Exemplary Housing Estate Regeneration in Europe

Issued with The Architects Journal THE ARCHITECTS JOURNAL

Exemplary Housing Estate Regeneration in Europe

02

03

AJ Publishing Editor James McLachlanSub editor Cecilia Thom, Simon AldousProduction editor Alan GordonDesign Ana ScheferPhotography credits Architectural Press Archive / RIBA Library Photographs Collection (p4-5) Haworth Tompkins (p9), Jan Bitter (p20-21), Philippe Ruault (p24), Stefan Mller (p37), Ioana Marinescu (p48), Karakusevic Carson Architects (p49) AJ editor Rory OlcaytoAJ art director Brad YendleAJ editorial director Paul FinchCommercial director James MacLeodManaging director of architecture and media Ben GreenishEMAP chief executive Natasha Christie-MillerIssued with The Architects Journal For reprints call James MacLeod 020 7728 4582Published June 2015 by Emap, powered by Top Right Group

Texts Introduction, Ivor Smith 5 Essay, Ellis Woodman 6 Buildings Urban form Grnby Strand, Brndby, Copenhagen, Denmark 10

Im Gut apartments, Zurich, Switzerland 13 Kings Crescent Estate, Hackney, London, UK 14 Tongeren Paspoel, Tongeren, Belgium 17 Osdorp, Amsterdam, The Netherlands 18 Infill & densification La Chesnaie, Saint-Nazaire, France 22 Silchester Estate, Kensington & Chelsea, London, UK 27 Tybalds Estate Regeneration, Camden, London, UK 28 Remodelling Ellebo Garden Room, Ballerup, Denmark 30 Rozemaai Apartment Blocks, Antwerp, Belgium 33 Splayed Apartment Blocks, Ommoord, Rotterdam, The Netherlands 34 Boroughs Colville Estate, Phase 1, Hackney, London, UK 38 Academy Street, Enfield, London, UK 41 South Kilburn Estate Regeneration Ely Court, Brent, London, UK 42 The Bacton Low-rise Estate, Camden, London, UK 44 Goldsmith Street, Norwich, UK 47

Voices Hackney Council, Estate Regeneration Team 50 Bacton Estate Residents Association, Sarah Robbins 51 Viewpoint, Owen Hatherley 52 Interview, Paul Karakusevic, Partner, Karakusevic Carson Architects 54

Contents

12

3

PUBLISHING

04

05

The house is a place to belong Ivor Smith What, apart from those things that are practically necessary, makes a house a home? It is a place to feel secure, sheltered emotionally as well as physically, a private place apart from the world outside. A house is where people come together, it is also where they may choose to be alone. Sometimes it is a place for peace and quiet, at other times a place to party. Above all, the house is a place to belong, to have a sense of identity.

The housing in this book must be set against the background of those many anonymous uniform developments that have been built on the outskirts of cities, towns and villages in Britain and are unrelated to their locality. It is here that the issue of identity is most acute, but how can it be successfully addressed? There are valuable precedents. Groups of houses form edges; these can be used to define streets, squares or landscaped areas that you might pass through on your way home and perhaps have a casual conversation with neighbours. This is where children might play, supervised from nearby windows. The sensitive designer searches for the particularities of each site and its relation to the existing urban grain.

There are continuing pressures of change. Different lifestyles affect the house and its surroundings; increases in population and land values impact on density; there is more mobility and car ownership; the internet is influencing ways of working and shopping, as well as meeting together. Consequently, there is need for innovative design. Some developers attempt to achieve identity through the imposition of arbitrary forms and a medley of different materials and colours, but these are superficial gestures. What is required is patient reflection and an understanding of the complex and discrete issues that generate a sense of place. Ivor Smith, Architect, Park Hill Estate, Sheffield

IntroductionTexts 1

Left and right The Park Hill Estate, Sheffield, 1961

Improvement over replacement Ellis Woodman In a recent interview, architect and urbanist Hans Kollhoff was asked for his views on the refurbishment of the Netherlands post-war housing estates. I wouldnt invest another cent in them, he said. The city and good urban architecture are solid. Theyre built for eternity. Its ridiculous to stretch the lifespan of those failed blocks of flats another 10 or 20 years by sticking a bit more insulation in the elevations. Those buildings are totally worthless.

Startling as this blanket dismissal of a whole era of well-intentioned architectural production may be, Kollhoff was far from the first to present it. As far back as the 1970s, Charles Jencks identified the demolition of Minoru Yamasakis Pruitt-Igoe housing estate (1) in St Louis, Missouri less than 20 years after its construction as conclusive proof of modern architectures failure to provide a model for mass housing.

Previously [the estate] had been vandalised, mutilated and defaced by its black inhabitants, he wrote, and although millions of dollars were pumped back, trying to keep it alive (fixing the broken elevators, repairing smashed windows, repainting), it was finally put out of its misery. Boom, boom, boom.

These doubts were shared, even by some of the architects who were most influential on the development of housing in the post-war years. In a 1970 interview about the design of their then under-construction Robin Hood Gardens estate in east London (2), Alison and Peter Smithson voiced distress at the vandalism their work had suffered prior to its completion. Alison went so far as to question the very premise of state-sponsored housing provision, noting: It may be that we should only be asked to repair the roofs and add the odd bathroom to the old industrial houses, and leave people where they are to smash it

up in complete abandon and happiness so that no one has to worry about it any more.

