Envisioning the Evolution of A Live-Work Typology

! !! !! !! !! ! !

Envisioning the Evolution of A Live-Work Typology!

Dwelling for the Creative Class

!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !

H+U March Term 2!

Domesticity

!

Submitted by Amanda Palasik!

1 April 2015 

Contents!

! !

Reevaluating the Live-Work Dichotomy…………………….……………………..……….….…1! !

Andy Warhol’s Silver Factory Loft!

The collective work-leisure space…………………………………………………………………3!

!

Chelsea Hotel and Apartments!

The private live-work space……………………………………………………………..…………5!

!

Media Evolution City!

The collaborative work environment..…..……………………………………..……………….…9!

!

Live to Work: Work to Live……………..…………………………………………………………11!

!

Work for Leisure: Leisure for Work………………………………………………..……….……12!

!

The Future of the Live-Work Typology………………………………………….………………13!

!

Bibliography………………………………………………………………………..…..….….……14!

!

Figure Credits……………………………………………………………………….….…….……15!

! ! !

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

!! !! ! !

Reevaluating the Live-Work Dichotomy! !

Envisioning the Evolution of A Live-Work Typology!

Dwelling for the Creative Class ! ! !

The global talent migration has resulted in the rise of a twenty-first century creative class, increasing housing demands that respond to the dynamic lifestyle patterns of this social class.

Economist Richard Florida broadly defines the characteristics of the creative class based on economic production and a shared creative ethos that values impermanence, “selfstatement, acceptance of difference, the desire for rich multi-dimensional experiences”, as well as liberation from imposition (Florida, 2002, p.

15). It can be argued that the overarching binding element amongst these unique individuals is their shared desire for a lifestyle that fosters creativity and defies the segregation of live, work, and leisure (Florida, 2002, p.8).

Furthermore, the notion of the office and commute are becoming irrelevant as nonconventional work patterns such as working from home, extensive traveling, freelancing, or embarking on start-ups become the norm.!

!

Case in point is transport engineer and member of the creative class, Adam, who temporarily relocated to West London for a year to be with his partner who studies in London. Working online for an overseas planning company, Adam’s makeshift “office” is set up in a five-foot wide corridor between the kitchen and living room of his rented basement flat, of which he shares with his partner and dog. Although a small desk, chair (found on the sidewalk), laptop, and mobile access is sufficient for his work, he spends 85% of his time alone facing a white wall with little social interaction or visual stimulation, aside from the occasional webinar or phone call. Some in this scenario may take up work at a local coffee shop or library to be in a more interactive environment that facilitates productivity, however these options may not be suitable for long-term work, if work requires more than a laptop, or if your schedule falls outside of the venue’s hours of operation. !

!

As evident in Adam’s case, an issue with conventional housing typologies is the notion of the home as an introverted space of private refuge, serving the mono-function of “living”.

The static partitions of the home dictate functions, assuming spaces for eating, cooking, bathing, and sleeping, thereby inhibiting the flexibility of the home to perform more than these essentials. The creative class challenges this traditional concept to become a hybrid space where living becomes working, and vice versa. Moreover, it challenges the notion that a live-work environment should operate in isolation. How can the desired privacy of essential living functions coexist with a more collective work environment as demanded by the creative class? Furthermore, how should this collective space perform; should the ambitions of this space(s) be solely dedicated to the notion of work?

Figure 1. Adam’s inefficient live-work arrangement set up in the corridor of his basement flat.

1

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

To postulate an evolution of this live-work typology, it is essential to understand the fundamental commonalities, aside from merely being creative, that define the common values shared amongst individuals of the creative class. Creativity, a term often associated with the arts, has assumed a twenty-first century definition associated with the ability to derive innovative solutions, therefore making the trait applicable to a diversity of fields including technical, medical, economical, and cultural (Florida, 2002, p.33). Likewise, creativity is often inaccurately stereotyped as an introverted process, alluding to romanticised stories of individuals, such as Michelangelo, who locked themselves away for days and even years to perfect their work, sleeping infrequently and eating just to stay alive. However, modern society acknowledges the potential of creativity to thrive in particularly diverse, yet stable, social environments with organisation1 playing a key role in facilitating or hindering (in excess), creative environments (p.35, 41). The same balance should be considered when it comes to proposing an evolved live-work typology for the creative class. Can too much architectural intervention stifle the creativity of its inhabitants or can design facilitate such environments? !

