Relationship between architecture, society and individuals
A dwelling palace could be social housing, but is not just about the building. It is the outcome of social integration between people to people and between people and environment. Full consideration needs to be given to all stakeholder needs, in the long-term, to ensure the best, most economical, sustainable and most importantly, safe environment is constructed. I want to propose a new concept of housing by considering the relationship between social housing and society because social housing is not just about the building. It is the outcome of social integration between people to people and between people and the environment. Full consideration needs to be given to all stakeholder needs, in the long-term, to ensure the best, most economical, sustainable and most importantly,safest environment is constructed.
High-rise VS Low-rise
Aim of Modern Architecture
​
Modern architecture is a tool for meeting a social agenda and a method of social reform, providing a better future for people.
For modernist architects, their ethical responsibility was to improve society and people’s lives through the new way of architecture. The Modernists proclaimed their desire was a new faith in the future through social transformation. It was a form of social dream and a movement in the direction of a new society.
​
​
​
Le Corbusier created social housing based on architectural ethics. His ideas were radical and changed the concept of traditional housing design but he believed that it was a time for change and was convinced of what to do.He was influenced by the social issues that he experienced such as rapid urbanization and industrialization that caused a variety of social problems such as unemployment and homelessness. He thought that industrial housing brought issues such as crowding, dirtiness and crime, so he wanted to create new housing designed for better living conditions and create a better society through a new residence concept. He emphasized “the machine is for living” and used modern materials and engineering techniques to improve the quality of life.
The Utopian vision of modernist architects focused on people who lived in social housing and how they could improve their lives within the emerging local and broader society, not being separated from broader society by distance, expense, materials or aesthetics.
Unité d'Habitation, Briey-en-Forêt, France, 1956
Negative aspects of modern architecture: High-rise
​
“Modern Architecture died in St. Louis, Missouri, on July 15, 1972, at 3.32 p.m. (or thereabouts), when the infamous Pruitt-Igoe scheme, or rather several of its slab blocks, were given the final coup de grace by dynamite.” – Charles Jencks
​
However, even though modernist architects had great vision and desire for improving conditions for working class people, their utopian urbanism brought a negative aspect. Modernist planners and architects were blinded by a drive for unrealistic, superhuman perfection, taking for granted that there has always been a relationship between utopian thought and urban planning and architecture.9 Ganjavie concludes that all utopian experiments have generally failed as there is a lack of enthusiasm toward understanding the relationship between utopian thinking and urban design.
Case study: Pruitt-Igoe
​
Pruitt-Igoe was opened in St Louis, Missouri, USA in 1955 and demolished in 1972. It consisted of 33 buildings of 11 stories each. Approximately 2700 units of one to five bedrooms replaced 400 dwellings on a 58-acre tract north of downtown St Louis.11 Pruitt-Igoe was an experiment in social housing through the Public Housing Act of 1949 in America. The Housing Act intended to clear slums, redevelop urban space and build affordable housing.12 At that time, the slum, mostly black area was located in the north but it expanded south into white neighbourhoods. The black ‘ghetto’ threatened local business and caused the decline of property values and the overall economy, which galvanised the Local Authority into clearing the slum and building new accommodation - a mixture of high rise, mid-rise and walk-up structures.13 It started out as a good idea to provide new modern style housing to low- income families. When the Pruitt-Igoe was built, the city expected to grow, but an unexpected economic crisis in the early 1960s due to inflation and a shortage of materials changed the political direction and the future of the Pruitt-Igoe.
This large scale, urban project which had targeted low-income and housing benefit recipients could not withstand the economic challenge to local government, which could not maintain the necessary investment to sustain it. With the neglect in maintenance, came ongoing problems such as vandalism, violence, racism, noise and crime. This urban project turned into a model of segregation. With drug dealing, gangs and shootings even police and firemen refused to go there and no one wanted to live there. Pruitt-Igoe was the evidence of the failure of modern architecture. It exposed the failures of modernist social vision in which design could solve social problems.
​
The role of modern architecture as social housing in London.
​
“SLUM CLEARLANCE AND REDEVELOPMENT OF LONDON”
​
“With approximately one third of Britain’s housing stock built before 1919 there is a very great need to replace slum dwellings and other obsolete housing. Both residential development and redevelopment usually take place at ever decreasing densities even within the inner urban areas….