The charge sheet against housing projects of the post-war era extends across their technical, urban and social deficiencies failings that, in numerous cases, it would be impossible to dispute. Political developments have further contributed to their demonisation. In countries like France and the Netherlands they are widely viewed as the physical embodiment of failed immigration policies, their lack of integration with the structure and appearance of the historic city mirroring a perceived rupture in society. Meanwhile, in Britain, Margaret Thatchers liberalisation of the housing market drastically reframed local authorities sense of their responsibilities to these developments. After decades of inadequate maintenance by the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, Robin Hood Gardens now awaits demolition, its population set to be rehoused as part of a deal with the private sector, predicated on a significant increase in the sites density.

Faced with such a legacy, the pursuit of the common good and the logic of the balance sheet might both seem to point to comprehensive reconstruction as the only way forward. But are there not other considerations that demand to be weighed in the balance? The environmental cost of destroying a project that has stood for scarcely four decades, for example, or the social impact of dissolving a now well-established community. The architectural merits of such projects surely also deserve a more measured assessment than the likes of Kollhoff and Jencks have been prepared to extend them. The work of the period is not without its shortcomings but there is much of quality and still more that might be enhanced through intervention.

An argument for the value of refurbishment over redevelopment lay at the heart of Frdric Druot,

Anne Lacaton and Jean-Philippe Vassals PLUS, a 2004 study commissioned by the French Ministry of Culture and Communication. In opposition to a national policy then guiding the replacement of the post-war banlieues with the development of reduced height and density, the authors made the case that refurbishment strategies could be delivered for less expense, while transforming the existing building stocks space standards, environmental performance and appearance.

Opening with an unequivocal statement of intent Never demolish, never remove or replace, always add, transform and reuse! PLUS argued that for the 167,000 the state was then allocating for the demolition and rebuilding of apartments, it was possible to redesign, expand and upgrade between two and three units of comparable size. The report gave rise to an invited competition to test its findings on the Tour Bois le Prtre (3) a characteristic 1960s high-rise building located on the periphery of Paris. Druot, Lacaton and Vassal went on to win the competition.

Completed in 2011, this project involved the replacement of the towers existing facade with a new envelope comprising three layers of enclosure. First, the buildings meanly dimensioned uPVC windows the product of an earlier refurbishment undertaken in the 1980s were exchanged for full-height, sliding, double-glazed doors. Then the building was encased in a structurally independent prefabricated steel structure, extending the floorplate by 3m on each facade. The inner 2m of this bolt-on comprises a winter garden, defined by a secondary enclosure of single-glazed and polycarbonate sliding doors, while the final metre is given over to a balcony protected by a glass balustrade. Crucially, the phased nature of the works allowed residents to remain in occupation throughout construction.

The dividends were many and considerable. Bringing glazing to the floor improved the penetration of daylight into the apartments and enabled the elevated views towards the city to be exploited to better effect. Meanwhile, residents heating bills were reduced by 50 per cent a saving that largely offset the small increase in rent that followed the works while the buildings formerly dowdy appearance was transformed beyond recognition. The principal benefit, however, was the provision of additional space. In the case of the apartments occupying the corner of the block, this increase more than doubled the floor area.

These more generous dimensions enabled the removal of partition walls and the creation of multiple means of accessing rooms. Accommodation that had been originally conceived in strictly Existenzminimum terms was suddenly invested with a sense of luxury and even glamour. Whats more, the strategys cost benefits exceeded those anticipated by the architects when they had published PLUS the wholesale replacement of one apartment equated with the cost of extending and refurbishing between three and four units under their approach.

The practices achievement quickly attracted the attention of mayors across France, leading to commissions for refurbishment projects of still-larger scale. On completion this year, its remodelling of 530 dwellings ranged across three blocks in Bordeaux will represent the most substantial application of the strategy to date.

While Druot, Lacaton and Vassals research has focused on the enhancement of the individual residential unit, the problems of many estates not least Robin Hood Gardens lie as much in the definition of their public areas. Ommoord (4), a residential neighbourhood built in the 1960s on the periphery of Rotterdam, is another example. Designed by Lotte Stam-Beese (the wife of celebrated Dutch architect Mart Stam), it occupies a parkland setting and is composed primarily of monumental slab blocks of inflected plan, each accommodating nine storeys of gallery-accessed apartments. In 2000, the housing association that manages the site asked Biq, the architect, to develop a scheme for the remodelling of four of these blocks, which it then realised in stages over the course of nine years.

The upgrading of the apartments technical performance was one of this projects ambitions but another that was no less central was the resolution of the increasingly fraught relationships between residents. As the architect explains: The departure

2 31 4

Essay06

07

Buildings 2Buildings 2of the stable population of pioneers and the influx of new tenants with different skin colours might be a completely normal manifestation of urbanisation, but for older residents it is a threat to their ways new families parking their childrens bicycles on the access gallery is their worst nightmare.

The clients desire to address these tensions meant the architects task became as much an exercise in political negotiation as design: the scheme emerged out of a consultation process that Biq conceived and managed with the buildings 2,000-plus residents.

The result was a more socially compartmentalised distribution of tenures, with two blocks being designated for the exclusive use of older residents. The continuous gallery access in the other blocks was divided up into smaller lengths, supported by the introduction of additional stair and lift towers in steel and glass. The buildings encounter with the ground was also addressed: garages were replaced by a deeper and more powerfully articulated plinth, which was occupied by care facilities in the buildings designated for older residents and additional garden-facing apartments in the others. As in Druot, Lacaton and Vassals work, the extensive use of prefabrication served both as a means of achieving economies of scale and of minimising disruption to residents.

