The fifth-place metamorphosis:the impact of the outbreak of

COVID-19 on typologies of placesin post-pandemic Cairo

Ahmed S. Abd ElrahmanUrban Design and Planning Department, Faculty of Engineering,

Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt

Abstract

Purpose – The world has recently faced the outbreak of an existential threat. Since December 2019, manyaspects of life have changed owing to a devastating pandemic, COVID-19. The second wave started spreadingin different parts of the globe. This article focuses on the impact of COVID-19 on Cairo city, regarding threeupper-middle-class districts as a case study. Based on a literature review, a theoretical framework is proposedto analyse how residents changed their living, work, and leisure time habits during the outbreak of thepandemic.Design/methodology/approach – A retrospective survey was conducted among the residents of threedistricts to investigate the new living model of adaptive, spontaneous urban and architecture design tacticsthat transfer people’s actual life, work, and leisure arrangements into future planning considerations.Findings – The results reveal relevant observations about the adaptation of the existing environments ofhome, work, and leisure activities. From these results, different considerations and new norms emerge forhousing typologies in post-pandemic Cairo.Originality/value – The conclusions of this study introduced the new term “the fifth place” as a space-timeplace that could serve as a motivation for urban designers and architects to design space typologiesconsidering the emerging circumstances.

Keywords Pandemic, COVID-19, Coronavirus, Fourth place, Fifth place, Metamorphosis

Paper type Research paper

1. IntroductionToday, the urban world is radically changing; thus, it is relevant to observe how cities stillgrow and how they are still planned (Duhl and Sanchez, 1999). Given the current emergencies,we must know how to deal with multifaceted systems whose characteristics influence thehealth of inhabitants (Brizuela et al., 2020). Because of the rapid sprawl in cities, urban spacesand the lifestyle of people have become the main reasons for the increasing rates of chronicrespiratory infections (Li, 2017).

The World Health Organisation (WHO) has officially termed the novel virus the “severeacute respiratory syndrome coronavirus”, (SARS-COV-2), and the infection caused by it“coronavirus disease 2019” or (COVID-19) (Hang, 2020). Egypt reported its first case inFebruary 2020. Ever since, the scene is characterised by uncertainty and obscurity, asCOVID-19 has been spreading, ahead of calls to beware a second wave. Rapidly, people’slifestyles have been transformed, cities locked down, educational institutes closed, and homesbecame working places as well. As a result, many social consequences emerged. It becamenecessary for people to accommodate their spaces (Klaus, 2020). Urban residents currentlyspend most of their time inside buildings, either for accommodation or work, which, in turn,will positively or negatively affect their health (Li, 2017). COVID-19 may likely change theway we study our cities and how we live within them (Klaus, 2020).

There is no doubt that the emergence of COVID-19 has greatly influenced manydisciplines, including urban design and architecture. Accordingly, many cities in the world,

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

113

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2631-6862.htm

Received 25 May 2020Revised 19 November 2020

30 November 202030 November 2020

Accepted 30 November 2020

Archnet-IJAR: InternationalJournal of Architectural Research

Vol. 15 No. 1, 2021pp. 113-130

© Emerald Publishing Limited2631-6862

DOI 10.1108/ARCH-05-2020-0095

including Cairo, are alert. Therefore, architects and urban designers are wondering what canbe done to accommodate living with the pandemic, to what extent our cities and homes areready for a new imposed lifestyle, and how the changed life pattern has influenced life, work,and leisure arrangements. Thus, this paper analyses the modifications that residents havemade to accommodate these changes.

The study addresses two main questions:

(1) How can residents coexist and practice their different living, work, and leisureactivities in different architectural gated and non-gated environments, and to whatextent can their living spaces accommodate their daily activities during the outbreakof pandemics?

(2) What are the different typologies of spaces that arise during pandemics, and what isthe living model that formulates adaptive and spontaneous architecture, as well asurban design that reflects residents’ needs during the outbreak of a pandemic?

For answering these questions, the study conducts a content analysis of selected literatureand quantitative analysis. This is done by surveying residents’ opinions about the currentsituation and the different tactics they applied to their living spaces to accommodate the othertypes of activities to fit their daily routine during the pandemic.

This article contributes to understanding the changing relationship between differenttypologies of spaces (living, work, and leisure) in terms of architecture tactics as identified byresidents from different types of upper-middle-class communities, amid the doublecomplexity of digital media and pandemic restrictions.

The article is divided into two parts. The first part comprises a literature review of thehistory of pandemics, the impact of COVID-19 on the city and current post-pandemic designconsiderations on both urban and architectural scales. It also comprises the content analysisfor the different typologies of spaces, in addition to the impact of the COVID-19 outbreak onthemetamorphosis of different typologies. This section presents the theoretical framework ofthe research.

The second part applies a quantitative method using a survey launched for two monthsduring the outbreak of the first wave of COVID-19 in different upper-middle-class districts inCairo. The purpose is to understand the modifications that residents have made to theirliving, work, and leisure arrangements. Meanwhile, it serves to provide a living model ofadaptive, spontaneous urban and architectural design that translates people’s existing life,work, and leisure arrangements into new norms and future planning design considerations.The research findings highlight an exemplarymodel for other housing types and the relevanttools to be used in other living arrangements (see Figure 1).

2. Literature review2.1 The history of pandemics and the impact of COVID-19 on the cityThere has always been a correlation between health and city planning throughout history(Giles-Corti et al., 2016). Table 1 summarises the different paradigms of relations betweencities and health.

Currently, COVID-19 is linking an extended list of infectious diseases, such as the Spanishflu in the United States andMexico or the Ebola Virus in Africa, possibly to accord persistentinscriptions to the urban environment (Klaus, 2020). The effects of the COVID-19 pandemicare still implicit. As it has been a year since its appearance, with a secondwave occurring, thiscatastrophe will obviously leave a sign on cities either socially, economically or with respectto urban and architectural aspects (Berg, 2020). This outbreak indicates how vulnerable ourcities are, while we cannot predict where andwhen the next pandemic will occur (Hang, 2020).