​
…. Throughout the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries suburbanisation was seen as the main answer to the housing problem of the inner cities. Population growth, the extension of public transport, inner development of the motor car, the transmission of electricity, the availability of relatively cheap land and the activity of speculative builders led to urban sprawl and lower densities.”
Terrace of the future; Refuge of the past
​
In the 19th century, slum housing posed a serious threat to the health of people living in Britain. The Industrial Revolution brought work, and large numbers of workers, from the countryside to city factories. The shift in population placed a strain on housing in London and other cities across the UK. Overcrowded conditions and poor sanitation were among the most prevalent causes of ill health.
​
The plight of London’s poor captured the attention of Victorian Philanthropists - as well as writers and artists. Suburban developments offered a solution to the overcrowded conditions of London’s central districts, but only to those who could afford them. meanwhile, some factory owners, moved by the appalling living villages. These communities offered secure housing, schools, hospitals and leisure and bathing facilities. - Living with Buildings exhibition
These images were created for a 1943 exhibition called ‘Health’ to get soldiers thinking about Britain’s postwar future. The drawings were created by Ernõ Goldfinger, a Hungarian architect who was a key figure in the Modernist architectural movement.
​
After World War II, the UK Government planned to build a high volume of social housing to tackle the acute housing shortage and bring better housing conditions to people, and for slum clearance.16 Architects and designers used modernism to help society meet the need for more housing and provide a new of standard of urban living. Architect Erno Goldfinger played a key role in designing London social housing using modernist ideas. However, even though his vision and motivation were great for society to improve living conditions using new methods of construction and type, as time passed these buildings were evidence of the despair of modern architecture and the failure of post-war social housing because they did not consider the connection between the environment and people.
The Pepys Estate - GLC Housing Project, 1969
From the GLC brochure, ‘The Pepys Estate – a GLC Housing Project’ (1969): ‘‘In the foreground is a block of old people’s flats…sited close to the shopping centre. The 24-storey Daubeney Tower dominates the scene and eight storey blocks run parallel to the River Thames’.
The Pepys Estate, in Deptford, South London, was one of several large-scale Government social housing projects, constructed in 1969.
It reflected modern design’s aim to create a healthy local society. Around 1500 homes were built within medium rise blocks and three large towers. All buildings were linked by concrete walkways. There were child welfare centres, sports and youth clubs. However, due to low investment and poor maintenance, by the 1980s it had become an environment for crime and violence.18 The Pepys Estate project started with great vision.
The Government and the Local Authority fully supported the project of new scheme of innovation for public support, but ironically, it became a symbol of failure of the modernist social housing project. By 1985, a quarter of households reported burglaries. In addition, drug dealing spread over the estate and it became the worst environment in Lewisham of the 1980s.
The collapse of Ronan Point and Grenfell Tower
​
Ronan Point, a social housing project designed by Sam Webb, in Newham, London, partially collapsed killing 4 people and injuring many more in 1968. The cause of the accident was the use of prefabricated concrete panels, called the ‘house of cards’ because it did not have any supporting frame. It was popular material in the 1960s because it was cheap and enabled a quick construction process. At that time many high- rise tower blocks were constructed in London using this method.
Grenfell Tower, in the borough of Kensington and Chelsea in London, was also specifically designed as social housing. The 24-storey tower block was designed in 1967 and constructed in 1970 by Clifford Wearden and Associates. It underwent major renovation between 2012 and 2016. Part of the renovation project was the replacing of the cladding to improve the appearance of the building, and it was this cladding that contributed to the extent of the tragic fire in June 2017 that claimed the lives of 71 people. Ironically before the renovation and throughout the refurbishment, residents and their representatives wrote to the Local Authority with their concerns about the lack of fire exits, hoses, extinguishers and an effective sprinkler system, but these concerns were not acted upon. Grenfell Tower was compromised by immoral design ethics arguably inspired by greed and prejudice. It is located in one of the most affluent areas in England. Yet the external appearance and the low working-class demographic of the residents were perceived to be at odds with the surrounding environment. Although the renovation included improvements to the heating system, as well as to the outside of the building, the implementation and the results of the work caused immeasurable inconvenience and eventually the loss of 71 lives.