The redesignation of blocks to accommodate particular demographics meant not all residents were able to remain in place but the commitment to upgrade the buildings for the continued use of the existing community stands in marked contrast to the process undertaken at Sheffields Park Hill (5), where refurbishment was achieved only after the substantial privatisation of the 1960s estate.

When I was still at school [in the 1970s], Rick Wessels of Biq said, I had a hope that one day Rotterdams urban reconstruction project would be finished and that then I could really enjoy it. Later, when we were in college, a book was published called The City is Never Completed, which documented the process of urban change in Rotterdam over the course of the past decade. It included some very rough photographs of urban decay and I began to understand that the city was not something that will reach an end; it is a process that you have to keep working on.

A criticism often levelled at the generation of post-war architects is that they failed to appreciate that their work formed part of a historical continuity. The challenges of post-war reconstruction and their desire to forge a new social order led many to develop proposals predicated on a fundamental rupture with

the past. Yet, in our present rush to sweep away the often problematic legacy that this generation has left us, do we not risk making precisely the same mistake again?

Undoubtedly, there are instances in which demolition can enable the creation of a richer urban environment than both the imagination and resources of the post-war generation proved capable of delivering. The two social housing blocks Peter Mrkli completed in 2014 on Gutstrasse in Zurich, for example, represent a welcome replacement of the low-rise terraces that previously occupied their site. Of seven storeys, the new blocks each extend for more than 100m in length: an arrangement that acknowledges Gutstrasses status as a significant route into central Zurich altogether more convincingly.

In a city like London, which faces the task of accommodating as many as one million new residents over the coming decade, there are sure to be many similar cases in which building anew offers an opportunity to clarify the citys urban form. It is crucial, however, that we stop thinking of demolition as the default option when presented with the challenge of addressing our ageing Modernist building stock. The brave future of which the generation of post-war architects dreamt may now be a compromised and conflicted reality but it remains rich in social, environmental and cultural capital. We should not dispense of it lightly.

08

5

Opposite Silchester estate by Haworth Tompkins

Grnby Strand, Brndby, Copenhagen, Denmark by BCVA and Domus Arkitekter The challenging scale and repetitive architectural expression of Brndby Strand Parkerne led to calls for its demolition, but by addressing the public realm and introducing new differentiated buildings BCVAs strategy aims to build on its potential.

Completed in 1973, it was the largest housing scheme in Copenhagens post-war expansion, with 2,900 homes in a variety of typologies arranged across a 2.5km strip. Cars, bicycles, pedestrians and buses were strictly segregated in a comprehensive infrastructure

set on different levels. BCVA won a competition in 2014 to renew the area, proposing an extensive transformation of buildings, urban space, traffic and landscape.

The overarching aim is to break 40 years of isolation and develop the scheme in coherence with the neighbouring park and surroundings.

An essential part of this is to create a diverse path for pedestrians and cyclists that spans the full 2.5km through the housing strip. The pathway will ensure there is a public space for all the inhabitants to stroll, meet, hang out and use to get from one place to another. New buildings are proposed along the

pathway to create an active urban environment. Another key part of the plan are four unique plazas, designed to create lively social spaces and lend each part of the scheme a distinct identity.

In addition, a differentiation in facades, detailing and layout of the apartments aims to break the monotony, and improve quality of life. The new facades minimise energy consumption and provide a range of window formats, along with the possibility to extend either the kitchen or living room with a balcony. The project will become the first social housing scheme in Denmark to achieve DGNB (German Sustainable Building Council) certification.

Urban form One criticism that has been levelled at the social housing of the post-war era is that much of it fails to adequately articulate shared space. In their commitment to a Corbusian vision of the city as a green and perforate terrain populated by standalone structures, many developments of the period struggled to achieve an integration with wider urban structures or to offer spaces that allowed for rich forms of inhabitation.

Each project in this chapter has sought to address such shortcomings through a radical reappraisal of the relationship between public space and built form. In the case of those at Brndby in Copenhagen and Osdorp in Amsterdam, existing public routes have been lent greater articulation, and significantly diversified both spatially and programmatically. The isolated and isotropic character that these estates formerly presented has been replaced by a new sense of connectedness and hierarchy.

Meanwhile, at Kings Crescent in London, new buildings establish courtyards that better relate the development to the form and character of the surrounding streets, while establishing public spaces that enjoy greater intimacy and surveillance.

Peter Mrklis buildings on Gutstrasse in Zurich represent the one comprehensive redevelopment project in the selection. Here, a low-rise development of suburban grain has been replaced by a pair of slab blocks of a scale that brings a more metropolitan definition to the street. The connection being sought is not to the pre-existing fabric but to how Gutstrasse one of the principal routes into the city centre might develop in years to come.

CreditsStart on site 2016Completion 2024Units 2,900 (8,000 inhabitants)Gross internal floor area 300,000mProcurement route Competition winConstruction cost 450 million (total estimated cost including urban space and landscaping)Landscape architect Kragh & Berglund Engineer MOE Client DAB, Bo-Vest, FA09 and Lejerbo housing associations

2000 10050 500

GRNBY STRANDSituation plan 1:5000

ACTIVITY PLAZAWATER PLAZA

Buildings10

11

1

0 25m

Grnby Strand

1.Water plaza2. Activity plaza3. Market plaza4. Nature plaza

3 421

2Grnby Strand Im Gut Apartments, Zurich, Switzerland by Studio Mrkli The project for 145 apartments for a private housing association is in the west of Zurich, about 2km from the city centre. Extensions to the city were built behind the Sihlfeld cemetery, city extensions were built in the mid-20th century following a Classical-Modernism-influenced urban plan of settlements, or Siedlungen in German.