ARCH15,1

114

Introduc�on

History of Pandemics and the impact ofCOVID-19 on the city

COVID-19outbreak

Quaran�ne

Restric�onmeasures

Different Typologies of placesFirstPlace

ThirdPlace

CominglingPlace

Co-livingPlace

Fourthplace

Co-workingPlace

SecondPlace

UrbanOutdoorspaces/Services

ArchitectureSpa�al

Configura�on/Shared servicesN

ewCo

nsid

era�

ons

Met

amor

phos

is

Upper middle class districtsDistrict 1 District 2 District 3

ResultsNew

typo

logi

esof

pla

ces

Discussions / Conclusion

Firs

t Par

tSe

cond

Par

tLit

erat

ure

Revi

ew &

theo

re�c

al fr

amew

ork

Data

& Q

uan�

ta�v

e m

etho

d

The early stageBefore mid-19th century

Documentation of the first public health effort by Greeks and RomansMiasma Theory (13th to 18th) CenturyConfronting “bad air” in the 19th centuryBefore developing the urban planning profession

The reformersFrom mid-19th to early 1900s

The Haussman model for city prettificationEbenezer Howard’s concept of Garden CityPatrick Geddes’ concept of regional City to develop ecological balanceLewis Mumford’s theoriesGerm theory

The new citiesMid-20th Century

Criticism of Howard and Geddes’ principlesHumans’ incapability to control all pathogensShift from sanitation to immunisationPendulum shift from social model to medical model

Current and emergent trendsEnd of 20th Century

New Urbanism principlesNew public health paradigm

Figure 1.Research methodology

Table 1.Paradigms of relations

between cities andhealth (Peters, 2020;

Diana, 2020; Giles-Cortiet al., 2016)

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

115

The occurrence of pandemics leads to a new perception of health and well-being with anemphasis on the built environment (Brizuela et al., 2020).

Thus, in the upcoming time, we will have a radical shift in how to design our cities (Peters,2020). Throughout the last century, medicine was used to cure infections and public concernsabout activities and communal systems. Today, space is used to address pandemics (Diana,2020). Thus, “de-urbanisation” is the approach of studying the relevance of the health conceptto the urban environment, with prominence on the pandemic issue. Consequently, theconsolidation of “diseases” and “architecture/urban space” has become a new division in boththeories of architecture and practice (Li, 2017).

2.2 QuarantineThe word quarantine is embedded in the Latin word “forty days”, which refers to thedefensive measures used in Venice in the Middle Ages to stop the spreading of the Bubonicplague. The incoming ships from areas infected by the Black Death had to be attached forforty days beforehand release (Diana, 2020).

Pandemics are not only threats, and the 21st century faces global health challenges,including physical inactivity, unhealthy eating disorders, and non-communicable diseases(NCDs) (Giles-Corti et al., 2016). The consumption, lifestyle, and work of urban citizens havethe possibility of triggering an escalation in NCD (World Health Organization and UnitedNations Development Programme, 2016).

Therefore, quarantine is not the only solution, and healthy human activities should behighly considered. Therefore, urban designers and architects face a great challenge during thepandemic, namely, balancing quarantine considerations and inhibiting physical inactivity. Atthis point, it is crucial to know the main urban and architectural considerations to balancebetween quarantine measures and different human activities (World Health Organization andUnited Nations Development Programme, 2016).

The COVID-19 urgent call for social distancing measures requires the right to affordablehousing, with new specifications, and public spaces with adapted conditions (Berg, 2020) tosupport physical activities, such as walking or cycling (World Health Organization and UnitedNations Development Programme, 2016). Bigger open spaces inside urban fabric can assistcities in performing emergency amenities and protocols for evacuation (Berg, 2020). Therefore,planned pandemic cities must accommodate more spaces for quarantine (Diana, 2020).

It is important to identify the differences in the type of work people do and the proportionof labor force that can engage in remote jobs against the proportion of frontline labourers(Florida, 2020). In addition, social distancing guidelines, which are necessary in a post-pandemic virtual world, will create a new life and working styles capable of accommodatingdifferent spatial relations (Salama, 2020). People also gather in big groups during religiousworships and ceremonies and share the same utilities in their houses (Florida, 2020).

The new norm for urban life during the outbreak and the newwave of a pandemic consists ofstaying at homeandworking from there (Berg, 2020).Apparently, isolation, social distancing, andquarantine are operative solutions that should be adapted to our homes and cities (Diana, 2020).Loneness and social isolation are accompanied byworsemental health unless people canmanageto do their daily routine at home (Giles-Corti et al., 2016). Accordingly, this pandemic raises thequestion of how architects and planners should work to confront these types of threats andbalance between the quarantine spaces and needed human activities (Hang, 2020).

2.3 The different typologies of places2.3.1 The first, second and third place. “The first place” is the living space inside homes. This isassigned to the practices of our private life (Habermas, 1989). “The second place” refers to theworkplace, which represents financial determination and productivity (Habermas, 1989). “Thirdplaces” are defined by Oldenburg as physical locations between the home (first place) and work

ARCH15,1

116

(second place) that provide a welcoming and comfortable atmosphere where people can socialise(Calderon, 2016). In the book,TheGreatGoodPlace, he demonstrates the importance of third placesfor people and public life (Purnell and Breede, 2018). In general, any place that has the componentsto endorse a social interface can be a third place (Calderon, 2016). Oldenburg also focused on itsneutrality, where guests are not burdened by the role of either the visitor or the host (Harris, 2003).

The third-place concept influenced scholars in several fields; however, many scholars believethatOldenburg’s concept of third places needs a serious revision and reevaluation. These scholars,together with Oldenburg himself, have expressed concerns about traditional third places (SamadiAhari and Sattarzadeh, 2017). Oldenburg objected to the communal idea by the presence of virtualthird places; however, its modules can vary over time (Purnell and Breede, 2018).