Details of the ongoing problems with the work, the behaviour and attitude of the contractors, and the lack of response of the Local Authority, are all outlined in detail in the minutes of the Grenfell Tower Emergency Meeting held on 17 March 2015. The Local Authority invested £8,700,000 for refurbishment. This included double-glazing, and an improved heating system, but arguably the main purpose was to improve the external appearance with cladding consisting of green and blue panels. This may have satisfied the demands of broader local society and the aspirations of the Conservative Local Authority, but ultimately at the expense of the lives and homes of the residents. The cladding used was cheaper and not flame-retardent. The cladding’s manufacturers clearly state that it should not be used on a building above a height of ten metres (32f) because above a certain temperature it burns as quickly as petrol.
Positive aspects of modern architecture: Low-Rise and High-Density
​
Low-rise, high-density dwellings are intended to combine urban and suburban development plans, i.e. public transportation options, access to city services, medium scale, public open space and the best elements of individualised housing. Therefore, it can reduce sprawl and efficiently use the limited space found in urban environments and maintain road networks and pedestrian paths.
​
Neave Brown: Pioneer of low-rise, high-density social housing
​
Neave Brown said after the Grenfell Tower tragedy, "one single staircase, two slow lifts, 20-storey building, no proper control at entry, people on very low incomes, higher rents than they could afford to pay, borrowing to live in buildings that they didn't like, decline in social patterns, increase of adolescent gangs and destruction. And we predicted all that, we knew it would happen. High buildings should only be used for the very rich because they're the only ones that can be done with proper lifts, proper services, proper control, proper entrances and the proper environment."
​
Neave Brown is known as a pioneer in social housing. His idea was for low-rise, high-density housing with private exterior space for all residents. He understood that the quality and maintenance of social housing are very important to maintain a healthy neighbourhood community. In the mid-1960s, housing built by local authorities often included tower blocks, whose flaws were quickly revealed, and which fell into disrepair due to lack of maintenance. In his first plan of the Fleet Road (now Dunboyne Road), which was built between 1966 -1967, Brown showed that he did not need to build high buildings to achieve the prescribed density. Instead of a high building surrounded by empty spaces, low "carpet" filled the place. Every dwelling had a front door opening on to the street as well as its own open-to-the-sky private external space.24 He started his own practice and built five modernist style houses on Winscombe Street in Highgate. He followed the idea of a state-of-the-art system from the United States: an adult section at the top, a children's section at the bottom, and an intermediate zone containing kitchen, dining and entrance on the middle floor. To secure a council loan, the houses had to meet local authority requirements, but the efficiency of Brown’s planning meant that he was able to deliver four bedrooms and two bathrooms within the space and cost limits that had been prescribed for a three-bedroom, one-bathroom unit. Alexandra and Ainsworth Estate in Swiss Cottage which was much larger, included not only housing, but also industrial complexes, schools, stores, light industries, amusement centres, youth clubs and community centres, and integration within the existing council estate. Brown aimed to create a modern version of London's traditional urbanism.
​
Each of high-rise and low-rise cases is an example of modernist social housing approaches presented as a solution for social issues. After World War II, the UK Government had a paternalistic new urban plan to solve the housing shortage issue with a utopian ideal of housing.26 The utopian ideology of modernist architects appealed to the Government’s vision and informed the design of high-rise developments within many London boroughs. Their intention was good within the limited budget and land, but the problem was that most types of high-rise social housing were made with low quality materials because the focus was on functionalism rather than the people who live there. The result of using low quality materials was exposed through accidents such as leaking and fire, and due to lack of sufficient financial investment in maintenance. Social housing focuses on helping those on low incomes, but when policy and economics change, residents are disregarded.
Neave Brown’s focus was on people and the quality of living conditions. What distinguished Brown as an architect of social housing was that the technical creativity of his plan was matched by his passionate sympathy for the people who live in the social housing. His plan for housing is a masterpiece of compression without the need for an inch of space waste, enabling him to produce amazingly wide interiors and decoration within the limitations of the space and cost of local homes.
During the 1960s most social housing took the form of high-rise blocks, leaving residents feeling isolated from society, living in visibly ‘special places for the poor’. Brown recognised that poor quality social housing was one of the biggest problems facing Britain in 1970s, and proposed low-rise and high-density social housing to provide a better quality of environment to residents rather than focusing on cost.