The houses were oriented towards the light with green spaces in between, sometimes with the long facade facing the street, sometimes the short facade, in no particular order. In two schemes the architects showed how small green spaces between groups of houses could be unified into a generous park, protected from the street. Mrkli also proposed the cemetery should have a second entrance whereas it used to be on the edge of the city, the city has long grown around it.

Instead of replacing each block, the architects built two very long buildings to create a facade with a strong presence relating to the whole collective space of the street. The space in front of the houses is raised a little from street level to have a gentle separation of the street and the forecourt. The laundry rooms were situated as single-storey annexes next to the entrances, and the existing trees were retained to create a space where neighbours can interact.

A private housing association is not allowed to make profit, so construction costs directly affect rents. Therefore, Mrkli aimed to build affordable apartments within the city using economical construction methods while ensuring a high quality of urban architecture.

CreditsStart on site 2010Completion 2014Units 145Gross internal floor area 27,060m2 Form of contract Total contractor (price and time guarantee)Construction cost 42.1 millionConstruction cost per m2 2,869Landscape architect Nipkow LandschaftsarchitekturClient Gutstrasse Housing Association

Ground floor plan of tower

Buildings: Urban form

Demolished buildingDemolished bridges

Densification Small entrance space for tower

Integration with adjacent park

Key New pathways and activity plazas Existing housing New housing

1. Community centre2. Rainwater drainage

12

13

0 1m

B

1

2

Above Grnby Strand was completed in 1973 Above New plazas provide lively spaces for inhabitants to meet

3 Kings Crescent Estate

Key Refurbished housing New housing

14

15

0 5mBuildings: Urban form

Kings Crescent Estate, Hackney, London, UK by Karakusevic Carson Architects and Henley Halebrown Rorrison Kings Crescent is an ambitious estate regeneration project involving the comprehensive redevelopment of Kings Crescent Estate in Hackney.

Following a collaborative competition, in September 2013 Karakusevic Carson Architects was appointed to lead a team of architects that included Henley Halebrown Rorrison and public realm designer MUF Architecture/Art. Karakusevic Carson Architects is leading the project in the first two phases of the masterplan, which involves 269 new homes and 101 refurbished homes.

The refurbishment of Kings Crescent Estate forms part of the London Borough of Hackneys wider estate regeneration programme. The properties are in a bad state of repair and have poor-quality, overlooked public spaces. As a result, the estate feels inward looking and disconnected from the surrounding townscape.

Our approach was to seek to reintegrate the estate with its surrounding townscape of Victorian streets and public spaces. This was achieved by creating a series of robust courtyard blocks, combining the existing and proposed buildings as well as creating a series of well-defined and overlooked streets and public spaces that are connected through the site. Existing garage units will be converted to new

street-accessed ground-floor units, and a high-quality public realm is proposed around the estates perimeter to stitch it into the surrounding streets.

The three new buildings, made from high-quality brick, have been designed to respond to both the strong massing of the existing building, as well as the Victorian townscape of Clissold Park and surrounding 19th-century terraced and semi-detached housing.

Varying in scale from five to 12 storeys in height, common aspects of the new buildings include ground-floor units that are accessed via their own front door, generous communal entrances and a large amenity space for family units.

Credits Start on site Spring 2015Completion 2017 (Phase 1) Units 765Gross internal floor area 24,000mProcurement route Competition winEstimated construction cost 52 millionPublic realm MUF Architecture/ArtClient London Borough of Hackney

Below left The first two phases involve 269 new and 101 refurbished homes Below New buildings have ground-floor units and amenity space for family units

3

4Kings Crescent Estate

Above Render of proposed scheme

Tongeren Paspoel, Tongeren, Belgium byS333 Architecture and Urbanism The project area is located on a rectangular plot in the city of Tongeren, Belgium. Currently, the site is characterised by three high-rise tower blocks, sur rounded by parkland and open space that lacks identity and character. In addition, the 192 units were experiencing increasing technical and constructional problems.

As a response, this project introduces a high-quality public realm befitting its location in the centre of the city. A strong urban framework of new civic spaces, community facilities, communal gardens and residential streets was established all of which have a distinctive character.

S333s approach has been to redesign the blocks with a focus on increasing the quality of accommodation for the residents and the quality of environment for the local community. The residents will remain on site and so the existing 192 units will be replaced by 192 new ones. This has resulted in a complex choreography of phasing, whereby decanting, demolition and construction are done incrementally over a four-year period to ensure residents can remain on site at all times. This work must also be done while ensuring that important Roman ruins are left untouched. The complexity of working in a Roman site of archaeological importance meant work had to be undertaken within a substantially reduced area namely the boundary of the foundations of the existing tow ers and a small basement car park.

A combination of medium-rise blocks and low-rise terraces form an ensemble of differentiated spaces. These courtyards, gardens and streets define a much clearer set of thresholds between public and private life than exists. The various relationships between garden, path, gallery and building are used as devices to create different levels of privacy and a variety of unit types.

CreditsStart on site August 2015 Completion December 2020Units 192Gross internal floor area 15,705m2Procurement route Public tenderConstruction cost 18.3 millionConstruction cost per m2 950Structural and M&E engineer Grontmij BelgiumLandscape architect S333 Architecture and UrbanismClient Woonzo

16

17

Buildings: Urban form

0 1m

Above The existing Kings Crescent estate

3 bed duplex plan

0 5m

300m

N

0

N

100m0

N

100m0

10m0

0 50m

0 100m

Zuidwestkwadrant plan (existing left, proposed right)

Typical plan Osdorp town houses by Atelier Kempe Thill

Osdorp location plan showing housing areas

6

5

34

Zuidwestkwadrant, Osdorp, Amsterdam, The Netherlands by De Nijl Architecten, Wiel Arets Architects and Atelier Kempe Thill Osdorp is one of the six districts known as the Westerlijke Tuinsteden (Western Garden Cities) of Amsterdam, which were built following the Congrs International dArchitecture Moderne principles in response to the housing shortage after the Second World War.