Existing Information and communication technologies (ICTs) offer virtual spaces tosocialise, but schemes and purposes for transmuting from an online space to another arerequired (Memarovic et al., 2014). However, that affects our understanding to the “public” andthe third places as well (Calderon, 2016).

Scholars wonder about the notion of necessity for accessibility and accommodation of thirdplaces. Third places are commonly considered accessible at any time (Purnell andBreede, 2018).Consequently, such places are a practice relative to an ordinary product (Samadi Ahari andSattarzadeh, 2017). The new third places inside cities do not need planners or architects; theyare planned or designed by the people themselves (Duhl and Sanchez, 1999).

However, people still need physical places to communicate and gather physically, and theycannot live in isolation from others (Duhl and Sanchez, 1999). Meanwhile, the accumulation ofjobs and facilities pushes many residents to meet in small parts, where interaction rates amonginhabitants of distant neighbourhoods will increase (Brizuela et al., 2020). Our neighbourhoodsneed a developed and retained mixed land use, good access to open pedestrian-friendly spaces,groceries and daily services (Abusaada et al., 2020). In addition, architects must integratephysical activities into our day-to-day routine through architecture solutions.

2.3.2 The fourth place. Nowadays, a new social environment is in progress. According toArnault Morission (2018), this environment distorts the orthodox distinction between the first,second and third places, where each typology represents a group inside a classification systemthat splits some characteristics of ourworld into portions alongside a continuum.There are newcombinations. The co-living space is a new arrangement between first and second places, whilethe co-working is a space that mixes between second and third space, and finally, thecommingling space is an assortment between the first and third place. The occurrence of thissocial environment comes from simultaneous tendencies adopted by the knowledge economy,specifically, the combination of work and private life; the significance of informal linkages; theprominence of unspoken acquaintances themillennials’ preferences for living insides cities, andgeneral newwork establishments (Morisson, 2018). ICTs can motivate and maintain the role ofphysical places and societies in which these places bloom (Memarovic et al., 2014).

The fourth place distorts the boundaries, and inside the space itself, there is a place thatgenerates interaction, stimulate mingling, cooperation, frontal communications, in addition toexchanging implied knowledge. Nowadays, the knowledge economy places are progressivelyoverlying, which eventually produces a fourth place (Morisson, 2018). This place is a generationaltransference; it partakes some resemblanceswithOldenburg’s thirdplace,with theprospects of thevirtual place that overwhelmed the boundaries of time and space (Crick, 2011). Currently, ICTsexaggerates howpeople combine thehousehold and theworkplace, howpeoplework and socialise.Our current understanding of being in a place continually links the physical space and virtualspace, and between synchronous and asynchronous communicative modalities (Calderon, 2016).

The borderline between the three customary places is gradually unclear, which requires thedevelopment of new spaces that comprise co-working, commingling and co-living spaces. Thisdesignates the prominence of tacit knowledge, societal communications, networking and thefour-dimensional innovational aspect in our world knowledge economy (Morisson, 2018).

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

117

The frontline between societal and secluded dynamics, work and relaxation, interacting andcommunal interactions and partnership and competition is unclear, making it themost suitablefor today’s necessities (Morisson, 2018). Our residences were theoretically in first places;however, they became second places as we do our work in bedrooms or living rooms, andbecause they are communal places, they are also considered as third places aswell (Crick, 2011).

Decision-makers should support establishing fourth places and new communal settingssuch as co-living, co-working and commingling spaces by endorsing mixed-use zoning. Thisshall integrate diverse magnitudes of places and support enticements in the city where thereis a recession (Morisson, 2018). One of the famous examples is “Station F” in Paris, which wasconstructed in 2017 on 51,000 square meters, and comprises more than 1,000 startupsmoderated by more than 30 startup programmes (Station F, 2020).

2.4 COVID-19 outbreak and the metamorphosis of our placesImprovement of sanitation in the 19th century was made in response to the outbreak ofmalaria and cholera. ICT infrastructure will be the sanitation of the current paradigm (Klaus,2020). It is an “isolation-by-choice” paradigm (Memarovic et al., 2014). Establishing this ICTinfrastructure that turns people connected and physically isolated corresponds to the 19thcentury’s usage of city planning and civil engineering to deal with the outbreak of malariaand cholera (Diana, 2020).

Buildings can have a role in directing people to suitable ways for testing and possiblyquarantine to minimalise face-to-face communication (Peters, 2020). The urban context couldbe digitally illustrated in the red and green zones (Klaus, 2020). Transformed rooms inhospitals, for critical cases, can be turned into an intensive care room in case of emergency.Parks can also function as an escape, as staying outside the public building is safer than beinginside (Peters, 2020). The decentralisation of services is now necessary, with a network ofsmall suppliers (Klaus, 2020).

Moreover, fixable transformed buildings will have a pivotal role in metamorphosing withpandemics outbreaks, as during that time, some uses emerge and others disappear. Outdoorpublic spaces can act as logistics and treatment zones and will have more attention in designschemes, which allow people to expose to direct sunlight, which is essential for vitamin D andminimising the risk of acute respiratory tract contamination. Correspondingly, an easyentrance to outdoor areas inspires residents to stay outside and exercise andmaybe remotelysocialised (Peters, 2020).

The new living model for life during a pandemic will generate new adaptive andspontaneous typologies to accommodate people’s needs, where architects need to findsolutions for spatial reconfiguration and utilising the shared amenities and services. Inaddition, architects and urban designers have to translate leisure activities to adaptive spacesin both building and semi-private and semi-public spaces and rethink the best model foroutdoor services.

The new typologies of spaces that contained the residents’ activities will be representedwith new norms at both urban and architectural levels. The urban aspects comprise outdoorspaces and services. Architectural buildings include internal spatial configurations andshared indoor amenities and services. Further investigation is needed to shed light ondifferent districts inhabited by upper-middle-class Cairo residents. The results will beexplored in the following paragraphs using a retrospective survey.

3. Data and methodsThis study used a three-step approach. The first step was the description of the selecteddistricts and the reason for their selection. The second step was the quantitative datacollection through an online and physical survey that was conducted for two months during

ARCH15,1

118

the first outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. The last step highlighted the results of thequestionnaire.

