a work sabbatical. The entire consumer/work
cycle can be positively effected.
|
|
Families,
farms and communities used to provide many of the
basic staples of life - now, almost everything
is
a commodity supplied by ever larger and complex corporations
delivering through an ever more complex and economically
and ecologically expensive supply chain. For some
products, such as computers and cars, this makes
sense.
For fresh vegetables it does not. Nor does it for
toothpaste that have but a few cents of materials
purchased at bulk. Even technology and service
costs
can be reduced because the Domicile community can
buy as a unit increasing it’s purchasing power.
|
|
Domicile
is an urban homestead for families - it can radically
expand their economic options and freedom. It can
facilitate a far greater set of choices than the
existing default
housing models.
|
|
It
also goes beyond these fundamental economic and
health
considerations. As a building strategy, the Domicile
offers significant architectural opportunities
that
few single family building schemes can
muster. Domiciles are potentially high variety environments.
Their architectural quality can be at the highest
level while being economically and ecologically
affordable to a fast number of people who can not
afford quality habitation today.
|
bolder_affordable_housing |
|
The
Affordable
Housing Project [link] for the City of Boulder,
designed in 1980, further developed many of the
Domicile
concepts.
The dome configuration was not used because the site
was close to the Flatirons and the view of these
mountains
could not be blocked. Instead, a low profile earth-sheltered
greenhouse was proposed. In this case,
the entire interior dwelling components: walls,
floors,
roofs and mechanical systems were made adjustable
and moveable by those living in the environment.
A
significant extension of the idea of adaptability.
|
| The
Xanadu
Project [link] which I conceived in the 1950s
and drew up in 2000 scales the Domicile idea to a
working
and
living environment for a thousand people. There are
many scales in between that will work if matched
to
specific site and socioeconomic circumstances. The
principles remain the same. |
| It
is incomprehensible to me that projects like Domicile
are not common today. This concept is nearly 40 years
old. The problem of affordable housing is still with
us. The ecological issues are still with us. And,
in recent years, fear of losing work is returning
to the workplace. The many personal and social consequences
of these patterns can be easily seen. Yet, they are
still treated
as separate issues. It remains, for all practical
purposes, impossible to get investment for this kind
of project. Yet, what is the worst case that could
happen? A marginal return? As long as our society
continues to think of architecture, ecology, economics,
life-style options and social policy as separate
issues, we will continue along the insane path of
the present. As long as “making” money is seen as
governed by a different standard than what makes
a good “social” investment, projects like Domicile
will remain on the drawing boards. Yet, as I write
this comment (returning from the 05 WEF) it is projected
that the world economy will grow by 80% over the
next 15 years [link].
Are we to believe that the present design strategies
of of food supply, energy,
transportation,
employment and housing are to prevail? Has anyone
thought thought about the consequences of this? Are
the barriers to innovations such as Domicile understood?
Who benefits from this existing social-economic entrenchment?
Who pays? Who loses? Maybe, a planet covered with
asphalt
really will be nice. Maybe, I am missing
something here. Maybe... [link] |
|
| The recently completed UniCredit NavCenter, while a work environment, best indicates the architectural quality that a Domicile can provide. It is also the closest built project that gives a taste of what the Xanadu project [link: xanadu] will be like. The scale and use is different yet the quality is the same. |
|
| Click on the picture above and look at the UniCredit NavCenter Tour while keeping the Domicile sketches in mind. This takes some translation, however, the interior landscaping the various zones, the “rooms within rooms” created by the PODs, the multiple heights of platforms all provide a small illustration of what a Domicile can be like. The structure will be more domestic in feel and there will be many more layers of privacy, yet let you imagination fill in the gaps. |
|
Matt
Taylor
Palo Alto
February 21, 1999 |
|

SolutionBox
voice of this document:
VISION STRATEGY EVALUATION
|
posted:
February 21, 1999
revised:
March 25, 2007
200002006.233038.mt 20000513.190127.mt
• 200001212.517623.mt
20011026.872002.mt
• 20050208.6451200.mt • 20070325.999910.mt •
(note:
this document is about 80% finished)
|