「住」可說是人對於建築最基本的物質需求,當居住空間不好時,居住者無法追求精神層面或者藝術美感上的感覺了。而「公眾生活」(Public life)則是Hannah Arendt對於集體生活的基本主張,「環境」就是由人們的「生命活動」所構成的「在場」(Location),因此在一個社區的公共領域即是在都市內重要的空間與元素。社區的公共空間以封閉的舊觀念是將社區範圍明顯劃設,並在社區內提供居住者所使用之公共設施。此做法在現今寸土寸金的都市內存在著大量的「私人公共空間」,將非社區內的人排除在外,但社區內真正使用這些公共空間的住戶比例又有多少?現今許多的小家庭生活在都市內,形成一個個封閉的居住單元,對於在這個人口密度及壓力越來越高的都市空間裡,人們開始尋找生活上的抒發管道,因此有了許多純公共場所產生,例如:公園、百貨公司、娛樂場所等,但人們從事活動時,往往忽略了其居住社區的公共空間。如果將社區公共空間的開放性提高至所有人使用,是否都市空間的使用方式會有所改變?本文以公共性及公共空間的相關文獻作為基礎發展設計,討論以不同於傳統形式的社區配置作為住宅場所的量體發展與空間分佈,並配合台中都市發展局所舉辦的「居・有所位」競圖案的基地來發展社會住宅設計以做討論。
The basic material needs of human to Architecture is living. We cannot pursue spiritual or aesthetic feeling when living space is not good. Hannah Arendt claim "Public Life" is a basic proposition of collective life, and the activities of people compose "Location" to be environment. Therefore, public area of a community are very important space and element in the city. The old concept in public equipment of community is making a boundary and providing facilities to households, excluding people who do not live there. There is a problem that how much proportion of households actually use this public space in their communities? Especially there are a lot of this kind public space of private in the city. Nowadays, there are many nuclear families live in city, forming one by one-dwelling unit. People began to look for ways to release their emotions in the high population density and pressure urban space, therefore many of these public spaces shown up, such as parks, entertainment, department stores, etc. People will miss their own space when they gathered to public space in the city from different places. If each of the private public space open to everyone, whether use way of urban space has changed. This essay based on pertinent literature of commonality and public space to concept development design, within the competition: "Social Housing in Taichung 2016", to study how different are between traditional and innovational community configuration in community.