3.1 Case studyCairo, the capital of Egypt, is surrounded by smaller satellite cities, called the “new urbancommunities”, which are located around the external boundaries. These satellite cities havedifferent administrative systems and regulations (Plate 1).

The field survey was conducted in three upper-middle-class districts located in Cairo andits surroundings (the Heliopolis district, the Seventh district inside Obour City, the Rehabgated community inside New Cairo City). The reason for selecting these three areas dependson the various roles of different issues related to the adaptation and acceptance of residents tothe quarantine as follows:

(1) The different roles of outdoor spaces, such as the streets in the older district(Heliopolis) vs semi-public and public gardens in the new gated and ungatedcommunities (Rehab and Obour);

(2) The different roles of mixed-use services distribution in the older district (Heliopolis)vs the neighborhood centre of services in both Rehab and Obour;

(3) The different role of the prevailing typology of living apartments in both Heliopolisand Rehab vs the family houses in Obour.

Plate 1.The location of the

three studied districts

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

119

3.2 Quantitative data collectionThe method used in this study was a retrospective survey, in which different residents fromthe three districts were invited to participate. The survey targeted residents of the threedistricts whose ages ranged between 20 and 70 years. The investigation aimed to exploreresidents’ feedback about how they could practice their daily life and routines at differenthousing typologies with different private and public outdoor spaces and explore theemerging adaptive types of spaces during quarantine that accommodated the requiredactivities.

The population size was considered to be the standard neighbourhood (4,500–5,000people), the sample size was comprised of 90 samples (30 samples per district), and the level ofconfidence was 80%, with a 6% margin of error.

According to the purpose of the research, the questions were classified into three groups.The first aimed at collecting personal “basic data” regarding gender and marital status, asfollows:

Q1. Your gender? Male/female

Marital status? Single/married

The second group of questions explored the different typologies of spaces. This set ofquestions included the following:

Q2. Your living place during quarantine restrictions (First place):

� Type of your living place? Family house/Apartment

� Total area (m2)?

� Does private outdoor space/s exist? Yes/No

� Used terrace/s? Yes/No

� Private entrance? Yes/No

� Private/ public outdoor space attached? Yes/No

Q3. Your workplace during quarantine restrictions (Second place):

� Online work? Yes/No

If yes, how much time do you spend? Part-time/Full-time

Q4. Your leisure place during quarantine restrictions (Third place):

� Physically, exist at home? Yes/No

� Virtually, exist at home? Yes/No

Q5. Can your home accommodate all your daily (live and work) activities duringquarantine restrictions (co-living place)? Yes/No

If yes, physically, virtually or both.

Q6. Can your home accommodate all your daily activities (entertainment andwork) duringquarantine restrictions (Co-working place)? Yes/No

ARCH15,1

120

If yes, physically, virtually or both

Q7. Can your home accommodate all your daily activities together (entertainment andliving) during quarantine restrictions (Commingling place)? Yes/No

If yes, physically, virtually or both.

Q8. Do you have tactics in mind or make arrangements in your home (indoor/outdoor) toadapt to all kinds of places during quarantine restrictions? Yes/No

The third group of questions investigated the changes that would most improve the livingmodel of adaptive architecture and urban design during quarantine restrictions, asfollows:

Q9.What are your recommendations regarding indoor spaces and outdoor spaces tomakeyour home more adaptive to quarantine restrictions with respect to interiorreconfiguration, usage of outdoor spaces and shared amenities?

The data were collected from the beginning of April 2020 until the end of May 2020. Thetarget respondents were residents of the same neighbourhood in the same district. Theywere contacted physically through printouts and online forms via emails and WhatsAppgroups.

3.3 ResultsTable 2 shows the results of the survey, and a proper adjustment was made after obtainingresponses from the participants.

The spatial reconfiguration varied from one housing typology to another. Many tacticswerementioned, either applied or planned, by the residents of the three districts, which variedaccording to their daily routine and profession, as well as the needs of their families, withrespect to the available indoor and outdoor areas. This indicates that the more physical areasand privacy the housing typology had, themore the tendency for reconfiguration. In addition,being located in a gated/ungated community did not affect the respondents’ intention toreadjust their houses.

Based on an open-ended question investigating the changes that would improvethe adaptive and spontaneous living model of the different typologies in selectedcases, the responses show various aspects that could be considered in designing post-pandemic residential places. The results show fifteen core elements related to the functionand safety of residents during quarantine restrictions. They are: Servicing outdoor area,circulation areas, running tracks, increase outdoor semi-private and semi-public areas,street furniture, parking areas, multipurpose areas, control points, entrances, percentageof closed/open areas, indoor service distribution, vertical circulation elements, sanitisingpoints, allocation of new activities and ICT infrastructure. Each element can be classifiedinto four Urban/architecture main considerations that were mentioned in the theoreticalframework. (Outdoor spaces – Services – spatial reconfiguration – shared amenities andservices).

The questionnaire shed light on this open-ended question regarding theconsiderations to make residential homes more adaptive to quarantine restrictionswith respect to the four elements of urban and architectural considerations. Theresponse stated that “The design of post-pandemic places needs more attentiontowards flexible spaces and design, maintained and secured attached outdoor spaces,adopting new urbanism principles in services distribution, and reconsidering our visiontowards the building shared services and amenities”. The question is how to do so (seeFigure 2).