The lengthy process of renewal began in 1993, and the major new-build phases began in 2004. The approach was to diversify the tenures and housing typologies and to improve the relationships between public, communal and private spaces.

The reconfiguration of the large-scale slab blocks to create closed courtyards was achieved by a combination of refurbishment, demolition and new-build projects. Improved park design, including the creation of built edges, aims

to transform the perception of Osdorp from failed estate to a renewed neighbourhood.

The project centred around two main elements: the framework and the building zones. Because of the urban development around Zuidwestkwadrant, parts of the framework had acquired a new role in the city and had lost their previous identity. The urban development strategy aimed to transform these parts, thereby giving the area a new identity.

One of the key projects in Zuidwestkwadrant is the widening of a strip of greenery into a city park; the line of six towers forms its spatial boundary.

The towers are grouped in pairs on a substructure containing facilities, forming a court on the edge of the park. The court gives access to two towers along low garden walls and under a wide portico. The garden flowers all year round and determines the character of the court.

The towers were constructed using industrial methods and fully prefabricated load-bearing facade elements, which allowed flexible configuration of the floor space. The urban architecture supports the spatial effect of the project on different scales, namely the silhouette of the row of towers along the park and the intimacy of the gardens between the towers.

The new buildings include four towers along the park edge with transparent ground floors designed by Wiel Arets Architects. The introduction of low-rise terraced homes by Atelier Kempe Thill diversifies the housing and introduces street-based typologies.

Credits Start on site 2002Completion 2004Units 238Gross internal floor area 36,000mConstruction cost 23 millionMain contractor BAM WoningbouwLandscape architect Michael van GesselClient Het Oosten housing corporation

Buildings: Urban form

Key A. Zuidwestkwadrant B. Sloterplas C. Rembrandtpark D. Leylaan study

18

19

5

0 1m

Osdorp

Top The towers of the existing estateAbove The new Wiel Arets towers are located on the park edge

Key 1. New parks 2. Street converted in road with retail 3. New schools 4. Housing by De Nijl Architecten5. Housing by Wiel Arets6. Housing by Atelier Kempe Thill

1

1

2

B

A

C

D

Osdorp20

21

Key New wings Existing towers/future refurbished housing

0 5m

Infill and densification While post-war housing renewal projects of the 1980s and 1990s tended to favour comprehensive redevelopment, the past decade has seen a growing awareness of the advantages of more strategic intervention. Lacaton & Vassals extension and remodelling of a tower at La Chesnaie, an estate in the French city of Saint-Nazaire, is the latest of a series of projects the practice has designed predicated on retention and addition, rather than demolition and rebuilding.

Always conceived with the aim of enabling residents to remain in occupation throughout construction, each of these schemes has significantly expanded the floorplates of the retained apartments while allowing for the creation of less compartmentalised plans. The fact that they have also proved markedly cheaper than rebuilding is certain to ensure their influence in the years ahead.

Meanwhile, a number of ongoing projects in London demonstrate the potential of renewal strategies based on adding buildings to formerly underdeveloped sites. The London Borough of Camdens redevelopment of the Tybalds Estate is one example. Designed by Mae and Duggan Morris, the proposed additions serve both as a means of cross-subsidising improvements to the existing fabric and of better integrating the post-war development into the urban grain of surrounding Bloomsbury.

Camden is just one of a number of central London boroughs that has audited its landholdings over the past decade and discovered significant possibilities for infill. The escalation of land values in the capital has played a vital role in enabling such developments.

Buildings22

Right A light metal extension was added to the south-east facade

23

La Chesnaie, Saint-Nazaire, France by Lacaton & Vassal, Frederic Druot Architecture, Julien Callot and Mabire-Reich La Chesnaie in Saint-Nazaire is typical of 1970s urbanism, consisting of Modernist towers and slab blocks. The area has a poor reputation. However, it is well located close to the city centre, has an established population and is in a now mature landscape.

The estate was selected as part of an urban regeneration scheme that involved demolishing four large towers containing 60 flats.

In 2006, Saint-Nazaires social housing office, Silne, recognising potential in the solidly built and well-maintained buildings, asked Lacaton & Vassal to consider renovating another smaller tower on 3 rue des Ajoncs with a view to possibly retaining the remaining towers on the site.

The 10-storey tower comprises of 40 flats. Its solid concrete construction allowed lightweight metal extensions to be attached the south-east facade of the building, adding an extra 33m to each flat. In practice, this equates

to an extra bedroom, a balcony and a small, glazed conservatory. The flats were also reconfigured internally: the bathroom moved to the bedroom and the old bathroom became storage.

Given the large plot on which the tower sat, the plan also includes two additional wings constructed using a similar lightweight steel construction technique, they are connected to the north and western ends of the existing tower. Each new wing has its own entrance and vertical circulation. At ground level, an existing car park was covered with an accessible green roof. The final configuration of the building comprises 80 units 40 renovated and 40 new. The hope is that this project will prove that the other remaining towers do not need to be demolished.

