According to Lacol, gentrification is no reason to be afraid of improving a city. “It’s a trap to think that we can’t improve something just because it will raise property prices in the area.”

You define Lacol as a non-profit cooperative whose goal is to contribute to political, social, economic and environmental transformation through architecture. Would you call yourselves architects or rather agents of social change?

Carles Baiges: We define ourselves as architects because architecture is our tool to influence the world. We are aware of the impact of our work on society and the planet and we strive to make it as positive as possible.

Many of your projects are in the former working-class district of Sants in Barcelona. Your studio is also located there. Is this area facing gentrification pressure?

Cristina Gamboa: I would say that gentrification is increasing here, although not as much as in other parts of Barcelona. People who cannot afford to live in the center are moving here. This increases prices and forces the more vulnerable residents to move further away.

But Sants is a neighborhood with a long history of associations, activism and civic associations, so there are certain structures that allow it to be more resistant to these pressures.

Some of the projects we work on here – such as cooperative housing – seek to enable local residents to remain in the neighborhood in affordable and dignified conditions.

Lacol’s offices are in a former factory that you transformed into a cultural center and headquarters for several associations, La Comunal. Isn't La Comunal a gentrification element?

CB: We always worry about the possible negative impacts of our projects. As for La Comunal, where there used to be an abandoned factory, there is now a cultural center, the headquarters of several organizations, a library and a bar, so the whole area feels more pleasant and its value might increase. But the positive thing is that the common spaces are used by non-profit organizations and associations.

So, I think the overall result is therefore more positive than negative. And I also think it's a bit of a trap to think that we can't improve something just because it will raise property prices in the area. The problem lies not in improving the surroundings, but in the lack of other measures, such as social housing, price controls…

You’ve placed wooden modules as temporary offices in the Can Batlló factory. What will you do with them after you move out?

CB: From the beginning, we counted on them being able to be dismantled and used elsewhere. We have a network of people, communities and organizations that could reuse the material. I am sure we’ll be able to do that, we already have experience with this from previous projects

CG: It was a relatively large space, and there was no budget for a complete renovation. The wooden modules made it possible to create a smaller zone with thermal comfort and a clearly defined office space.

We found part of the wood to build these boxes at the factory and there was also a carpenters' cooperative in the area that got involved in the project. These simple wooden boxes were not therefore only designed with circularity and climate change in mind, but also with the idea of using local materials and human resources.

You have designed around 15 cooperative buildings. Cooperatives work differently in different countries. How do yours work?

CG: Cooperative housing has a long tradition in Spain, but most cooperatives were simply a tool for cheaper construction. Once the construction was completed, the cooperative was dissolved and the apartments became the personal property of the individual members.

We began working on cooperative housing at Lacol during the economic crisis, when Barcelona was facing a huge housing shortage and increasing gentrification. Our goal became to prevent speculation and create stable, affordable housing, because the rental laws of the time shortened the length of contracts and people lived in uncertainty. We are part of a model where the cooperative not only builds the building but remains the owner of it even after completion. Residents are members of the cooperative and have an agreement for the right to use the apartment, not ownership. This means they have affordable and stable housing, but they cannot speculate with the apartment. When someone leaves the cooperative, the apartment remains their property and the cooperative decides who moves in next.

CB: The member share must always be invested into the cooperative at the beginning. When a member decides to leave, the money is returned to them by a new member or family investing the same share in their place.

Residents also pay a monthly fee, which in our projects is typically around half the market rent. This is possible because most homes are on public land or benefit from some form of subsidy. We are now trying to find ways to reduce this initial payment, working with authorities, banks and lenders.

What type of participation has proven to be the best for you?

CB: We are still figuring that out. We try to standardize the participatory processes as much as possible, but in every project, we adapt the process and at the same time learn from the previous ones. At the beginning, we wanted people to be fully involved in everything, even in the construction itself, but this is not always possible due to legal restrictions, lack of skills or time.

We proceed similarly to architectural design – at the beginning the process is very open, we collect ideas, inspirations, people's wishes, and gradually narrow it down to a real solution. We do a series of workshops: some are informative, where we show examples and explain the principles of sustainability, others are discussion-based. These help set priorities or get feedback on our designs.

CG: Thanks to various workshops and because the residents follow the entire project development process, they feel a sense of co-responsibility. This is key, because they already gain a lot of information about its functioning, energy consumption and maintenance during the project development.

At the same time, as Carles mentioned, we continue thinking about how to handle participation. We do not want to create a project tailored only to a specific group or individual needs, because these change over time. That is why we are designing an open and flexible infrastructure that allows for adaptation. The use phase of the building then provides us with valuable feedback – it helps us compare the original participatory intentions with reality and derive new participation strategies from them.

You speak of adaptability. What makes your buildings adaptable?