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

121

HeliopolisObourcity

Rehab gatedcommunity

Basic information Status quoGender Male 13 16 17

Female 17 14 13Marital status Live alone 10 2 7

Family 20 28 23

Types of places during quarantine

First placeType Family house 2 27 6

Apartment 28 3 24Total area (m2) Below 100 3 0 3

100–150 16 1 12151–200 6 1 7200–250 3 7 3Over 250 2 21 5

Existence of private outdoor spaces Exist 4 28 10Not exist 26 2 20

Existence of used terraces Exist 27 29 30Not exist 3 1 0

Existence of used roof Exist 5 28 7Not exist 25 2 23

Private entrance Exist 4 28 10Not exist 26 2 20

Semi private/public outdoor space Exist 3 11 30Not exist 27 19 0

Second placePercentage of online working hrs None 6 5 7

Part-time 5 2 6Full 19 23 17

Third placePhysical (indoor/outdoor) Exist 5 12 26

Not exist 25 18 4Virtual Exist 30 30 30

Not exist 0 0 0

Co-livingExist/not exist (physical/virtual) Exist physical 24 26 23

Exist virtual 24 26 23Not exist 6 4 7

Co-workingExist/not exist (physical/virtual) Exist physical 1 9 3

Exist virtual 15 16 13Not exist 14 5 14

ComminglingExist/Not exist (physical/virtual) Exist physical 3 15 29

Exist virtual 30 30 30Not exist 0 0 0

TacticsSpace rearrangements Exist 5 11 7

Not exist 25 19 23

(continued )

Table 2.Participants’ answersto the three-partquestionnaire

ARCH15,1

122

Access to service was one major consideration. On the contrary, mixed-use development inHeliopolis with allocation of services everywhere om the ground floors of buildings is not aconcern for its residents. In addition, the percentage of outdoor spaces in Rehab city plays apivotal role in outdoor exercise, socialising within small groups, in addition to theavailability of usage as a multipurpose outdoor area in case of emergency. All residentsrequired the use of ICT infrastructure for checkups and investigations in indoor andoutdoor spaces.

Reviewing the entire analysis of this question, a correlation between the tactics in urbanand architectural spaces and the words that respondents can use to describe these adaptiverequirements showed significant results. Urban considerations comprising semi-private and

HeliopolisObourcity

Rehab gatedcommunity

Recommendations and requirementsInterior spaces Closed/open areas percentage 13 5 2

Allocation of new activities 6 2 5Entrances 16 0 7Vertical circulation elements 14 0 5ICT infrastructure 9 0 4Services distribution 3 9 8Increasing circulation areasfor social distancing

11 15 18

Exterior spaces Increase outdoor areas 24 9 2Multi-purpose spaces 15 8 7Services’ out doorwaiting areas 24 20 22Street furniture design 7 13 15Running tracks 17 15 7Parking spaces 22 2 7Sanitising points 2 5 8Control points/entrances 15 8 4 Table 2.

Control points / entrances

Sani�zing points

Parking spaces

Running tracks

Services’ out door wai�ng areas

Services

Urb

an

15 8 4

2

3

2

5 8

89

8

9

9

22 2 7

7

7

17

11 15 18

15

13 15

15

7

24

24

20 22

Street furniture

Mul�-purpose spaces

Increase outdoor areas

Increasing circula�on areas for social distancing

Services distribu�on

Outdoor areas

Arch

itect

ure

ICT infrastructure

Ver�cal circula�on elements

Entrances

Shared ameni�es &services

Spa�alreconfigura�on

Alloca�on of new ac�vi�es

Closed / Open areas percentage

0 4

14 0 5

16 0 7

6 2 5

13 5 2

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Heliopolois Obour Rehab

Figure 2.Stack bar for urban

and architecture designconsiderations of three

districts

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

123

semi-public spaces or (the streets and attached gardens) are the main concern for residents inthe ungated community. The building typology affected the respondents’ recommendations.The precautionary measures indicated the need to change the concept of designing livingspaces and housing typologies, and it also reconsiders the concept of service distribution andaccessibility to these services.

As the fourth place only works in the normal living mode, during quarantine restrictions,a new hybrid place emerged from the operation of the different outdoor and indoor typologiesof other places. This place sometimes works on a physical basis, and other times virtually,with some essential characteristics needed to work properly during the pandemic outbreak.The limit of this place is the attached quarantine semi-private or semi-public space, which canbe called “quarantined fourth place” or “fifth place” (see Figure 3).

According to the survey, we can classify the three typologies as follows:3.3.1 Living apartment typology in the ungated community. It exists in the Heliopolis

district; the fourth place comprised in this typology has some spatial limitations according tothe unavailability of properly attached private and semi-private outdoor areas, in addition tothe shared amenities and services, inside the building, the existing first and co-living placesare still the same as in other districts. The commingling space is highly affected by theabsence of private and semi-private outdoor areas. There is no influence on the virtual co-working and commingling places; hence, this typology will depend on the virtual co-workingand commingling place with the absence or shortage of these places in their physical form.The obvious potential is the proximity of services within walking distances, and some ofthem are working with restrictions such as cafes and bakeries, which can linearly extend thefourth place on the attached walkways until the delivery point of services.

3.3.2 Family-living house typology in the ungated community. It exists in the Obour district,the fourth place in this typology is larger than the previous model, but has a minor spatiallimitation because of the presence of unmaintained semi-private and semi-public spaces,according to the importance attached to private and semi-private outdoor areas, in addition tothe interference of cars and pedestrianmovement. However, there is great potential to expandthe spatial coexistence of the fourth place by the regular maintenance of outdoor spaces, theimprovement of landscape furniture and outdoor lighting, and some tactics to separate carsand pedestrians. However, the presence of varied outdoor private spaces, such as unusedroofs and basements, in addition to the existence of private gardens, has an importantcompensation role for the commingling places. Inside the building, the existence of the first

Figure 3.The fifth-placeconfiguration

ARCH15,1

124

and co-living places is still the same as in other districts. The dependence on the virtualdimension to configure a virtual commingling place is less than that of the previous type.There is no influence on the virtual co-working and commingling places; hence, this typologywill depend on the virtual co-working and commingling place with the absence or shortage ofthese places in their physical form.

3.3.3 Family-living apartment typology in gated communities. It exists in the Rehab district,and the fourth-place boundaries are widely extended; however, the transition between theprivate living mode and the semi-public living mode through the shared amenities andservices of the apartment building needs to be revised in terms of quarantine measures. Thatis why the respondents of these districts were stressing providing “sanitation points”, and“separation of vertical circulation of vertical elements like elevators and stairs” . . .etc. such asthe previous examples, the co-living place has the same configuration dimensions, which canbe accommodated inside the living space of the apartment (see Figure 4).