CreditsStart on site 2012Completion 2014 Units 80Gross internal floor area 10,282mConstruction cost 4.7 millionEngineers CESMA, PLBI, AREA, Cardonnel and Guy JourdanClient Silne

1

La Chesnaie

La Chesnaie24

25

2 -

++

+

ch. 3

SdB

30 10mTybalds Estate ground floor plan

0 1m

A

B

B

B

B

Tybalds Estate regeneration, Camden, London, UK by Tibbalds Planning and Urban Design, Duggan Morris Architects, Mae Architects and Avanti Architects Tybalds Estate is part of Camden Councils Community Investment Programme a 15-year plan to invest money in schools, homes and community facilities. Tibbalds Planning and Urban Design was appointed to lead a multidisciplinary design team to deliver the estate regeneration through a design competition.

The winning scheme was a collaborative partnership formed

initially between Duggan Morris Architects and Mae Architects, who were selected to work alongside Avanti Architects and landscape architect Camlins.

The project will deliver 93 new infill homes occupying underused spaces with new-build apartments and houses, as well as improved public realm, such as the open play space on Orde Hall Street. The proposals create clear new routes to aid navigation through the site and give existing buildings a street address. They aim to create better-defined and overlooked public space with mews houses and mid-rise blocks that have a relationship with public space.

The full project team worked closely with residents on the estate to ensure the plans reflected their needs. Building high-density schemes in historic, existing and occupied sites is highly complex and requires the careful handling of competing pressures.

It was vital to ensure local households would move to more suitable new homes nearby. This was achieved by designing a more secure, distinctive and attractive estate, which was tested and communicated in consultation events. The desire to build beautiful, viable homes and spaces is challenging but is the core essence of this collaborative project.

Credits Start on site 2016 Completion 2018 Units 93Gross internal floor area 6,304mForm of contract Design and build (two stage)Construction cost 28 millionClient London Borough of Camden

Buildings: Infill and densification

Key A. Remodelled block B. New terraces

28

Tybalds Estate

3

29

Far left Design diagram Left The existing scheme (top) and render of proposal (bottom)

Existing Blemundsbury block

Proposed two-storey and three-storey terraces

Proposed lower ground-floor homes

Proposed rooftop extension

Proposed side extension

Proposed CHP

B

B

Remodelling Each project shown in this chapter represents a remodelling of that quintessential element of post-war housing: the slab block. The type has drawn criticism on a range of counts, most notably its failure to cultivate social interaction between residents; the alienating character of its semi-public circulation spaces; and its inability to structure the territory that surrounds it.

Each project included here seeks to demonstrate that such shortcomings are not inherent to the type and can be significantly ameliorated through strategic intervention. Both Atelier Kempe Thills project for the Rozemaai estate in Antwerp and Adam Khans scheme at the Ellebo estate in Copenhagen wrap the existing buildings with heavily glazed enclosures in the former case, to provide an acoustic barrier and wider choices for public circulation, in the latter to offer apartments private winter gardens. In both instances, the strategy serves as a means of improving the buildings environmental performance while establishing a more expansive relationship between interior and landscape.

Biq and Hans van der Heijden Architects remodelling of a splayed apartment block on the Ommoord estate in Rotterdam does not expand the apartments floor area but achieves similar ends through a strategy of reglazing and the redesign of the buildings formerly semi-opaque balustrades. In each case the existing buildings relationship to its encompassing territory is further improved by the introduction of new uses at ground level, offering animation and surveillance to spaces that were formerly under-occupied and hostile.

Buildings30

31

Ellebo Garden Room, Ballerup, Denmark by Adam Khan Architects with Daniel SerafimovskiKristine Jensens TegnestuePrice & Myers The Nordic Build Challenge was set up by the five Nordic Countries to prototype sustainable approaches to the legacy of post-war industrialised housing. Ellebo is a very typical 1960s estate, with a set of problems familiar from across Europe. The project draws on the work of Lacaton & Vassal to achieve a radical environmental and social sustainability.

The internal layouts are adjusted to give larger, double aspect flats, and the facades are completely replaced, all without decanting the residents. This is possible through a surgical approach to the existing panel structure and by using new prefabricated facade techniques.

The facades are given a new hierarchy the outer elevations are highly insulated, simple and economical while those facing into the shared garden are given winter gardens and balconies.

These deliver superb environmental performance in a simple robust way, but also give the residents a new seasonally flexible set of rooms. The balconies,

vertically proportioned, articulated into bays and made of robust precast concrete, form a dignified, elegant framework for the social life of the estate. This refocus towards the centre animates the shared spaces and fosters a strong sense of local identity. The new-build elements of the project further help to give definition and coherence to this new garden room. An energetic process of resident engagement will transform the shared landscape from a barren municipal green to a lively and diverse set of gardens, by offering opportunities to unleash and cultivate the sense of ownership so often suppressed in public housing.

The architecture acts as a robust but nuanced frame for a more plural and diverse community to develop; one that develops organically from the existing group of residents and that caters for contemporary desires for individual expression and autonomy.

CreditsStart on site 2016Completion 2019Units 260Gross internal floor area 22,880mConstruction cost 26 millionClient KAB-Bolig, Copenhagen

1

Ellebo Garden Room

Main image Isometric of proposal Above left Existing scheme dates back to the 1960sLeft Proposed scheme

Key Ellebo Garden renovation

and roof extension Extended block Remodelled facade

2

Extens ion A cces s esExis ting New ins ulated facade S hared G ardenW inter-G ardens & B alconies

Rozemaai Apartment Blocks, Antwerp, Belgium, by Atelier Kempe Thill, Osar architects and Land Landscape architects The remodelling of the Rozemaai housing scheme in Antwerp by Atelier Kempe Thill aims to address the problems of pollution from the adjacent motorway and harbour while connecting residents to the neighbouring park. It will evolve over three phases.