!

In an era where our smartphones know more about us than our significant others, perhaps this social introversion has prompted the creative class to elect the interactive social realm as an integral part of our working lifestyle.

The desire for this collaborative atmosphere has been explored by pioneering companies catering to the creative class such as Google, with their free co-working cafe in London.

Likewise, typologies evolved from shared and flex work space, such as Media Evolution City (MEC) in Malmö, have taken this concept further, yet fail to include housing as part of the dynamic. Why is this so? While some may argue for a separation between living and work, this distinction is arguably becoming more and more obsolete as work is perceived as a lifestyle pursuit of passions and not merely as a job out of necessity.!

!! !! !

!! !! !! !!

Figure 2. Google’s co-working Campus Cafe in Shoreditch, London.

Figure 3. Collaborative fix desk work environment of Media Evolution City in Malmö, Sweden.

Figure 4. Lobby/cafe of Media Evolution City designed as an open informal collaborative space to host events and meetings.

1

In The Rise of the Creative Class, Richard Florida emphasises the social nature of the creative process, claiming the necessity of organisation to facilitate the interaction amongst individuals. Likewise, organisation must achieve a balance of “practice” (achieving creativity) and “process” (implementing creativity) in order to serve as a facilitator versus as a hindrance to the creative process (p. 41).

2

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Andy Warhol’s Silver Factory Loft!

The collective work-leisure space

!

The dynamic of a collective work environment is perhaps best represented in Andy Warhol’s Silver Factory. In 1963, Warhol rented the fourth floor of a derelict five-storey industrial building in New York City as his work studio. He was attracted to the anonymous character of the introverted space, defining it as atypical of an artist’s work space (Reznik, 2014). At that time, the character of Manhattan’s East 47th Street was equally as mundane, flanked by residual industrial buildings, an adjacent YMCA, and antique shop with little urban vitality. Despite the lack of activity in the area, the frequency of visitors, parties, and events in the space essentially brought the streets of New York into the studio. Appropriately deemed the Silver Factory, Warhol consistently employed a diverse social mix of “friends, partiers, free thinkers, drug users, adult film performers, drag queens, socialites, musicians and artists” into his home to share experiences and participate in the production of his screen prints and movies (wikipedia, 2015).!

!

The loft was a rectangular floor plan of one hundred and fifty square feet, with a row of windows that ran along the south edge facing 47th Street (Reznik, 2014). However, Warhol preferred to have minimal light and covered them up (Comenas, 2013). Although Warhol and his associates spent majority of their time working or leisurely lingering around the studio, Wa r h o l ’ s f r i e n d and Silver Factory photographer, Billy Name, was the only one who lived in the loft full-time (often guests would stay overnight on the couches). Name converted a second bathroom into his sleeping closet/ darkroom (Danto, 2009, p.93). Despite an adequacy of space and surplus of second hand couches, it is interesting that Name chose to convert the space as his sleeping quarters, perhaps attesting to the lack of privacy in the loft (London, 2013). On the other hand, Warhol would often sleep at his mother’s house nearby, but stuck to a workaholic lifestyle of working in the studio from 12 - 12, going out until 4 a.m., coming back to mingle at the Factory, then sleeping (at his mother’s) when the sun started to come up until he returned to the factory around noon (Comenas, 2013). In this respect, the notion of home and living became synonymous with the studio and work. Sleeping became a transient function for Warhol and his entourage (with the exception of Name). In essence, a non-kinship family was established within the Silver Factory, critical to its productivity.

!

!

Figure 5. Warhol relaxing in Silver Factory on second hand couch found on the street.

3

Leisure!

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Living!

Working

Figure 7. Facade of Silver Factory!

 

Figure 8. Silver Factory consumed as work space. Brillo box silkscreening in effect.

Figure 9. One of several parties hosted at the Silver Factory where the Velvet Underground would often perform.

Figure 10. Warhol at work as visitors socialise in background.