CG: Our priority is always to design buildings that are as flexible and adaptable as possible. Naturally, user requirements vary, and this influences the entire design.

For example, in the case of the La Borda project (a cooperative apartment building in Barcelona designed by the Lacol studio – ed.), we created a so-called room matrix, thanks to which the apartments can be interconnected via intermediate rooms that can be accessed both from an apartment and from the corridor, which created variable layouts. We further developed this principle in another cooperative apartment building project, Sotrac, where these spaces are separated and even more open. Flexibility is thus manifested not only within the units, but also between them.

CB: There are many changes in how residents manage their own individual units. For example, when an apartment becomes vacant, the cooperative members themselves have the preemptive right to move if their needs or living situation have changed. In La Borda, over six years, three apartments had been vacated by residents, resulting in about a dozen moves between apartments.

Unusual situations also arise. For example, a couple got divorced, but both stayed in the building in separate apartments to continue caring for the children. Similarly, in La Balma, two households swapped apartments – one family needed more space, while the other needed less. It was all based on trust, discussion and the community’s efforts to prioritize those with the greatest need. I think it’s great that such an option exists. Our lives are changing and architecture should be able to adapt to them.

In the La Borda and La Balma projects, you have a large, shared kitchen. How frequently do people use it?

CG: The desire to have common meeting spaces emerged already during the participatory phases of these projects. Architecture should encourage interaction between people. However, each unit has its own kitchen. If two or three people live in an apartment, a standard kitchen is enough for their daily needs, but if they want to organize a larger family gathering or celebration, they can use the common one.

The communal kitchen is part of a multi-purpose community space where meetings, work sessions and various activities take place, for example. La Borda hosts a collective dinner every two weeks on Wednesday, when four to five people cook for the other residents. In addition, yoga classes are held here, and the space can also be booked for private events such as birthdays or celebrations.

CB: The space is also used by several people to work from home during the day. It is easy to manage, has a good size and amenities.

CG: There’s no need to have a separate room for yoga, another for work, another for cooking or dining. If the space has some flexibility mechanisms—such as the ability to move furniture around—one place can be used for many different activities.

You give quality to even seemingly ordinary functions, such as a laundry room or drying room. Do the residents of your projects enjoy going there to wash and dry their clothes?

CB: Before moving in, people were quite afraid of the shared laundry room, because in Spain it is common to have a washing machine at home, and the law even requires that apartments have a place to connect a washing machine. Yet we installed only two industrial washing machines in a building with 28 apartments. And the result? None of the residents have a washing machine at home anymore – and they don’t want one.

A shared laundry room is more efficient, faster, more spacious and better situated. People, especially parents, often bring their laundry here while the children play in the shared space, and when it's done, they go hang the laundry on the terrace together, where there are swings for the kids, for example. It's a much more pleasant experience than doing laundry at home in a small, cramped space all by yourself.

CG: It is also related to the feminist approach to housing and how housing typologies are changing. Previously, kitchens and similar spaces tended to be concealed and separate, while today the opposite is happening. Kitchens are placed in the center of the apartment, in the place with the best conditions, because it is a space of joy and shared life.

We try to place shared spaces in the best possible locations. For example, in the Sotrac project, there is a laundry room by the terrace, which makes it practical for drying, but at the same time it is a beautiful space where you can be, read, or just wait for the laundry to be done.

You both even lived in La Borda. How was it living there?

CG: I think it was a huge privilege for us looking at the experience we gained. Usually as architects we are involved in the design and implementation, but in the case of La Borda, as users we were able to penetrate the other layers of the process too. This gave us a broad overview of the entire development of the project and the trust of other communities that we are now working with.

CB: There is mutual respect and trust between us and our neighbors. It is not the case that residents complain about things that don’t work, as other architects, who would never want to live in the buildings they design, often fear. On the contrary, people realize that the project involved a lot of risk and innovations, and they see the fact that it has brought so much attention and positive feedback as confirmation that it was worth it.

CG: We support this model because we believe in the need to create affordable and stable housing, but also because there are many benefits to a collective and shared way of life. It would be strange to advocate and promote something for others without wanting to live that way ourselves. (laughter)

At the same time, this way of life gives us a strong sense of belonging and mutual support, which is especially important in big cities, where life is often anonymous and isolated.

Are your homes also open to the wider community?

CB: In many of our projects, we open the ground floor to local initiatives – often we get community stores, food cooperatives, non-profit organizations or social services established there. This creates a very positive synergy with the surrounding area.

The creation of a cooperative building can often also encourage the founding of a local food cooperative. In the case of La Borda, a small food cooperative already existed in the neighborhood, but it only operated two days a week. After moving to the ground floor of the building, the number of members increased significantly and its assortment expanded. Many other features have a positive impact on the neighborhood, whether it is shared spaces or, for example, guest rooms that serve not only visitors but also people in need.