The first phase involves demolishing the vertical circulation and lift shafts, leaving only the concrete framework and gallery. Following this, new staircases and lifts will bookend each block, constructed using a cost-efficient tunnel formwork method. Adding a new aluminium-framed glazed gallery and closing the previously open-air areas with a full glass facade creates a sound barrier around the building protecting it from noise from the nearby main road. The glazed addition will also improve the buildings thermal performance. New winter gardens give residents views of the neighbouring park.

The final phase will see the floorplate opened by removing existing cross walls to create an open space from facade to facade. Timber-framed infill walls will be removed, thereby merging smaller units to form larger apartments. New typologies are introduced, including maisonettes at ground floor. A pharmacy will also be integrated into the ground floor.

CreditsStart on site September 2015 (planned) Completion September 2017 (planned)Units 107 units, 1 drug storeGross internal floor area 15,155m2 gfa total 2 blocks56-111m2 gfa/ unit ( 1-3 bedroom apartments)12-16 m2 gfa / unit private terraceForm of contract or procurement route selected competition first prize (2011)Estimated construction cost 9,784,923Estimated construction cost per m 691Client Woonhaven Antwerpen, Antwerp, Belgium(housing corporation)

T he target of 3% D F is reached in the double as pect living roomC ombination of two flats and addition of winter gardenEas t Bl oc k - Upper Floor

New wall / InfillDemolished / Widened

New L ayoutDemolition P lan D aylight A nalys is

Demolition plan: east block upper floor

Existing Extension New insulated facade and roof extension Winter garden and balconies Accesses Shared garden

32

33

Ellebo Garden Room

Buildings: Remodelling

Detail facade section

0 0.5m

T he target of 3% D F is reached in the double as pect living roomC ombination of two flats and addition of winter gardenEas t Bl oc k - Upper Floor

New wall / InfillDemolished / Widened

New L ayoutDemolition P lan D aylight A nalys is

New layout : combination of the two flats and addition of winter garden

0 1m

Existing bedroom Remodelled bedroom

AB

C

D

0 1m

knikflats ommoordoverzicht blok B1

N

3 Splayed Apartment Blocks, Ommoord, Rotterdam, the Netherlands, by Hans van der Heijden Architect / Biq Built in 1968, the larger part of the Ommoord residential district consists of multi-storey blocks in a park-like setting. In recent years, its demographic had changed significantly and the buildings needed an overhaul.

Many of the problems that had slowly arisen could be traced back to the design of the communal access system. The residents of the 176 dwellings in each splayed building shared two lifts and one entrance. Newer households, which had varied economic and ethnic

backgrounds, were unfamiliar with the delicate codes of the older occupants, many of whom had been in residence since the blocks were first completed. Two of the buildings (Blocks A and B) were redeveloped as accommodation for older people, together with a medical centre. The accessibility of these was enhanced, and new apartments were added on the ground floor.

The remaining two blocks (C and D) were to be redeveloped within the customer choice concept (the Dutch equivalent of Right to Buy). Owing to the financial model, which allowed residents to either buy the flat outright, rent the shell of the flat and buy the interior or

simply rent, the diversity of the residents was expected to be substantial. The proposal was to divide the slabs into autonomously functioning segments, each of which would have its own access system. The existing strips of gallery and balcony were broken up because it was unlikely that a long access deck would work on the commercial market. Short and clearly arranged private decks are the result. New lift shafts and emergency staircases were added to the block, articulating the main volume of the blocks. All first-floor flats have their front door at ground level.

Credits Start on site 2007Completion 2009 Units 704Gross internal floor area 77,074mForm of procurement routeNegotiated contractConstruction cost 38.5 millionConstruction costs per m net 651 excluding VATClient Woonbron, Rotterdam, Netherlands, in cooperation with Residents Design Panel

Buildings: Remodelling

34

35

Splayed Apartment Blocks

New ground floor flats for the elderly

Existing ground floor flat0 100m

0 5m

Top Block b1 flats plan Above Existing scheme built in 1968 and New buildingLeft Site plan showing existing scheme (yellow)Top right Remodelled building

37

36

37

Splayed Apartment Blocks

Boroughs In 1975, the proportion of UK homes built and managed by local authorities reached a record high of 60 per cent an unrecognisable situation from today. Of the 122,590 homes built in England in 2013, only a fifth constituted social housing and, of those, local authorities were responsible for the construction of a small fraction. Yet, as the projects gathered in this chapter indicate, councils are in the process of reclaiming a role as housing providers in no uncertain terms. The impetus has been a relaxation of the mechanisms by which council housing can be funded. Where rental income from council housing was previously taken by the Treasury and pooled nationally, recent changes have enabled local authorities to redirect it towards the construction of new homes.

Given that Londons population is escalating at double the rate of the rest of the country, it is no surprise that boroughs in the capital have been among the first to seize this opportunity. Newham has committed itself to the construction of 20,000 new council homes. Southwark, which is already Londons largest social landlord, aims to deliver a further 10,000 by 2043. It has been 30 years since councils were building homes in those kind of numbers, requiring a whole culture of housing delivery to be reinvented. Yet the performance of the housing built in the post-war period can still provide a valuable guide for current practice ensuring that the technical and social problems that dogged many developments of the period are not repeated.

Buildings38

39

Colville Estate

Colville Estate, Hackney, London, UK by Karakusevic Carson Architects

The Colville Estate is located in the southern part of Hackney, close to the border of Islington, with the Regents Canal to the north and Shoreditch Park to the south.