In Cairo, the quarantine restrictions for COVID-19 shaped a new way for residents socialisetogether, with new typologies of places that are not equally configured inside and outside thebuildings; however, each one offers an eclectic range of provisions acceptable by residents.Heliopolis, regardless of the limitation of its outdoor spaces in comparison to the other twodistricts, represents the optimal environment for distributing services with relevance to thequarantine atmosphere in terms of density and walking distance. Living in a gatedcommunity is highly recommended by residents during quarantine for the privilege of controland safetymeasurements. In addition, the commingling place can be exceedingly representedbecause of the good distribution of outdoor spaces. The building typology existing in theselected district in Obour represents the proper location that accommodates the physical co-working activities.

4. DiscussionUnderstanding different place typologies and the reconfiguration of spaces in addition tourban and architectural considerations of upper-middle-class residents during quarantinerestrictions can create a better environment for residents in post-pandemic cities. Theseaspects seek to identify relevant design tools to be used in other living arrangements in citieswith the same specifications and circumstances. This study discussed the living/working/leisure arrangements of residents in Cairo during the outbreak of COVID-19, in addition to thehybrid model of these places’ arrangements, and the changes that should meet thetransformations of post-pandemic life experiences, whenever the residents need change. This

Figure 4.The fifth place fordifferent districts

(Author, 2000)

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

125

work provides evidence of the different needs of residents and their tactics in indoor andoutdoor place typologies. In addition, it offers an extended living model of adaptive,spontaneous urban and architectural design decisions. This model necessarily produces adifferent and distinct experience rather than the ordinary living model.

The results of the study provide evidence that urban designers and architects cannot dealwith living spaces as they used to do in the pre-pandemic stage. Despite some aspectsremaining identical, there are also some new variables. Residents are now preparing theirhomes to adapt to the new conditions. Currently, there is an urgent need to develop newdesign concepts and principles; we should set a new design “controls and requirements” forthe post-epidemic phase; however, under the successive changes, the life experiences duringthe quarantine are still intertwined.

From the outcomes of the theoretical framework, key findings show the problematicrelationship between quarantinemeasures and residents’ activities. The findings concern twomain aspects. The first comprises urban considerations, the attached outdoor areas withinquarantine limits, and the linked services. The second includes architectural considerations,the spatial reconfiguration of interior spaces and the shared amenities and services. A furthernovel finding is that there is a link between residents’ tactics and considerations to achieve anadaptive livingmodel based on the four elements of urban and architectural reconsiderations.

These results show the idea of creating a convenient atmosphere for residents during anypulmonary quarantine. Although it is a necessity and difficult at the same time, it stands for acritical approach that enables us to test existing and planned post-pandemic livingcommunities. Then, the issue of designing urban communities and residential districts needsa periodic follow up and full attention by introducing quarantine measures. The key resultsconfirmed that investigating residents’ opinions regarding the readaptation andreconfiguration of their living places enables them to reach key issues for redesign andrethinking post-pandemic city designs. The outcomes prove that there is a difference inresidents’ reconsideration because of the difference in housing typologies.

These results are linked to previous literature discussing the different place typologies,the first, the second, the third and their virtual three places. Besides, some places are in theirhybrid form until we can have a common understanding ofwhat is the fourth place. Althoughthe virtual form of these places has a non-physical dimension, they still play an important rolein designing new readapted quarantined places, or what the research calls the “fifth place”inside the post-pandemic cities. Consequently, during the process of reshaping our traditionalcites and neighbourhoods, urban designers, planners and architects should work onaccentuating the guidelines that rearrange the existing live/work/leisure place typologies andalso help planners and designers to create different living mitigated atmospheres.

Indeed, with other studies and works for designing post-pandemic places (Berg, 2020;Brizuela et al., 2020; Hang, 2020; Klaus, 2020; Peters, 2020; Salama, 2020), five transferablelessons can be outlined. The first lesson is to identify implications for further research; if thiswork succeeds in illustrating the typologies of quarantined places and their urban andarchitectural design considerations, it will achieve its objective. The different typologies ofplaces, analysed within their virtual and hybrid settings, are experienced differently bydiverse residents, according to the housing typology and the surrounding environment.

The second lesson is about the dilemma between “Not everything can become virtual” vs“Technology determines spatial reconfiguration”, which could be more elaborated on thesocial innovation of residents with existing indoor places. However, still what people canpractice within semi-private and semi-public spaces within boundaries of externalquarantined spaces will remain the most vital aspect. The fifth place is supposed to bespace-time quarantined with restricted boundaries.

The third transferable lesson is about the “critical outlook for change”. The state ofrestriction in which we are currently living has demonstrated the ability of people to cope

ARCH15,1

126

with the emergent circumstances and their ability to think about re-adapting theirarchitectural spaces according to the available capabilities. This is followed by theiridentification of the space deficiencies and additions that they need and do not need at theirliving places, which they would not have been realised without the spread of the pandemic.The state of quarantine also demonstrated the residents’ need to interact with the urban streetand prepare it for human interaction that makes up for the rest of the restricted spaces.

The fourth lesson is about the new “public health paradigm”. The vision of architects,urbanites and urban developers towards the design of living communities and places willchange regarding the proportions of public and private spaces, open and semi-open spacesand the individual’s share of different areas. Reviewing different previous theories for urbanplanning and design, in addition to outdated theories, may illuminate the currentcircumstances. The post-pandemic living places will comprise different qualities frommultiple theories, an assortment of hygienic places of “healthy city”, horizontal developmentof “green city” in addition to services distribution of “new urbanism”. This new perception ofhealthy and living places will embrace socioeconomic and environmental considerations sideby side with urban traits.

