82 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

In converSatIon
anne lacaton

aPProachIng BuIldIngS
from the InterIor
a new attitude to transformation

oice lacaton & vassal, based in ⑦  TOUR BOIS LE PRÊTRE ⑧  530 DWELLINGS IN ⑨  HOUSING BLOCK C
Paris, has an international prac- The Spatial Envelope CITÉ DU GRAND PARC The Study
tice, working on various programs The Thermal Layer
of public buildings, housing, and
urban planning. all the projects are
based on principles of generosity
and economy, which serve the lives
of building and inhabitant, as well
as use and appropriateness, with
the aim of changing and improving
on existing standards. the oice
frédéric druot architecture, based
in Paris, was founded in 1992. the
oice focuses on housing projects
and urbanism. central concerns
are the subjects of context, scale,
and cost-efectiveness in new and
existing buildings. the two inde-
pendent oices collaborated on the
transformation of modernist hous-
ing projects such as the tour Bois
le Prêtre, Paris, and cité du grand
Parc, Bordeaux.

➊ the exterior view after con-

struction, quartier du grand Parc,
Bordeaux ➊
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 83

ʹ In 2004, you initiated a new method of dealing

with the post-war building stock with your study the most important
PLUS,1 and following your study you imple-
mented this strategy in tour Bois le Prêtre,2 thing is to focus
Paris (2011), la chesnaie, Saint-nazaire (2014),
and cité du grand-Parc,3 Bordeaux (2016). on how to improve
recently you have done a study for one of the
ive high-rise building blocks in the center of the quality and the
halle-neustadt. What was your primary inten-
tion with the study PLUS, and how did it mani- comfort of the interior
fest itself regarding the tenants’ use?
ʶ In fact, it started with our general idea about space.
what a living space is, i.e. what housing should be. In
the design of private houses, we proposed to radically
change architectural standards, i.e. applying ideas
of doubling living space, providing extra space and buildings, but we think that it is not enough to reduce
more freedom of use. When we studied the question this to a technical question. We think that any inter-
of renovation, we realized that the existing buildings vention, every inancial investment, must also improve
should also be brought up to the same standards of the living space and bring it to a superior standard.
better living spaces. In the study PLUS, these ideas By the addition of an extra layer of space, creating a
were taken up and developed further. Initially, PLUS double envelope, we created additional space for liv-
was a reaction against the national policy of demo- ing, more light, more openness, and a better view. We
lition and the rebuilding of public social housing. also brought the building up to code in terms of lower
We were convinced that demolition would be a mis- energy consumption. So it is a beneit on many levels,
take and we tried to demonstrate that an alternative but irst and foremost it radically changes the quality
transformation was better in terms of sustainability, of life for the tenants. our observation has been con-
in terms of solving technical questions, including the sistently veriied. looking at the photographs of the
question of energy saving, ire security, and acces- same interiors before and after the works it is amaz-
sibility, but most important, providing better condi- ing to see this collection of diferent ways of using the
tions of housing. and lastly, transformation is less space, of furnishing, and also of decoration.
expensive than demolition and rebuilding. the study in halle was a continuation of our
after we built our irst housing project, we previous projects. the client is a competence cen-
observed how the expansion of living space was tre—Kompetenzzentrum Stadtumbau—a research
really changing the way people live. and this is why centre in Saxony-anhalt, which is involved in the ren-
we decided to try applying the same generosity to ovation and transformation of the city of halle-neu-
the transformation of social housing. Starting from stadt. they knew the study PLUS and were interested
the standpoint that we do not care about the exte- in our experience with the transformation of social
rior form—we don’t mind if it’s a long slab, a tower, or housing, such as the project in Paris. they commis-
any other building type—we approach the question sioned us to study one of these ive eighteen-story
from the interior of the building. the most important blocks—hochhausscheibe c—which had been empty
thing is to focus on how to improve the quality and the for many years.
comfort of the interior space. a precise observation there is now a series of implemented projects,
is required to detect what is working well and what which can serve as a background for the study in
is missing and the goal of the project is to improve halle-neustadt. We can show these and the docu-
and add whatever is missing. the dwellings are most mented transformation of living spaces, which give
often too small and enclosed. and many times what an idea of how the apartments are used after our
is missing, apart from the usual technical questions, intervention. We are also experienced with all the
is space, light, and freedom. In general, the modern technical and inancial details.
housing blocks we dealt with have the potential to pro-
vide these three elements. at the same time, there is a ʹ What was the structural condition of the hoch-
need nowadays to improve the thermal quality of the hausscheibe c at the outset of the study?
ʶ there are no problems regarding the structure. It
1 frédéric druot, anne lacaton, 2 architects: druot, lacaton &
is solid and fully functional. additionally, we consulted
and jean-Philippe vassal, PLUS – vassal an engineer who knew these buildings well in order
Les grands ensembles de logements 3 architects: lacaton & vassal,
– Territoires d’exception (Barcelona: druot, hutin
to inform ourselves about all possibilities that could
editorial gustavo gili Sl, 2007). be made in terms of structural changes. → 95
84 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

