Participation / Financing

Our architectural design emerges from two factors. First, a need to affordably house public school teachers, especially in close proximity to schools. Second, the opportunity provided by point access building typology, affording a density within a small footprint. In this proposal we not only design the physical systems, a flexible concept of support and infill aimed to last centuries not decades, but we also structure the social and financial systems which engage the physical. Within a system of rigid supports and flexible infill, we as architects facilitate co-design workshops with the residents, tailoring room layouvts to individual needs within a predefined ruleset. This process reimagines housing as a tool for city design, embedding principles of sustainability and community into the built environment. The building process becomes a collaborative act, where architecture is shaped by the lived realities of its inhabitants.


We imagine the land, owned by the local school district, leased out for 99 years to a cooperative which consists mainly of teachers and a few members of the surrounding community. The cooperative then funds, through collective mortgages, the construction of the building. As the cooperative matures, the structure allows residents to switch units as occupants come and go. As a result of its non-speculative and non-profit nature it becomes more affordable as time goes on as the debt is paid off. And as a result of the flexible design built with care, repair, and social safety in mind, we propose a framework for permanently affordable housing.

Support / Infill

The physical design of the building contains rigid and unchangeable components in conjunction with flexible interiors and spatial conditions to create a system of supports and infill. Supports represent the building’s core structural framework—centralized utilities, circulation, and primary infrastructure that remain constant. Infill refers to the adaptable, resident-designed interior spaces that can be reconfigured within certain parameters to support changing living environments. As a result, the building can accommodate a range of living situations from single residents, couples, and multigenerational households.

Unlike conventional market-rate or affordable housing models, cooperative developments allows for an unique adaptability mechanism: residents can swap between units as occupancy levels change. As all residents are members of the cooperative, shifting units between others is made possible and even encouraged to ensure the most efficient use of space. While addressing the issue of housing vacancy, this architectural strategy transforms housing from a static product into a responsive, evolving ecosystem that directly reflects its inhabitants’ life and collective requirements.




Access / Circulation

The balcony emerges as a critical social infrastructure, wrapping around the entire building into a vibrant shared experience. Serving more than circulation, this expansive communal space encourages spontaneous interactions, collective living, and a sense of shared community unique to cooperative frameworks.

Intentionally designed to connect residents, the balcony becomes an active living surface—a place for chance encounters, collective gardening, informal conversations, and community-building. Its continuous circulation allows residents to move through the building’s social landscape, blurring boundaries between transit, leisure, and communal engagement. It also provides maintenance access for residents to perform building upkeep, conduct repairs, clean exterior surfaces, and manage shared systems. The implementation of design for maintenance further allows the building to have a long life-span.



Collective / Living


The ground floor prioritizes communal living through an open space for laundry, cooking, events, and leisure. This area enables collective living, social life, and spontaneous interactions among residents.Dedicated guest housing units provide flexible accommodations for temporary stays, allowing residents to host family, support community members in transition, or offer emergency housing through the cooperative. By reducing private space and expanding shared areas, the design creates an efficient, interconnected living environment that prioritizes community needs and spatial adaptability.

The total project cost, estimated between $2.6 million and $4.4 million, is made possible through a unique land agreement with the school district, reducing upfront expenses and enabling the development of truly permanent affordable housing. With a minimum occupancy of 28 people, the project averages a cost per person between $93,000 and $158,000. As a cooperatively funded initiative, the model allows for flexibility in how costs are shared. While the average cost per person serves as a guideline, the cooperative structure ensures inclusivity by enabling adjustments based on individual financial capacity, supporting residents who may need assistance with the initial down payment or ongoing monthly payments.


This approach directly addresses the financial challenges many teachers and community members face. For example, a teacher earning the median salary in Denver, approximately $61,000 per year, would find these housing costs highly manageable. A projected monthly payment of $790, given standard 30 year mortgage rates, falls well below the affordability threshold of 30% of gross income, even when accounting for property taxes, insurance, and other expenses.


Moreover, as a non-profit housing initiative, the project is designed for long-term affordability. Without a profit margin driving up costs, the financial burden per individual is expected to decrease over time as expenses stabilize. This ensures the development remains accessible and sustainable, providing teachers with a secure, community-focused housing solution that directly supports their critical role in the education system.