After the 1917 Revolution, the Soviet Union faced massive “densification” — former bourgeois apartments and income houses were repurposed and filled with working-class families, creating the infamous kommunalka, or communal apartments. The authorities promoted the idea of “collectivized everyday life,” believing that shared living would help shape a new kind of person — one freed from bourgeois individualism.

By the 1960s, attitudes had shifted. Communal apartments had become a symbol of backwardness. Khrushchev’s housing reforms prioritized private apartments — small, but one’s own. The “Khrushchyovka” was meant not only to solve the housing crisis but also to transform the Soviet mindset, moving people from collective existence to private life. Privacy became a value, and communal living — a relic of the past.

In Europe and the United States, shared living evolved along a different path. In the 1960s, hippies and squatters created communes as acts of rebellion against the system.

 Today’s co-living spaces — such as The Collective in London or WeLive in New York — are no longer countercultural experiments but commercial products. They offer small, fully furnished apartments combined with shared areas for work, yoga, cooking, dining, and socializing. It’s a blend of modern convenience and community — an affordable alternative to high rents and an antidote to urban loneliness.

For some, co-living is a conscious lifestyle — ideal for young professionals, freelancers, and digital nomads. It’s not just about affordable housing but about being part of a community where it’s easy to find friends, collaborators, or simply interesting company.

Shared dinners, social events, and coworking spaces turn everyday living into a form of mutual cooperation — especially valuable for small businesses and freelancers.

But for many, co-living is simply a survival strategy in cities where rent prices have gone through the roof. People agree to have roommates simply because they have no other choice.

Think of Friends or The Big Bang Theory: everyone has a roommate — and in Sheldon Cooper’s case, candidates even undergo an interview process before moving in.

University dorms remain focused on practicality — affordable, minimal, and study-oriented. Meanwhile, outside cities, eco-communes are gaining traction — with gardens, workshops, and a focus on living in harmony with nature. The choice depends on one’s goals, budget, and appetite for community.

At first glance, Soviet communal apartments and modern co-living spaces look similar: shared kitchens, thin walls, and neighbors just a few steps away. It’s no surprise people joke that Gen Z has reinvented the kommunalka — this time with Wi-Fi and lattes.

The key difference is choice. Communal apartments were assigned by the state; co-living spaces are joined voluntarily — often temporarily.

It’s not just a roof over one’s head but a network of like-minded people. Instead of forced coexistence, it’s shared values, projects, and a sense of belonging. This isn’t a return to the past, but a new format of life — where comfort and community matter more than square meters.

The demand for co-living is rising fast, and the reasons are obvious. In big cities, rents are becoming unaffordable — especially for young people and freelancers. Urbanization forces people to seek new housing formats, while ironically, the digital age has made real human connection scarcer. Remote workers, missing office camaraderie, find co-living a social alternative — a way to feel less isolated in a big city.

Yet shared living comes with challenges. Living with strangers can lead to conflicts over habits and routines — noisy parties, bathroom queues, kitchen messes, lack of privacy. Not everyone can tolerate that, even for the sake of saving money or enjoying vibrant company.

Still, co-living has a bright future. Premium formats are emerging, offering not just comfort but access to exclusive services and events. Families and older residents are showing growing interest too — for example, parents in co-living communities can take turns babysitting, cutting childcare costs.

Remote work also gives co-living a boost: if you don’t need to commute daily, you can live anywhere — even in more affordable areas.

Ultimately, living together isn’t just cheaper, but more practical: people share rent, utilities, and even hire tutors, guitar instructors, or yoga coaches together. You save money and gain a sense of community.

Shared living can offer many benefits — but avoiding the pitfalls of old-school communal apartments requires thoughtful design. Each resident should have private space — a compact studio with a bathroom and mini-kitchen for basic needs. That eliminates the main sources of conflict and preserves a sense of autonomy. Shared spaces, meanwhile, should be top-notch: a spacious professional kitchen, buffet-style dining, or even robot chefs.

The key to an ideal co-living experience is professional maintenance. Cleaning, organization, and daily logistics should be handled by staff — not residents. Only then can shared living become truly comfortable and conflict-free, evolving from “budget housing” into a premium lifestyle that values both privacy and connection.