⑦
tour BoIS le Prêtre
the Spatial envelope
ARCHITECTS
Frédéric Druot,
Anne Lacaton
& Jean-Philippe Vassal

LOCATION
17. Arrondissement, Paris,
France

YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION
1964

RENOVATION
2009–2011

CLIENT
Paris Habitat, social
housing association
of the city of Paris

ORGANIZATIONAL MODEL
Rental housing

USABLE AREA
Existing: 5,014 m²
Building transformed:
7,565 m²

GROSS FLOOR AREA / TOTAL

Existing: 8,900 m²
Building transformed:
12,460 m²

NUMBER OF APARTMENTS
100 apartments

BUILDING COSTS
11,250,000 euros net

➊
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 85
86 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

➌ ➍
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 87

5m
➎

➋–➍ the inhabited extension

layers
➎ the regular floor plan after
refurbishment
➏ the extension concept which
was irst implemented in the tour
➏ Bois le Prêtre
88 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

⑧
530 dWellIngS In
cIté du grand Parc
the thermal layer
ARCHITECTS
Anne Lacaton
& Jean-Philippe Vassal,
Frédéric Druot,
Christophe Hutin

LOCATION
Bordeaux, France

YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION
1960s

RENOVATION
2014–2016

CLIENT
Aquitanis, social housing
association of Bordeaux
Metropolis

ORGANIZATIONAL MODEL
Rental housing

USABLE AREA
Existing: 33,095 m²
Buildings transformed:
36,724 m² + 16,032 m²
winter gardens

GROSS FLOOR AREA /

TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE
Existing: 44,210 m²
Buildings transformed:
67,717 m²

NUMBER OF APARTMENTS
530 + 8 apartments

BUILDING COSTS (TOTAL)

27,200,000 euros net

➊
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 89
90 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

➌
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 91

➋ detailed view of the facade

after refurbishment
➌ axonometric view of the regular
loor plan after refurbishment
➍–➏ Impressions from after the
refurbishment ➏
92 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

⑨
houSIng Block c
the Study
ARCHITECTS
Anne Lacaton
& Jean-Philippe Vassal,
Jeanne-Françoise Fischer

LOCATION
Center, Halle-Neutstadt,
Germany

YEAR OF CONSTRUCTION
1970–1975

STUDY
2015

CLIENT
Kompetenzzentrum
Stadtumbau—SALEG;
Sachsen Anhaltische
Landensentwick-
lungsgesellschaft mbH,
Magdeburg

USABLE AREA
Existing: 11,091 m²
Project: 14,393 m²
+ 4,216 m² winter gardens

NET EXTERNAL AREA

Existing: 14,850 m²
Project: 22,660 m²
120 dwellings: 10,336 m²
+ 4,216 m² winter gardens

BUILDING COSTS
Estimation:
14,663,500 euros net
120 dwellings:
10,880,000 euros net

➊ rendering, housing Block c in

the center of halle-neustadt ➊
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 93
94 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

5m
➋

➋ option 2 with a 3.6-meter

extension and transformed interior
layout
➌ the section of the existing
structure shows the missing bal-
conies on +6 and +13, which in the
proposed refurbishment of option 2
would be used as duplex apartments
with two-story winter gardens.
➍ option 1 of the proposed refur-
bishment strategy entails the replace-
ment of the facade and balconies with
new glass elements, as well as the
5m
➌ transformation of the layout.
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 95