The fifth lesson learned about the possibility of presenting a set of theoretical and appliedsciences that architects and urban designers can learn to develop their ability toaccommodate emergency restrictions and their impact on their design perceptions fromthe point of view of preventive health, technology, urban sociology and interior design. Theextent towhich this can be accommodated to develop their abilities tomake “flexible designs”suitable for life under or without the pandemic, andwhether this, in turn, will require theworkof new building and planning codes and legislations or not, and how much change can occurto the current.

This study tried to develop a vision for a space-time quarantined space typology, namely“the fifth place”, by combining the different concepts of places with the quarantineconsiderations. Although extensively acknowledged in bibliometric research, the determinedlessons suffer from some restrictions owing to the deficiency of a precise sample size that canlead to outcomes close to reality. Another constraint in this survey was the timing during theoutbreak of the first wave of the pandemic, and it was difficult to reach peoplewithin the sameneighbourhood properly, without the help of colleagues and friends. The target samplefocused only on residents of upper-middle-class districts in Cairo in selected neighbourhoods.A limitation consists in not testing the theoretical framework in a sample representing a realcase of residents in the three districts that have circumstances that can be measured andrecognised.

5. ConclusionsThis article uses the concepts of Oldenburg (1997) and Morisson (2018) to analyse andillustrate the different place typologies, the effect of COVID-19 on city design (Berg, 2020;Brizuela et al., 2020; Florida, 2020; Hang, 2020; Peters, 2020) and the implications ofquarantine restrictions on urban and architectural considerations. The current studyinvestigated the considerations of different typologies of emerged places that accommodatequarantine restrictions. This article argued for the recognition of the involvement of both thephysical and virtual dimension in what is so-called the “fifth place” or a “quarantined place”.According to the participants’ responses, the identification of the most important featuresthat make up the fifth place becomes clear.

The study introduced the new term “the fifth place” as a space-time place. “Space” as it is aplace configured by a group of ingredient spaces, its boundaries are the limits in which aperson can practice her/his various activities inside her/his home or/and within attachedsemi-private and semi-public spaces. “Time” as it is related to the time of quarantine only, andthis space can be reconfigured after the expiration of the restriction period.

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

127

Based on the findings of the current study, the spatial configuration during quarantine issudden. It results from human needs to live, work and spend leisure time within restrictedboundaries of available and convenient spaces, as well as governmental boundary limitations.The urban environment and architecture typologies reform the new configuration intosequential and overlapping spatial typologies or fifth places during the quarantine.

The main inference that can be articulated here is that fourth places are separate placesrelated to physical and visual considerations for people who are obliged to live in. Theseconsiderations are in a dynamic process as long as the daily routine changes, and the closerthe normal pre-pandemic situation, the more successful the fourth place is, which causes astate of comfort, stability and well-being.

By discussing Oldenburg andMorrison concepts for the third and fourth places to analysethe different types of places, we could understand the interrelationships between the differenttypologies and to what extent these interrelationships can work together with informationtechnology to create a virtual context that bridges the gap between the different users atdifferent typologies of spaces. In addition, every now and then, it provides a familiar state ofplace that diversifies its features and possibilities.

This article determined, through the output of the literature review, the differentconsiderations for design and adaptation of the fourth place that vary among three keyissues. The first depends on governmental authorities: quarantine space-time boundaries.The second is related to urban planners and developers: physical outdoor formation. Thethird relates to urban designers, architects and interior designers: how to consider thedifferent aspects of outdoor and indoor adaptation to produce flexible designs andmulti-usedspaces. The fourth issue is related to ICT dependencies for the configuration of the differentvirtual typologies of places.

The outcomes of both the literature review and collected data revealed that the mainelements that compose the urban and architectural considerations are the outdoor spaceswith quarantine boundaries, attached services, spatial indoor reconfiguration and sharedamenities and services. These elements include various other elements that identify thereadaptation process. The results of the survey demonstrated that these elements affect thereconfiguration of our places during quarantine, but differently according to the internal andexternal situation of the place.

Generally, the study attempted to undertake a relevant analysis of a discreet sector ofsociety during the pandemic, trying to provide a characteristic living model of adaptive,spontaneous urban and architectural design aspects that translate people’s existing life,work, and leisure arrangements into future planning design considerations with the featuresof the living communities under quarantine conditions through two issues. The first is linkedto human needs and activities in their living places, in addition to other impressions, such asacclimatisation, habituation and accommodation. The second is related to the physical indoorand outdoor environment within the permitted quarantine boundaries. These two issues relyon the following:

(1) The contextual setting and typo-morphological aspects, such as linkage tohierarchical levels of outdoor spaces, pedestrian-friendly spaces, proximity topermitted services, other functions and uses.

(2) Design efficiency and flexibility of interior and exterior spaces, such as inclusivespaces, free spans, accessed terraces, accessed roofs and basements.

(3) Housing typology, like type “family houses” or “apartment level”, total area, privateoutdoor areas, the existence of parking areas.

(4) ICT, Connectivity to infrastructure and informatics.

ARCH15,1

128

The results showed that the most adaptive fifth place typology is formulated as anassortment of the features of the three case studies. It comprises the effectiveness of thefamily home as a housing typology, which is connected to external pedestrian-friendlyoutdoor spaces and services. The role of ICT that supports virtual places appears as asubstitute of the physical one; its role becomes important as long as the physical placesconsiderations cannot be applied. The fifth place represents a “state” of visual interactionacquainted by spatial qualifications during the quarantine.

By discussing different concepts related to place typologies, the first place always exists inits physical form; the second place varies according to profession and applicability ofpracticing in its virtual form. The third place is formulated by changing spatial andinformational capabilities. The hybrid forms of places differ in applicability; the co-livingplace can be easily configured; co-working and commingling places depend on spatialcompetencies and the effectiveness of ICT infrastructure. The fourth place, unless theexistence of permissions, ceased during quarantine restrictions. This, in turn, will bereconfigured to various types of places mentioned at other locations in the city.