Figure 11. Warhol working on film while workers simultaneously engage in silkscreen production and visitors observe and socialise.

4

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

The open plan of the factory was informally zoned with moveable hinged standing plywood panels to create areas for Name’s studio, Warhol’s silk screen stations, an office, movie set, paint studio, various themed parties, as well as temporary band rehearsal space for the Velvet Underground. Despite the intent of these partitions to delineate space for programs, the flux of events voided the potential for a permanent configuration. Likewise, the open plan proved extremely efficient, continually activating redundant space and integrating open circulation throughout the space. !

!

One simply could not take a cookie cutter plan of the Silver Factory and rebuild it, nor could a modern day Warhol move into the Silver Factory, with all its recycled furniture and glitz, and expect it to perform as during the Silver Era2. The potential for appropriation afforded by the open loft and its minimal architectural intervention is what made the Silver Factory a suitable incubator for fostering the collective creativity of its dwellers. By intensifying a work and leisure mix within a single open space, the formalities between these functions became obsolete. !

!! !!

!

!

Figure 12. Warhol and Ruby the cat. Warhol invited Billy Names to paint the Factory silver (floor, ceiling, walls, and everything in between) after seeing Name’s amphetamine inspired work in his own apartment.

After being given a camera by Warhol, Names was inspired to explore his creativity and became a successful photographer. Ironically enough, the reflective light of the silver decor in the loft became a defined characteristic of his work.

Figure 13. Sketch of the Silver Factory Layout by Billy Name.

2

The Silver Era is deemed the years Warhol spent in the Silver Factory Loft from 1963-68.

5

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Chelsea Hotel and Apartments!

The private live-work space!

!

The Chelsea Hotel in New York is renowned as home to generations of creatives who lived and produced some of their best work in the makeshift live-work apartments and hotel rooms. Constructed in 1884 as an artist’s cooperative, the design of the building was inspired by the socialist Charles Fourier’s description of Utopia, a collective lifestyle that freed one economically in order to pursue the value of living life, an Association that “coalesced in a grand collage reflecting the mosaic of individuals”, where “separately, no single feature-and perhaps none of the individuals-possessed any particular power. But together they had the ability to nurture creativity and unfettered imagination” (Tippins, 2013, p.

31). !

Figure 14. The Chelsea Hotel is a critical element in defining the Manhattan’s art district, likewise providing a home to several of its artists.

!

Although initially designed with ten artist studios on the top floor, the soundproof structure of the Chelsea assumed an informal live-work status within its private rooms, enticing anyone from artists, musicians, writers, to prostitutes, and even a dentist to reside. In addition, the hotel’s mix of affordable rooms and apartments attracted a diverse social mix of people including travellers, recent divorcees, families, salesmen, the elderly, and stock brokers. The appeal of the Chelsea Hotel was not necessarily its spatial qualities (especially since its ongoing retrofit as a hotel in 1905), but its location in a thriving urban arts district and the diverse concentration of individuals that called it home.

The Chelsea Association’s3 lack of regulation and imposition on how one should live allowed the diversity and expression of its individuals to create the cohesive social mix, or “collage”, that was unique to the hotel.!

Figure 15. The Chelsea Hotel activates the street life of West 23rd Street through the porosity its facade and the mobility of its residents.

!

Figure 16. Section through the Chelsea’s monumental circulation core, the platform that unites the hotel’s diversity of spaces and inhabitants.

3

The Chelsea Association was the democratic board that represented the ambitions of the Chelsea Artist Cooperative. An example what Richard Florida may categorise as an organisation that provides enough structure to foster creativity without over governing.

6

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Figure 17. Activity in the halls of the Chelsea.

Figure 18. Resident's artwork activating the halls.

Spatially, the Chelsea hotel was much more structured, dense (at twelve stories and 250 units of 1-4 rooms), and of finer craftsmanship than Warhol’s industrious loft. The rooms, each unique in character, provided retreat for introverts such as writer Thomas Wolfe, who preferred to work alone at his desk and came out only occasionally to have a drink in the Chelsea Bar downstairs or to unlock the door for his editor to review his work (Tippins, 2013, p.