"We have to face it as a social problem, not as an economic problem for neoliberalism to make money out of. And if we go on doing that, we are going into a future of catastrophe with our eyes wide open." -Neave Brown
​
How can we prevent a similar disaster like Grenfell Tower or Pepys Estate? How can we improve? Providing and adhering to strict regulations and planning by local committees can be good but the most important thing is for architects and local authorities to have clear ethical responsibilities for social housing. Ideally architecture is an expression of radical ideas and approaches, reflecting philosophies and creativity through design while improving quality of life. Nowadays architects have less subjectivity in aim and freedom of design. They face the ongoing challenge of balancing the considerations of personal value judgements, social judgements according to moral obligation, clients’ interests, economic profit, the consumer and the environment. Architects must engage with the competing priorities of ethical, political and economic considerations. The Grenfell Tower case reveals the tragic consequences of ill-applied priorities and the extents of the architect’s responsibility.
​
Social housing is for low income and disadvantaged groups, including the unemployed, those with mental or physical health issues, victims of crime, loss of employment, poverty, family breakdown and low income. We live in a time of competitive market economy. It maximizes efficiency through competition, but fails to protect the less privileged because they disrupt the growth of the economy. Even though they hinder national development, governments and society have a moral obligation to care for them and try to improve their living conditions because like it or not, they are part of society. For this reason, social housing is based on social responsibility and ethics. As Neave Brown said we have to find a way of restarting social housing programmes. We have to deal with the problem as a social problem, because it can't be dealt with by private sector because the private sector exists for solely for profit. Social housing is not just about the building. It is the outcome of social integration between people, and between people and the environment. Full consideration needs to be given to all stakeholder needs, in the long-term, to ensure the best, most economical, sustainable and most importantly, safest environment is constructed.
Reference
H, Heynen. (1999). “Architecture and Modernity”. pp. 2-12
N, Coleman. (2012). “Utopia and modern architecture?”, Architectural Research Quarterly / Volume 16 / Issue 04 / December 2012, pp 339 - 348
C, Jencks. (2007). “Critical modernism: Where is Post=Modernism going?”, Wiley-Academy, pp.32-41
P, Ricoeur. (1986). “Lectures on Ideology and Utopia”, New York: Columbia University Press, p. 2
J, Cohen. (2015). “Le Corbusier”, Taschen, pp. 55-60.
K, Frampton. (2000). “Le Corbusier”, Thames & Hudson.
N, Ma. (2017). “Emergence of a Utopian Vision of Modernist and Futuristic Houses and Cities in early 20th century, IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science1 26314 (526071879)0 012033
P, Balchin. (1979). “Housing Improvement and Social Inequality: Case Study of an Inner City”, Ashgate Publishing Limited, pp. 8-11
R, Lupton. (2009). “Growing up in Social housing in Britain: A profile of four generations, 1946 to the present day”, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, p. 15
C, Pearson. (2005). “Ronan Point Apartment Tower Collapse and its Effect on Building Codes”, J. Perform. Constr. Facil, 19(2), pp. 172-177
A, Coleman. (1985). “Utopia on Trial: Vision and Reality in Planned Housing”, Hilary Shipman Limited, p. 6
C, Jencks. (1977). “The Language of Post-Modern Architecture”.
A, Picon. (2017). “Notes on Utopia, the City, and architecture”.
Ganjavie, A. (2014). “The Role of Utopian Projects in Urban Design”, Utopian Studies, Vol. 25, No.1, pp. 125-149
M, Comerio. (1981). “Pruitt-Igoe and Other Stories”, Tayler & Francis, JAE, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 26-31
R, Ferguson. (2015). “Michael Brown, Ferguson and the the Ghosts of Pruitt-Igoe”, University of Minnesota Press, Cultural Critique, Number 90, Spring 2015, pp. 140-142
M, Allen & N, Wendl. (2014). “After Pruitt-Igoe: An Urban Forest as an Evolving Temporal Landscape”, Routledge, Studies in the History of Gardens & Designed Landscapes, Vol. 34:1, pp. 101-105.
https://grenfellactiongroup.wordpress.com/2015/03/27/minutes-from-the-grenfell-tower-emergency-residents-meeting- 170315