Interior retreat and urban habitability in the megapolis: architecture and family history in a house in Mexico City
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
The intensive use of interior living space in the cities of the 21st century consolidates a process of retreat to a private spatial sphere that is not always satisfactory for the users. The need to consider elements not only in terms of individual satisfaction, but also in terms of collective and environmental satisfaction, leads us to think about the integration of quality of life demands of users linked to family connection in a healthy micro-environment, through a tripartite habitability model, with three fundamental dimensions: psycho-efficiency, socio-efficiency and eco-efficiency. Based on the planimetric and photographic survey of a case study located in Mexico City, we proceeded to an analysis based on the previously elaborated theoretical triad. The result shows that at the intersection of these dimensions are located controversial elements of the habitability of the residential interior environment (such as an urban and family connection compatible with privacy and health in an environment as sustainable as possible), objectives that the designer had to try to achieve by negotiating solutions that adapt to the not always coinciding desires of the users.
habitability;, urban house;, Mexican architecture;, family identityHabitabilidad;, casa urbana;, arquitectura mexicana;, identidad familiarhabitabilidade;, moradia urbana;, arquitetura mexicana;, identidade familiar
Arcas, J., Pagés, A., y Casals, M. (2011). El futuro del hábitat: repensando la habitabilidad desde la sostenibilidad. El caso español. Revista INVI, 26(72), 65-93.
Casals, M., y Arcas. J. (2010). Habitabilidad: Un concepto en crisis. Sobre su redificación orientada hacia la rehabilitación [Ponencia]. SB10 Mad-Sustainable Building Conference.
Eleb, M., y Bendimérad, S. (2018). Ensemble et Séparément. Des Lieux pour Cohabiter. Pierre Mardaga Editeur.
Espinosa, A. E. y Gómez, G. (2010). Hacia una concepción socio-física de la habitabilidad: espacialidad, sustentabilidad y sociedad. Palapa, 5(10), 59-69.
Guerin, D., & Ginthner, D. (1999). Designers knowledge of green design: What do we do now? En IDEC, International conference abstracts (pp. 50-51). Clearwater.
Gómez Muñoz, G. M. (2014). Método de análisis diacrónico para la intervención en alojamiento con criterios ecológicos [Tesis doctoral, Universidad Politécnica].
Hayles, C. S. (2015). Environmental sustainable interior design: A snapshot of current supply of and demand for green, sustainable or fair trade products for interior design practice, International Journal of Sustainable Built Environment, 4(1), 100-108. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsbe.2015.03.006
Hall, E. (1989). La dimensión oculta. Siglo XXI.
Herman, T. & Lewis, R. (2017). What is Livability? University of Oregon https://sci.uoregon.edu/sites/sci1.uoregon.edu/files/sub_1_-_what_is_livability_lit_review.pdf
Kaal, H. (2011). A conceptual history of livability. City: Analysis of Urban Change, Theory, Action, 15(5), 532-547. https://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2011.595094
Kusumarini, Y., Ekasiwi, S. N. N., & Faqih, M. (2011). Sustainable Interior: A Holistic Approach of Eco-Socio-Econo Interior. Australian Journal of Basic and Applied Sciences, 5(12), 2176-2181.
Landázuri, A. M., y Mercado, S. (2004). Algunos factores físicos y psicológicos relacionados con la habitabilidad interna de la vivienda. Medio Ambiente y Comportamiento Humano, 5(1y2), 89-113.
Ley, D. (1990). Urban Liveability in Context. Urban Geography, 11(1), 31-35.
Luna, J. G., y Gómez, A. (2015). Un acercamiento al estudio de habitabilidad en la vivienda de interés social. En R. Valladares Anguiano (ed.), Diversas visiones de la habitabilidad (pp. 91-112). Red Nacional de Habitabilidad Urbana.
Lefebvre, H. (1947). Critique de la vie quotidienne. Editions Bernard Grasset.
Martins, M. (2016). Arquitectura y calidad ambiental en ciudades del Cono Sur. Universidad Nacional del Litoral y la Universidad de São Paulo.
Mehabian, A., & Russell, J. (1974). An Approach to Environmental Psychology. MIT Press.
Mercado, S. J., y González, J. (1991). Evaluación psicosocial de la vivienda. Infonavit.
Mohit, M. A. (2014). Residential Satisfaction: Concept, Theories and Empirical Studies. Planning Malaysia, 12, 47-66.
Montaner, J. M., y Muxí, Z. (2010). Reflexiones para proyectar viviendas del siglo XXI. Dearq, (6), 82-99.
Osmond, H. (1957). A review of the clinical effects of psychotomimetic agents. Ann N Y Acad Sci, 66(3), 418-434. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.1957.tb40738.x
Sorrento, L. (2012). A Natural Balance: Interior Design, Humans, and Sustainability. Journal of Interior Design, 37(2), 9-33.
Sabater, T. (2015). Socioeficiencia. En A. Barrios, E. González, J. Mariñas y M. Molina-Huelva (coords.), Re-habitación, re-generación, re-programación (pp. 40-47). Junta de Andalucía-Universidad de Sevilla.
Van Dorst. M.J. (2012). Liveability. En E. Van Bueren (ed.), Sustainable Urban Environments (pp. 223-241). Springer. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/314616668
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.