85). But even if residents preferred to work in solitude, one had the option to step into the halls to talk to neighbours, terrace down the stairs, lounge in the lobby, walk out on the balcony or rooftop, go downstairs for a drink, or even invite others into their room. Likewise, when you crossed the threshold out of your private unit, you never knew who or what you may encounter. The Chelsea provided that unique experience, created by the diverse mix of its many inhabitants and accelerated by the flux of hotel guests.!

!

Each floor was arranged around a double loaded, particularly wide, corridor of eight feet.

At the core of the hallway, an open monumental staircase spanned from the lobby to the open skylight above, drawing in West 23rd Street up into the Cheslea’s twelve stories. The phenomenological lightness of this circulation space allowed the smells, sounds, and sights of the Chelsea to vertically integrate the units, concentrating the circulation to a central focal point. The hierarchy and quality of this space became an informal gallery, where artist’s work activated the walls and where impromptu gatherings would occur amongst residents and guests. Furthermore, continuous balconies that spanned the entirety of several rooms created a semi-private corridor to connect rooms, allowing informal and sometimes unwelcome guests to meander from room to room. These semiprivate balconies became a front porch that opened up to the bustling streets of Manhattan below. !

!!

Figure 19. Illuminated staircase as central gallery.

Figure 20. Chelsea lobby, an extension of the vertical circulation gallery, creates the threshold between private living and the public streets of New York.

7

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

!! !!

Figure 21. Arthur Miller, Robert Whitehead, and Elia Kazan working on the production of the play "After the Fall� in Miller’s home.

Figure 22. Room 614: Collaborative livework arrangement in Arthur Miller's room.

Figure 28. Philip Hubert's design for the Chelsea cooperative consisted of apartments ranging 3-10 rooms in size on each floor to allow individuals and families of mixed economic status to coexist, an unprecedented concept in the 1880s in New York. !

Floor plan depicts floors 1-9.

Figure 23. Room 714: Home to an italian photographer and German rock singer.

Figure 29. Diagram of what a typical evolved mix of living arrangements in the Chelsea may have included after being converted into a hotel in 1905. No two rooms were alike and often inefficient and quirky spatial arrangements were constructed (ongoing) to carve out hotel rooms, which commingled with residential apartments on each floor.

Figure 24. Adorned walls of abstract Painter Peter Schuyff's home in the Chelsea.

Leisure!

Living!

Working!

Living Temporary!

Live-Work!

Live-Work Temporary!

!

Figure 25. Hotel room, one of several hundred temporary homes at the Chelsea.

Figure 26. Dentist Peter Ferro in his live-work apartment, 614 (after Miller)

Figure 27. Dee Dee Ramone playing guitar on the balcony.

8

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

The creative environments of both the Silver Factory and Chelsea Hotel are testaments to the effectiveness of collective space in enhancing productivity, whether directly related as collaborative work space or indirectly as common circulation space to facilitate an interactive environment. Similarly, both are examples of former typologies, an industrial loft and hotel/apartments, that were appropriated by the user to accommodate their working needs as a vital aspect of living. Whereas the collective environment of the Silver Factory was focused on a blend of working and leisure (a lifestyle of working for leisure), the privacy of the live-work units at the Chelsea challenge the notion that collective environments should be solely focused on the function of work. The informal networking and interactions that occurred in the lobby, hallways, balconies, and stairway connecting the individual units were just as critical to the composition of the collective creative realm endemic to the Chelsea. Despite the inherent differences amongst the two, the deliberate role of architecture to facilitate these collective environments is rather passive and the spatial aspects of working are essentially designed by the user.!

+

!

Could this same concept of adapting former typologies to accommodate diverse functions hold true for a more effective live-work typology to suit the demands of the creative class? Could we achieve these by combining elements of the Chelsea and Silver Factory to accommodate the desired essentials of living (sleeping and bathing) with a balanced collective work environment? 

=! !

?

9

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Media Evolution City!

The collaborative work environment!

!

