Kitchen retrofits to support food practices and wellbeing

Kitchen design is a critical, yet underexamined, factor in supporting residents’ wellbeing in increasingly densified city landscapes. This study explores how a group of private apartment dwellers in Melbourne (Australia) retrofitted their kitchens to support home food practices. A survey of residents (n = 62) and in-depth photo-elicited interviews (n = 20, including families with children) investigated lived experience within the constraints of current regulatory frameworks. Residents described strong preferences for home cooking shaped by health, cultural tradition, economic considerations, enjoyment and social connection. These motivations drove staged and cost-sensitive retrofits. Thematic findings identify four core dimensions: a) resident preferences and compromises; b) decision-making and timing; c) enhanced functionality and safety through improved storage, work surfaces, lighting, ventilation and layout; and d) the transformation of kitchens into socially and aesthetically engaging communal spaces. Conceptually, the study advances debates around buildings and wellbeing by framing retrofits as corrective affordances that bridge gaps between intended design and the everyday social practice of cooking and eating. It calls for stronger evidence-based apartment design guidance integrating functional, social and wellbeing dimensions.

POLICY RELEVANCE

This study provides evidence to inform standards for apartment design, housing policy and public health strategy by demonstrating how kitchen design directly shapes everyday food practices and wellbeing. The findings indicate that current apartment design standards provide limited kitchen-specific guidance, leaving residents to privately resolve design shortfalls. These include inadequate storage, limited bench space, insufficient lighting and ventilation and poorly located appliances, all of which can undermine home cooking and safety, particularly for families with children. Resident-led retrofits function as corrective responses to ‘affordance gaps’ between intended design and social practice. Embedding evidence-based kitchen design principles into regulatory frameworks could reduce costly post-occupancy modifications and support healthier food practices at scale.