the structure is strong but very constrained, since it was not possible to create big rooms, because each
is based on a grid of walls every 3.60 meters. one of cell is limited to 20 square meters. this is compen-
the beneits of the additional layer that has been pro- sated for, however, by the extended space that adds
posed in the study is that it connects the rooms, so it a large open area on each loor. the combination
is not necessary to move or remove many walls inside of these two diferent kinds of space—the existing
for this purpose. this allows us to avoid complex and cells and the large extension—creates much more
expensive structural problems. the extensions allow innovative typologies than in newly built apartment
for more space and for solutions to the facades of buildings, which have been done following today’s
the building as well. they also solve the problems of conventional standards.
ire security, but also other more functional aspects
inside the existing blocks. ʹ In your opinion, which intervention led to a
the building contained residential accommo- fundamental improvement of the dwelling
dations [Wohnheime] for students and workers, but structure? Which intervention created a new
they were not family apartments. thus they were of a typology?
special type: containing four bedrooms and one com- ʶ our goal was to take advantage of the existing
mon bathroom. In consequence, the loor plan is very structure of the walls. We ind this more interesting.
rigid. our proposition was to transform it into good changing too much is expensive and we prefer to
housing in an afordable way. this is why we consid- spend the budget on the construction of new, addi-
ered the idea of the extension along the same lines as tional space. the interventions on the existing struc-
in Bordeaux. It was in fact easier, however, because the ture are minimal, and the extension is a 4-meter layer
facades are not loadbearing but simply panels that can built all around the building on every loor.
be removed. It was in this way that we could open up the basic layouts with two bedrooms use
the existing structures and add a new layer to them. four of the 20-square-meter modules (two for the
bedrooms, two for living room and kitchen) plus the
ʹ In halle-neustadt you changed the existing extra space of 4 meters in the front connecting the
layout of the lats. this is diferent from pre- four modules. two variations have been proposed. In
vious projects where the main function was to option 1 the plan with two bedrooms on each side
extend the given space. In the case of halle- of the apartment with the living room and kitchen
neustadt, it seems that the project gained yet in the center creates two independent private units
another function, a typological one. Is this an
advancement of your previous approach?
ʶ yes, but it must be noted that this is mostly
related to the diferent contexts and the diferent
situations of the buildings. the projects are always the combination of
a result of precise observations, analysis, inven-
tory of the capacities of the existing space, or its these two diferent
potentials. on the one hand, we face the question
of improving the space and its quality for living; on kinds of space—the
the other, we are always confronted with diferent
spatial circumstances. existing cells and the
regarding apartment types, halle is a special
case. the apartment types in the other projects dealt large extension—
with buildings that were clearly designed for fami-
lies. furthermore, in Paris and Bordeaux the tenants creates much more
remained in their apartments during the construction
works. So we preserved the loor plan, we just added innovative typologies
a layer, like a garden, because it was neither neces-
sary nor possible to change the layouts. than in newly built
In the case of halle-neustadt, the building is
empty, so we can use the extension to change the apartment buildings,
existing typologies and to create new ones. In the dif-
ferent options of the study we found that a variety of which have been done
approaches would be possible—from the small dwell-
ings to bigger ones, some special cases at the south- following today’s con-
eastern edge, where we can have an extension at the
corner of the building, and also duplex apartments. It ventional standards.
96 aPProachIng BuIldIngS from the InterIor lacaton & vassal – druot

with a bathroom each, and at the same time the out- We are involved in preserving the social composition
door connection between living room and kitchen is of the buildings, and we think that providing better
interrupted [loor plan]. With every second module, housing should not be an opportunity for gentriica-
the wall extends to the edge of the building, there- tion. this is why we ind it important to approach these
fore disconnecting the irst bedroom and living room projects from the interior—it motivated us to consider
from the kitchen and the second bedroom; in a word, the inhabitants and not just the building. from inside,
it creates two equal units within one apartment. on the situation is radically diferent, because we do not
the other side of the building we ind a more classical face a big building, but a number of small dwellings,
form. the two bedrooms are on one side, occupying and a number of people. When we meet the people, we
two modules. the living room and kitchen occupy feel committed towards them. the situation inside is
the other two modules. here both living room and always very precious, and it is the people themselves
kitchen are connected outdoors, and the two bed- that give value to the building and to their dwellings.
rooms are disconnected. this division between Whatever the situation is, whatever the incomes, what-
shared spaces and essentially private spaces is more ever the building looks like, the interior space is very
common in housing. Both create spatial conigura- private. they are proud of it; their lives are on display
tions, that would not be possible in new housing pro- there on the walls and through objects. We got very
jects. this is one of the beneits of the transformation involved when the people showed us their belongings
of existing buildings; transformation seems to allow and when we saw the care with which they decorated
for proposals that are usually not possible. the interiors. after these visits in previous projects, we
We also proposed duplex apartments on two were determined to preserve all this. In fact, extension
speciic loors of the building. We noticed that the is the best method for transforming as little as pos-
existing building did not have balconies on the 6th sible on the inside.
and on the 13th level. We don’t know the reason for
this; however, it is an irregularity that had the poten- ʹ Was it through your observations of how peo-
tial to result in something inventive: in option 2 [sec- ple appropriate the existing space that you
tion] we proposed the duplex apartments precisely could detect that the existing buildings had
on these loors—i.e. on the 6th / 7th as well as on potential?
the 13th / 14th loors—resulting in a winter garden ʶ It is important to observe carefully, with posi-
on two levels. tive eyes, with attention and respect for people,
free of judgment. many people are really brilliant in
ʹ What residential models did the building cre- giving value to something that others would con-
ate, for which residential groups? sider worthless. People face bland, ordinary spaces,
ʶ generally speaking, it was important to create when they move in, yet they manage to customize
open possibilities for a variety of forms that allow the apartment, giving it a unique quality. It is some-
diferent types of people to live there. In such big thing that we do not want to lose; our aim is to add
buildings, with nearly 100 lats, it is important to cre- to the efect that the people themselves provided,
ate typologies that absorb many diferent types of to their forces, to their qualities. given the existing
households. apart from the diferent family units, space and what the people were able to do with it,
there are also small one-bedroom-apartments suit- we merely wanted to preserve these aspects, and
able for students or elderly people. another possi- to bring something additional to them, knowing full
ble option would be residences for elderly people well that the people will also be able to do something
with some common spaces on the ground loor or with whatever we ourselves are able to create. the
2nd loor. It is important to keep these possibilities core of the project is a belief in the capacity of peo-
open, and give the freedom of customization to dif- ple, of their capability of doing things by themselves.
ferent tenants, and not to decide whether a form is
for families or for young people. ʹ Would you say that in the very beginning this
was one of the challenges of the project, to
ʹ If we go back to your general concept and your actually convince the french authorities to see
previous projects, one of the intentions was this potential?
to retain the building’s tenants. how did you ʶ In fact, PLUS was not very well received, because
achieve that with the previous projects? it contradicted the policy of renovation and demolition
ʶ It is our aim to retain the tenants who are living in france. the most diicult task is to demonstrate
in the building prior to our intervention, and that they that the modernist housing projects have a potential.
will be the irst beneiciaries of the transformation. the core problem is that these buildings are gener-
When we work on social housing, we are dealing with ally viewed in a negative light. and if you consider the
people with diferent incomes, also with low incomes. situation negative, you cannot observe and see the
Small InterventIonS new Ways of living in Post-War modernism 97