As a successful collective work environment, The Media Evolution City (MEC) by Juul Frost Architects provides a foundation for exploring this potential. As a modern work environment geared towards the creative class, MEC offers a mix of conventional offices, hot desks, flex desks4, and fix offices, providing work platforms for numerous potential work lifestyles. Likewise, the open ground floor is designed to perform similar to the Silver Factory, where inhabitants can appropriate the space to take on a number of work and leisure functions, from gallery exhibitions, small informal meetings (using enticing furniture clusters), to social events. The transparency of the walls surrounding the corridor creates a sense of semi-privacy similar to the ambitions of the Silver Factory’s movable partitions. The work operations occurring in the various rooms surrounding this central circulation space are on constant visual display, activating the “walls” and collective space similar to the art walk on the walls at the Chelsea. Furthermore, a network of catwalks illuminated by the skylight above provide vertical circulation to connect the four stories.

The concept of this monumental void was also evident in the Chelsea, similarly drawing circulation to a dramatic focal point and using light as a media to connect individual spaces.!

Figure 30. MEC, a catalyst in transforming Malmö's former industrial area.

Figure 31. MEC’s open lobby provides flexible space for formal and informal events and gathering.

Figure 32. Events extending into MEC's plaza, activating the waterfront.

Figure 33. Leisure at work, lunch break swim.

4

Flex-desk is defined on MEC’s website as “your own desk in a full service open office space with a personal locker and an own postbox”. A Fix Office is “a full service office, furnished and lockable with room for 4 people.”

10

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Figure 34. Proposed transformation of MEC with fourstorey parasitic housing addition.

How would MEC function if housing were added, transforming it from a four-storey collective work environment to an eight-storey hybrid live and work typology, providing 108 units for workers of MEC’s companies, as well as individuals who want to tap into the collective network of creativity? Similar to the flexible tenant structure of the Chelsea, the option to rent a unit for a week or several years allows a varied and intensified mix of individuals, sustaining the dynamic of a collective environment. This option for noncommitment living defies the stereotype of “home” as a place of permanence. As a migratory social class, “home” for creatives is often an ephemeral concept that is validated from place to place.!

!

Leisure/Social!

Living!

Working

Figure 35. (Bottom) Existing typology of work + leisure, extending onto the adjacent waterfront plaza. (Above) Proposed transformation introducing housing, the function of living, into the mix.

11

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Collective/Circulation!

Living!

Working !

Figure 36. Proposed layout of typical MEC floor where living engages on the periphery to connect with the city and working becomes the core collective function. Open circulation provides opportunities for appropriation and interaction, creating a cohesive, transparent, and vibrant atmosphere. The spatial configuration of the living arrangements allows a transition between the private functions of sleeping and bathing amongst the desired collective work environment.

!

Live to Work: Work to Live ! !

One of the major considerations in evolving the live-work dichotomy is the relative spatial positioning of these functions. Should living and working occur in the same space as in the Chelsea, or should they be separate (transient) as was the case in the Silver Factory? If they are to occur simultaneously, how can we achieve a desired sense of privacy for living (sleeping and bathing) while facilitating a collective working environment? !

!

Despite the shared desires of the creative class to blur the transition between living, working, and leisure (as in Adam’s case), it seems a threshold of spatial separation between living and working is beneficial for productivity.!

!

!! !

Likewise, the preferred minimalist lifestyle of the creative class, some who relocate to cities with nothing more than a suitcase, can be translated into the spatial amenities provided for living. The dwelling arrangement can be consolidated to the basic necessities for sleeping and bathing.

The efficient bedroom, a mere 120 square-foot space with a bed and closet, provides enough space for sleep. Bathrooms are shared between two to three individuals. For couples or persons with physical needs, there are 2 larger bedroom units with a private bath on each floor. A communal kitchen adapted in one of the livework units will further allow interaction amongst the residents and workers.!

!

12

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Rooms of four to twelve are clustered around a common space, appropriated collectively by the inhabitants based on democratic preferences.

These spaces will be semi-private, accessed only by the inhabitants of the rooms around the cluster. This space provides a platform for synergies to emerge amongst individuals living in the rooms, yet does not compete with the collective working spaces of the buildings ground floor. ! !

Work For Leisure: Leisure for Work !

!