The current study showed that the consequences of quarantine caused by COVID-19 on aselected class of residents seem crucial in designing post-pandemic places. However, the useof appropriate geographical information systems and parametric and other digital methodsto be used in the fields of interior design, architecture design, urban design and planning fordata gathering, data management, data analysis and design will open a way for consecutiverelevant research. In addition, similar quantitativemethods should be applied to other classesof residents.

In this paper, the results from the literature review and quantitative analysis showed thatwhile much can be detected from investigating residents’ opinions regarding the designconsiderations for place typologies, more empirical studies are essential. Moreover, it isnecessary to know how architects and urban designers address the post-pandemic in theirdesigns, rather than just applying social distance measures. A considerable effort is requiredfrom developers, decision-makers, legitimists, designers and scholars to embrace a safe andhealthy environment in their works. Finally, this paper recommends that we think morecautiously about the metamorphosis process for our city places.

References

Abusaada, H., Elshater, A. and Abd Elrahman, A.S. (2020), “Articulating assemblage theory forsalient urban atmospheres in children’s environments”, Ain Shams Engineering Journal,Volume Under Press.

Berg, R.V.D. (2020), “How will COVID-19 affect urban planning?”, [Online], available at: https://thecityfix.com/blog/will-covid-19-affect-urban-planning-rogier-van-den-berg/.

Brizuela, N.G., Garc�ıa-Chan, N., Pulido, H.G. and Chowell, G. (2020), “Understanding the role of urbandesign in disease spreading”, March 19, bioRxiv, pp. 2-14.

Calderon, R. (2016), Third-Placeness: Supporting the Experience of Third Place with Interactive PublicDisplays, Univeristy of British Columbia, Vancouver.

Crick, P.A. (2011), Rethinking Oldenburg: Third Places and Generation Y in a Developing CountryContext, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Massachusetts, pp. 1-20.

Diana, B. (2020), [Online], available at: https://www.curbed.com/2020/3/17/21178962/design-pandemics-coronavirus-quarantine.

Duhl, L.J. and Sanchez, A.K. (1999), Healthy Cities and the City Planning Process : A BackgroundDocument on Links between Health and Urban Planning, World Health Organization, Copenhagen.

Florida, R. (2020), “The geography of coronavirus”, [Online], available at: https://www.citylab.com/equity/2020/04/coronavirus-spread-map-city-urban-density-suburbs-rural-data/609394/.

The impact ofCOVID-19 in

post-pandemicCairo

129

Giles-Corti, B., Vernez-Moudon, A., Reis, R., Turrell, G., Dannenberg, A.L., Badland, H., Foster, S.,Lowe, M., Sallis, J.F., Stevenson, M. and Owen, N. (2016), “City planning and population health:a global challenge”, The Lancet Journal, 23 September, Vol. 388 No. 10062, pp. 2912-2924.

Habermas, J. (1989), Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category ofBourgeois Society, MIT Press, Cambridge.

Hang, M. (2020), “Preparing cities for epidemics: lessons from the COVID19 outbreak”, [Online],available at: https://www.ijurr.org/the-urban-now/preparing-cities-for-epidemics/.

Harris, K. (2003), “Your third place or mine? Public libraries and local communities”, Public LibraryJournal, pp. 26-29.

Klaus, I. (2020), “Pandemics are also an urban planning problem”, [Online], available at: https://www.citylab.com/design/2020/03/coronavirus-urban-planning-global-cities-infectious-disease/607603/.

Li, Y. (2017), Urban Design and 3 Kinds of Space-Related Epidemic Diseases, s.n., Seoul, pp. 1-5.

Memarovic, N., Fels, S., Anacleto, J., Calderon, R., Gobbo, F. and Carroll, J.M. (2014), “Rethinking third places:contemporary design with technology”, Journal of Community Informatics, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 2-13.

Morisson, A. (2018), A Typology of Places in the Knowledge Economy: Towards the Fourth Place,Springer, Reggio Calabria, pp. 444-451.

Oldenburg, R. (1997), “Our vanishing ‘third places’”, Planning Commissioners Journal, Vol. 25,Winter, pp. 6-10.

Peters, A. (2020), “How we can redsign cities to fight future pandemics: ‘Buildings have to be thesecret weapon in the future to combat infectious diseases’”, [Online], available at: https://www.fastcompany.com/90491094/negative-pressure-rooms-save-lives-why-arent-there-more-of-them.

Purnell, D. and Breede, D.C. (2018), “Traveling the third place: : conferences as third places”, Space andCulture, Vol. 21 No. 4, pp. 512-523.

Salama, A.M. (2020), “Coronavirus questions that will not go away: interrogating urban and socio-spatial implications of COVID-19 measures [version 1; peer review: 3 approved]”, Emerald OpenResearch, Vol. 2, p. 14, doi: 10.35241/emeraldopenres.13561.1.

Samadi Ahari, A. and Sattarzadeh, D. (2017), “‘Third Place’, a place for leisure time and its relationshipwith different social setting in Tabriz, Iran”, International Journal of Architecture and UrbanPlanning, 30 December, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 95-105.

Station, F. (2020), “stationf.co/campus/”, [Online], available at: https://stationf.co/campus/.

World Health Organization and United Nations Development Programme (2016), NoncommunicableDiseases: What Municipal Authorities, Local Governments and Ministries Responsible for UrbanPlanning Need to Know, World Health Organization, available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/250228.

About the authorProf. Ahmed S. Abd Elrahman is an Academic and practitioner. He participated in many projects inEgypt, Africa, Gulf and Europe. Academically, he is a member of the editorial technical office of ASEJ:Ain Shams Engineering Journal – Elsevier. He is the author and co-editor of three books and bookchapters. He also has many research papers published in the international peer-reviewed press.Professor Ahmed S. Abd Elrahman is the Unit head of Architecture Program at Faculty of Engineering,Ain Shams University, he is also the Coordinator of Double Degree Program between Ain ShamsUniversity in Egypt and Mediterranea University of Reggio Calabria in Italy. Ahmed S. Abd Elrahmancan be contacted at: ahmed.sami@eng.asu.edu.eg

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htmOr contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

ARCH15,1

130