CG: Common spaces are regularly used by specific collectives. It's not like someone can just knock on the door and occupy the space. There are pre-agreed rules and agreements on usage.

And one other thing. In La Borda and other projects, energy cooperatives are also being formed – solar panels share electricity produced within the energy cooperative and its surroundings.

The projects also include guest units that residents can book for family or friends. How has this system worked out in practice?

CB: Guest rooms are part of the common areas that residents can book for free. Instead of everyone in the apartment having a spare room “for mom to visit”, these rooms are shared together. And these rooms have become some of the most used spaces. For example, in La Borda there are two – for two and four people. Most weekends they are booked in advance.

When the guest rooms are full, someone writes in the group chat: “Does anyone have an empty apartment this weekend? My mom is coming.” And the neighbors borrow each other’s apartments. I think this beautifully shows the level of trust and neighborliness that is we see only exceptionally in a regular apartment building.

CG: The system is flexible – the rooms are for guests, temporary users, or other purposes. During Covid, they turned into isolation rooms or offices. The management is simple – it works via a shared calendar and brief instructions.

You have raised cooperative housing in Barcelona to a high standard. What countries abroad do you like to draw inspiration from?

CG: Our most important reference in cooperative housing is Switzerland. Cooperatives there have over a century of tradition and history. The Swiss are aware of the stability and accessibility this model offers. When we go to Switzerland, we always visit their cooperative projects. But we also draw inspiration from other countries – Denmark, France, Canada or the USA.

La Borda won the EU Mies van der Rohe Award 2022 in the Emerging category. Do you feel that the award has opened doors to new collaborations or projects for you?

CB: The award brought us a lot of attention – but we also learned that attention alone does not guarantee new projects. (laughter)

It has made the cooperative housing model more visible, but projects are mainly created through long-term work with communities and trust in our ability to communicate quickly and reliably.

But it was a recognition of the meaning of our work. It was an incentive to continue what we’re doing, knowing that we are going in the right direction.

CG: The award brought recognition to all those involved in the project, including the city. Perhaps this also bolstered the city's policy supporting this cooperative housing model.

The apartment buildings you design consume on average half as much energy as those in the surrounding area. How do you achieve this?

CG: We emphasize passive strategies – minimizing energy consumption and maximizing the use of local resources. Where possible, we incorporate collective elements such as atriums, galleries or thermal “buffers”, which are often not used in a regular apartment building because they require management, ​​but this is something we know how to provide within the cooperative.

Besides energy, we also focus on other areas – materials, water and waste. Since budgets tend to be limited, we need to invest strategically. For structures, we try to reduce our carbon footprint. We use CLT panels or precast concrete, which allows for more efficient construction and easier dismantling in the future. Due to financial reasons, we at least prepare the infrastructure for recycling and using grey water, but full installation often comes later.

CB: Also key is the user’s active involvement – the residents need to understand how the building works. Otherwise, even the best design will fail. That's why we involve them and teach them how to use the building.

You build apartment buildings out of wood, among other materials. Are Spanish standards and regulations favorable to this?

CG: Working with legislation and building codes was a big challenge for us, as many of the things we were doing were new and uncommon. For the first project, La Borda, we brought in a team of experts – for example, a timber construction specialist versed not only Spanish standards but also in international practice.

Standards are often not conducive to sustainability and adaptability. It is important to understand the rules, but at the same time to be creative and constructive. To be able to look for their limits and room for change.

You also devote yourself to teaching. Do you promote the principle of collective ownership among students?

CG: I teach housing design at an architecture school in Barcelona. The students are in their third year, so we don’t really deal with housing ownership or management issues yet. I try to break down stereotypes and standards – to change the way students think about housing. I think that’s incredibly important and I try to do that whenever possible.

CB: In recent years, I have focused more on a participatory approach in my teaching. But in general, I try to show students that there are other paths than the ones they’ve been presented with in the past. I want to show students that architecture doesn't have to be just about "star architects" and rich clients.

You are proving that housing can be seen as infrastructure, not a commodity. What are your ambitions for the future – to become an example for other cities in Spain?

CB: We try to work very locally. We are open to collaborations, but our main focus is on Barcelona and Catalonia and making the cooperative housing model as stable, affordable and easy to implement as possible.

At the same time, we are also trying to penetrate other areas, for example, more classic social housing or projects focused on the social economy, such as workspaces, community centers or projects related to energy transformation and sustainability. For three years now, we have been collaborating with other architects and engineers on larger-scale projects, because we want to increase the impact of our work.

CG: Our goal is to take these principles to a larger scale, perhaps to the level of an entire neighborhood or the wider community. And ultimately, it is about how the city itself can be reused and managed in a way that is consistent with these collective and sustainable principles.

Interview by Sára Kročková.