The work units essentially perform as a front porch would to the living unit, creating a semiprivate space where others can be invited in without having to be within the personal confines of the living space as was the case in the Chelsea Hotel. Locating the work space at the periphery of the circulation void allows this space to operate similar to an open office plan, allowing direct visual access across the floor as well as from the void circulation space, while preserving audial privacy for meetings, listening to music, or conference calls. The character of the workspace will be an empty shell, to be appropriated by the users based on the necessities required to perform their work.

These work units are connected to the collective work-leisure space in the lobby by extending the catwalks that operate as elevated streets. As in the stairway of the Chelsea, the proposed circulation extension will link the collective work and live-work units of MEC, providing the potential for synergies to emerge between workers and inhabitants.

Figure 37. (Top) Extension of the atrium, vertically connecting the proposed four-storeys of live-work units.

The peripheral work units surrounding the atrium extend the work activity of the four storeys below. The inclusion of “living” intensifies the use of the circulation to further encourage interaction amongst inhabitants and thereby intensifying the dynamic of the central open space.!

!

Figure 38. (Middle) The illuminated open lobby of MEC. The work spaces on the upper three-storeys are grounded to this common space by the light catwalk circulation that connects them.!

!

Figure 39. (Bottom) Transparency between the atrium and workspace that surround it, creating an active and engaged, yet semi-private environment. A diverse array of spaces, ranging in intimacy, are provided for optional collaborative work.

13

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

! !

The Future of the Live-Work Typology!

The future of the live-work typology leaves much to be explored as technology and nonconventional work patterns further evolve, questioning architecture’s ability to respond to such demands. As the line between live, work, and leisure are eventually eliminated, where working controversially becomes a lifestyle, how will this spatially delineate our built environments? Perhaps in a few years, the proposed evolution of the live-work typology may no longer be relevant, despite its structured ability to be adapted. !

!

Will there be a need for architectural typologies or will architecture become quasi-anonymous, as suggested by the lifestyle preference of the creative class. As Cedric Price rightfully claimed, architecture is too slow to solve problems. Perhaps this is why, going back to the 1960s, the spatial arrangements that revolve around the combination of living and working have been self-created within spatial confines of non-relevant typologies (industrial buildings, hotel rooms, etc.) that are appealing on practical terms such as economy of space or location, versus adopting a one-size fits all complete package to accommodate the mutual desires of living and working.  

! !

Figure 40. A Meetup group inspired by the twenty-first century’s evolution of a shared economy. How will concepts such as these, favouring non-committed transient typologies, shape the way we live and work in the future?

14

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Bibliography!

!! ! ! ! ! !

Abalos, I. (2001). The Good Life. Barcelona: Editorial Gustavo Gili.!

Comenas, G (2013) Andy Warhol Silver Factory. [online] Available at: http://www.warholstars.org/chron/ factory63n7.html [Accessed 22 Mar. 2015].!

Danto, A. (2009). Andy Warhol. New Haven: Yale University Press.!

Florida, R. (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class. New York, NY: Basic Books.!

Gilmore, K. (2012). Andy Warhol and The Factory. [online] Biography.com. Available at: http:// www.biography.com/news/andy-warhol-and-the-factory-20750995 [Accessed 14 Mar. 2015].!

London, C. (2013). Billy Name, The Man Who Silvered The Factory. [online] CIivilian. Available at: http:// civilianglobal.com/arts/the-man-who-silvered-the-andy-warhol-factory-billy-name-lou-reed-ondine-1960s-newyork/ [Accessed 27 Mar. 2015].!

! !

Media Evolution City, (2015). Media Evolution City. [online] Available at: http://www.mediaevolutioncity.se [Accessed 16 Mar. 2015].!

Reznik, E. (2014). Interview: Billy Name’s Rare Photos of Andy Warhol’s Factory in the Silver Age. [online] American Photo. Available at: http://www.americanphotomag.com/interview-billy-names-rare-photos-andywarhols-factory-silver-age [Accessed 22 Mar. 2015].!

! ! ! !

Rigby, A. (1974). Communes in Britain. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.!

Teige, K. (2002). The Minimum Dwelling. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.!

Tippins, S. (2013). Inside the Dream Palace:The Life and Times of New York's Legendary Chelsea Hotel. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.!

