Designing a 200-year-old house

I think this is a very good and profound vision. As a vessel for life, housing is involved in people's lives from the moment they are born into this world, and throughout their lives. The basic unit of family and community is each individual house and the people who live there, and their existence is fundamental to the formation of personality. Moving to a new home depending on the stage of life will also be easier if there is a large stock of good quality housing. Long-lasting housing can be a very important social asset. In particular, for collective housing where it is difficult to reach an agreement on rebuilding, it is necessary to have hard things such as a structural frame that can be used for a long time, soft things such as management and operation that make this possible, and a legal system to support them. I have heard that various discussions and considerations are currently underway, including the enactment of legislation based on this "200-year housing vision."

If we take this discussion even further, I think it will be a good opportunity to fundamentally rethink not only Japan's urban structure and urban landscape, but also urban planning and construction regulations. Japan is based on a wooden architecture culture, and houses are rebuilt in a short cycle of 30 years per generation. In this environment, those involved in the design, including myself, will be asked whether it is really possible to create a building that will continue to exist in place as a component of the city for as long as 200 years, and whether they can bear the heavy responsibility.

It is technically possible to change the infill to accommodate changes in lifestyle, life stage, and tastes, and there are many such houses today. The issue is what the skeleton, which cannot be easily changed, should be. It is not a matter of the durability or earthquake resistance of the structure, but the size and height of the building, the design of facade, and its relationship with the streetscape and the city. If the design is carried out in accordance with the current legal system and economic principles, a building that is as large and tall as its capacity can be is one correct answer. There are also advanced examples such as Makuhari Baytown, where street-type apartment buildings were developed through district planning. However, what will be the public consensus if the house is to remain there for 100 years, if not 200 years, and form the streetscape as one element of the city?

While collective housing has become an overwhelmingly important element of the urban landscape in cities, the reality is that it is extremely difficult to reach a consensus on rebuilding them. It may be difficult to imagine what cities and housing should look like 100 or 200 years from now, but we should start thinking immediately about what they will look like in 30 or 50 years and what collective housing, as an important asset, should be like. As an extension of this, we may be able to see the ideal form of a new city vision, urban planning, and building regulations.

The "200-Year Housing Vision" also calls for the "formation and maintenance of good townscapes." This is the core of the "200-Year Housing Vision," and is probably the last remaining very large and profound issue.