ʹ there is also the issue of how state support

from inside, the programs for renovations and their respec-
tive regulations function, which often prevent
situation is radically new approaches and inventions. how does this
work in the french context?
diferent, because ʶ In france the national program of renovation
of public social housing buildings was introduced
we do not face a big in the early 2000s. It planned the demolition and
reconstruction of around 150,000 dwellings and the
building, but a number renovation of about 250,000 dwellings. on the one
hand, the government could grant subsidies from
of small dwellings, and 15,000 to 18,000 euros per dwelling in order to carry
out a small-scale renovation like adding insulation or
a number of people. refurbishing technical installations, and on the other
hand 150,000 up to 180,000 euros per dwelling were
allocated to demolishing and rebuilding. In between
these two options, there are no other subsidies.
through PLUS, we studied very carefully the
question of economic feasibility. We found that for
potential. It is because we started with a positive atti- more or less 50,000 euros per unit it would be pos-
tude, that we could ind potential and new solutions. sible to radically transform and renovate a dwell-
ing and the common spaces without relocating the
ʹ apart from the negative image, what role does tenants. now, realistically, that is about roughly one
the renovation practice of housing associa- third of the subsidies given for demolition. for the
tions play? as a routine, they focus on new amount that was spent for demolition and rebuilding
cladding, insulation, etc. of 100,000 apartments in france, they could have
ʶ owners generally proceed to standard renova- transformed 300,000 existing dwellings. So even-
tion, i.e. technical interventions, which don’t improve tually the policies determine the process with very
the intrinsic value of the dwellings. on the contrary, real efects.
these interventions often diminish the interior qualities, It is not clear why our attitude, PLUS, was not
for example by reducing glazing, and therefore illumi- taken into consideration, or developed further. Per-
nation. furthermore, standard interventions are short- haps it is generally considered that a basic dwelling
sighted. numerous buildings that were insulated and is suicient; it is simply unnecessary to do more. But
re-cladded twenty years ago are already in need of new this is clearly no opinion as far as we are concerned;
cladding. It is very clear that this is a wrong approach we believe that improving the condition of housing,
to renovation. It is important to be more ambitious. giving space, light, and freedom is the most impor-
there are so many better, smarter ways than tant thing, and people are free to use these three
insulation to make a building more energy-eicient elements as they want. the dwelling is an essential
and sustainable. Sustainability is also about the way element in the lives of all the people and they expect
that money is spent for doing something that lasts more than just the provision of basic standards.
longer and is of greater use. the issues of improving
insulation, of saving energy, are all perfectly solved
in the transformations that we implemented, while
also adding space and quality. at the same time it is
also less expensive. for example the project in Bor-
deaux cost 45,000 euros for the transformation of
each dwelling. When that is compared to the costs
for a basic renovation, with total insulation, chang-
ing the windows, elevators and so on, it is more or
less 25,000 to 30,000 euros. So the gap is very small
for something that inally creates a new building with
improved apartments. So why is a large majority of
renovations limited to technical interventions? I think
the problem is not purely economic, it is much more
a question of a lack of generosity, and a resistance to
change in established practices.