Reconnectingamerica.org, (2013). Are We There Yet? The Creative Class - Reconnecting America. [online] Available at: http://www.reconnectingamerica.org/news-center/half-mile-circles/2013/are-we-there-yet-thecreative-class/ [Accessed 7 Mar. 2015].!

! !!

Wikipedia, (2015). The Factory. [online] Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Factory [Accessed 27 Mar. 2015].!

15

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Figure Credits!

! ! !

Figure 1.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Adam’s Makeshift Live-work Arrangement [digital photograph].!

Figure 2.!

Hitchon, B. (2013) Google Cafe [digital photograph] Available at: http://www.heelsandwheelsonline.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/GC_Banner.jpg [Accessed 29 Mar.2015]!

!

Figure 3.!

Borg, S. Media Evolution City - Fix Desk Medieskogen [digital photograph] Available at: http:// www.mediaevolutioncity.se/en/kontor-2/ [Accessed 29 Feb. 2015]!

!

Figure 4.!

Borg, S. Media Evolution City- Lobby [digital photograph] Available at:https://www.flickr.com/photos/ 47400163@N05/10200525386/in/set-72157636519649603 [Accessed 29 Feb. 2015]!

!

Figure 5.!

Shore, S. (1965-67) Untitled (Warhol on couch in Silver Factory). [digital photograph] Available at:http:// www.metalocus.es/content/en/blog/warhol-two-times-madrid [Accessed 12 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 6.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Recollecton of events at the Silver Factory. Mapping appropriation of space. [illustrative diagram-Sketchup and Photoshop]!

!

Figure 7. !

Unknown.Untitled (Exterior of the Silver Factory) [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// planetgroupentertainment.squarespace.com/planetgroupentertainment/ [Accessed 12 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 8.!

Unknown (1964) Andy Warhol with box sculptures and silver foil at The Factory [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http://uk.phaidon.com/agenda/art/picture-galleries/2011/december/09/the-failsafe-gift-guide-andywarhol-giant-size/?idx=19&idx=19 [Accessed 10 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 9.!

McDarrah, F. (1965) View of the attendees at a party in pop artist Andy Warhol's studio, the Factory [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/view-of-the-attendees-at-a-partyin-pop-artist-andy-warhols-news-photo/542482653 [Accessed 10 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 10.!

Unknown (c. 1965) Untitled (Warhol in his studio) [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// blog.needsupply.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/The-Factory-Andy-Warhol-and-HisCircle_05_0003.jpg [Accessed 10 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 11.!

Kennedy, W. (1964) Warhol Filming “Taylor Mead’s Ass” Suite I-IV [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http://www.connextionsmagazine.com/random-thoughts--reviews/andy-warhol-back-in-soho [Accessed 8 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 12.!

Name, B. (1964) Andy Warhol with Brillo Box sculpture and Ruby the cat [reprographic digital photograph] Available at:http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/gallery/2014/nov/09/andy-warhol-nico-beyond-billy-namesfactory-photographs [Accessed 8 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 13.!

Name, B. Andy Warhol’s Silver Factory [reprographic floor plan sketch] Available at: http:// planetgroupentertainment.squarespace.com/storage/WarholBillyName'sLayoutfortheSilverfactory.jpg? __SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1213193805434 [Accessed 12 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 14.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Chelsea Hotel in the thick of Manhattan’s art district [digital rendering montage].!

16

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

!

Figure 15.!

Edinger, Claudio. The Chelsea Hotel. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// www.chelseahotelblog.com/living_with_legends_the_h/2008/08/ [Accessed 12 Mar. 2015]!

! !

Figure 16.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Section through the Chelsea’s corridor [digital rendering].!

Figure 17.!

Calfee, J. (c.2003-2008) Hallways of the Chelsea Hotel. [reprographic processed photograph] Available at: http:// www.juliacalfee.com [Accessed 08 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 18.!

Ogori, R. (2008) Chelsea Hotel Interior. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http://www.panoramio.com/ photo/7362987 [Accessed 12 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 19.!

Singer, S. (2009) Stairway of the Chelsea Hotel.[reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// theselby.com/galleries/sally-singer/ [Accessed 07 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 20.!

