Standardisation in dwelling architecture has led to mass housing projects to be built within a short period of time. With increasing standardisation, the needs of the actual user of the building have been lost. Adaptable housing is a way of creating a more useroriented approach within the architecture of buildings. This research paper explores the concept of adaptable architecture design which all started with theories of Habraken and Brand. These were picked up by other theorists Schmidt III and Austin, and Schneider and Till who searched into implementations of adaptable architecture design with the actual benefits to the user. Four contemporary residential building projects are analysed of which are two greatly adaptable in dwelling plans and the other two are adaptable in matters of use. This research gives guidelines for the implementation of adaptable architecture to design with a user-oriented approach for a design project of working and living in the Merwevierhaven in Rotterdam.

Eindhoven and Philips, two names that are inseparable from each other. Travelling by train to Eindhoven you are accompanied by the heritage of Philips next to the railway. Travelling by car to Eindhoven along the highway you pass the Medical Centre of Philips in the north and the High Tech Campus of Philips in the south. In the city white factory buildings with the Philips logo are prominently displayed in the city. In the prime of Philips around the 1930’s it was a real industrial hub. This is the reason why residents of Eindhoven are still proud of the city (Onna, 2002). The city of Eindhoven is in a large extent formed by Philips. The buildings are designed from the company architecture of Philips. Architects employed by or under direct supervision of Philips’ Technische Bedrijven (Philips Building Design and Plant Engineering Division). Optimal use of the production facilities was priority in the designs (Geevers, 2014). Because of the lack of space, the factories needed to be built higher and this gave the white towers the appearance of a ‘world industry’ (1908, p.134). The retiring of Philips from Eindhoven in 2001 can be seen as a pauperization of her identity, but as well a release. The architecture of Philips remains nowadays to the collective memory of the city (Doevendans, 2009). The architecture and city planning of Philips is still recognizable. The old production facilities are used nowadays for Brainport, creative and innovation city and reused for new functions as living, culture, recreation, and offices. But the brands Brainport and Design Capital will never win it from the trademark Philips. Eindhoven will always be able to use the name Philips for its reputation (Doevendans, 2009). The challenge for Eindhoven is to combine this tradition with the next phase of architecture. Eindhoven is an exceptional urban environment, an environment that has been made an exceptional city because of its knowledge and heritage (Onna, 2002).