Oyser (2010) Lobby at Hotel Chelsea. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// www.newyorkinspiration.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/lobby-chelsea-hotel-v2.jpg [Accessed 07 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 21.!

Morath, I. (1963) Left to Right: Robert Whitehead, Arthur Miller and Elia Kazan working on the production of the play "After the Fall." [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: https://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?

VP3=SearchResult&STID=2S5RYD31YWH [Accessed 07 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 22.!

Morath, I. (1963) Arthur Miller working on the production of the play "After the Fall” in his room at the Chelsea. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: https://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?

VP3=SearchResult&STID=2S5RYD31YWH [Accessed 07 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 23.!

Erwitt, E. (1987) Umberto Menzinger Von Preussenthal and Shizo, Apartment 714. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http://www.magnumphotos.com/C.aspx?

VP3=SearchResult&VBID=24PVHKAZGE3JC&SMLS=1&RW=1440&RH=511 [Accessed 07 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 24.!

Bright, S. and Miller, S. (1997) Peter Schuyff – Abstract Painter. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http://igetakickoutofyou.me/2012/06/29/between-the-sheets-at-the-chelsea/ [Accessed 02 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 25. !

McElwain, A. (2009) Our room in the Chelsea Hotel. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// www.icanhascook.com/the-chelsea-hotel/ [Accessed 07 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 26.!

Erwitt, E. (1987) Peter Ferro, Apartment 614. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// www.magnumphotos.com/image/NYC32785.html [Accessed 07 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 27.!

Green, K. (1993) Dee Dee Ramone at the Chelsea Hotel. [reprographic digital photograph] Available at: http:// www.keithphotog.com [Accessed 12 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 28.!

Hubert, P. (1883) Chelsea Association Building, floors 1-9, by Philip Hubert [reprographic digital blueprint] Available at:http://www.charlesfourier.fr/article.php3?id_article=707 [Accessed 02 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 29.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Diagram of the Chelsea Hotel’s unique conversion and evolved mix of inhabitants. [digital rendering].!

!

17

Envisioning the Evolution of the Live-Work Typology: Dwelling for the Creative Class

Figure 30.!

Juul Frost Architects (2008) Media Evolution City Mapping [rendered digital image] Available at:http:// www.juulfrost.dk [Accessed 02 Mar. 2015]!

!

Figure 31.!

Borg, S. (2013) Media Evolution City lobby [digital photograph] Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ 47400163@N05/sets/72157636519649603/ [Accessed 29 Feb. 2015]!

!

Figure 32.!

Borg, S. (2012) Happy Hour in Media Evolution City’s plaza [digital photograph] Available at: https:// www.flickr.com/photos/47400163@N05/sets/72157636519649603/ [Accessed 29 Feb. 2015]!

!

Figure 33.!

Borg, S. (2012) Sunbathing at MEC [digital photograph] Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ 47400163@N05/sets/72157636519649603/ [Accessed 29 Feb. 2015]!

!

Figure 34.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Photo montage of housing addition on MEC. [digital rendering montage]. Original image available at: http://www.temagruppen.se/Referenser/Kontor1/Media-Evolution-City-Malmo/ [Accessed 29 Mar. 2015]!

Figure 35.!

Palasik, A. (2015) MEC existing and proposed typology. [digital rendering montage].!

! !

Figure 36.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Proposed floor plan of live-work configuration. [digital rendering].!

Figure 37.!

Palasik, A. (2015) Proposed perspective of the atrium extension surrounding by the work units of the live-work configuration. [digital rendering].!

!

Figure 38.!

Borg, S. (2013) Illuminated lobby of MEC [digital photograph] Available at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ 47400163@N05/sets/72157636519649603/ [Accessed 29 Feb. 2015]!

!

Figure 39.!

Borg, S. (2012) MEC work space [digital photograph] Available at: http://www.mediaevolutioncity.se [Accessed 29 Feb. 2015]!

!

Figure 40.!

Lim, E. (2013) Pitch'n'Play: Round (1) Travel element at SOHOland's Live-Work-Travel-Learn-Play environment / ecosystem (digital photograph] Available at: http://www.meetup.com/Collaborative-Second-Home-for-Live-WorkTravel-Learn-Play/ [Accessed Feb Mar. 2015]

18