The existing estate is owned by Hackney Council and consists of 438 homes, predominantly in medium height linear blocks, typical of the post-war period. The estate was poorly planned and inward-looking with many illegible building entrances, a lack of clear streets and a lot of unloved, underused land.

Hackney Council appointed Karakusevic Carson Architects and submitted an outline planning application (OPA) for the comprehensive development of the estate. The new neighbourhood will be mixed tenure and accommodate up to 925 units. The demolition, rehousing and construction period is anticipated to span 12-15 years.

Residents of the Colville Estate had spent more than 10 years on previous attempted schemes which had stalled at ballot and funding stages. Karakusevic Carson Architects was required to develop a workable rehousing programme and deliver the first phase of homes to unlock the replacement home process.

The Colville Estate has one of the strongest neighbourhood spirits the practice has encountered, and

CreditsDesign Team Muf Art + Architecture, Eurban, Tibbalds, and Peter Brett AssociatesClient The London Borough of HackneyBorough The London Borough of HackneyAwards Part of our winning submissions for Housing Architect of the Year Awards 2011-2012 and 2013-2014, Civic Trust Award 2012, andHousing Design Award 2012Shortlisted RIBA Award 2012 Units and Density 41 homes, 195 dph, 690 hrhTenure 100 per cent social rentStatus phase 1 completed 2012

1 its community identity is strong and thriving. The masterplanning strategy has been characterised by engaging and harnessing this community spirit, working closely with the proactive resident steering group to develop a more dynamic and strategically viable scheme with grassroots support.

Increased density and financial viability was achieved through the third phase: a pair of taller buildings facing the park, with outline planning granting a 20-storey and a 16-storey tall building providing up to 200 homes for market sale/shared ownership. This created cross subsidy for the replacement of social housing to be located in the lower rise streets and courtyard buildings elsewhere.

The scheme delivers a viable mixed-tenure, mixed-use, masterplan and creates a public-realm strategy locked into the wider neighbourhood.

Above Model showing Phase 2 and 3 of the sites wider masterplanRight Phase 1 under construction and proposals for the neighbourhood zone in Phase 2

2 Academy Street, Enfield, London, UK, by Karakusevic Carson Architects and Maccreanor Lavington Architects The Academy Street project in the London Borough of Enfield comprises 38 new social and affordable homes with the intention of rehousing some residents from the neighbouring Alma Estate.

Working in collaboration with Maccreanor Lavington Architects, Karakusevic Carson Architects proposed high-quality housing arranged in two terraces, creating a new residential street and public route. This scheme successfully addresses the boundary conditions, creating a clearly defined public realm with improved natural surveillance generated by more front doors and habitable rooms overlooking the streetscape.

The units are a mix of one, two, three and four bed dwellings with ample amenity space and 28 parking spaces. The scheme also provides four wheelchair-adaptable units across the unit mix.

The scale of the street reflects the surrounding urban grain of neighbouring residential streets such as Nelson Road and Sutherland Road, creating a more intimate residential environment. The shared surfaces create a pedestrian-orientated street, which will benefit from low traffic levels.

The western terrace is largely two-storey houses with a three-storey portion to the north providing a mix of family houses, maisonettes and apartments. These properties are provided with rear gardens, which are at least 11m deep, backing on to Falcon Crescent. The eastern terrace is largely comprised of three-storey courtyard houses with a small three-storey apartment building to the south. These house typologies have been developed specifically to minimise overlooking to the nearby school playground.

Principally, the houses are orientated west to the street and south to a sheltered first-floor terrace, creating a layout with no habitable rooms overlooking the school. The notched nature of this eastern terrace not only creates an interesting street profile but allows additional daylight into the street and creates an animated elevation to the school.

Credits Start on site 2012 Completion 2014Client The London Borough of EnfieldBorough The London Borough of EnfieldUnits and density 38 residential units, new build of 3650m2, 48dph /172hrhTenure 50 per cent social and 50 per cent intermediate Status Detailed planning permission granted June 2013

0 1m

Above left Interior of Phase 1 (Bridport House) showing cross laminated timber construction and right photo of completed scheme

Axonometric of Maisonette Typology from Phase 2

Buildings: Boroughs

40

41

Colville Estate

Ground floor site plan of Phase 1

0 5m

0 1m

3 South Kilburn Estate, South Kilburn, London, UK, by Alison Brooks Architects and Lifschutz Davidson Sandilands Spanning a 2.1ha site in London, three existing isolated estates in South Kilburn were set to be replaced with 144 new dwellings as part of a regenerative masterplan by Alison Brooks Architects and Lifschutz Davidson Sandilands.

The 15-year regeneration strategy of the South Kilburn Partnership, of which Brent Council is a key partner, will see the phased development of the area until 2025. The primary objective of the programme is to deliver better homes, in a safer and more sustainable environment, for the existing and future residents of South Kilburn, and address the inequalities that exist between the estate and the surrounding areas.

Situated at the gateway to the historic quarter identified in the overarching masterplan, the central approach to the scheme is a reinstatement of the urban street pattern that characterised the area before post-war development the traditional model of back-to-back villas fronting the main roads, with corresponding mews houses and a restored 19th-century route, Alpha Mews (Mews Lane). Running the

length of the block and linking the new developments, the spine route is made up of shared surfaces, play areas, gardens and clearly defined public and private spaces overlooked by balconies and roof gardens.

Alison Brooks Architects 43-unit scheme for Ely Court is a collection of three building typologies of up to four storeys: apartment terrace, flatiron building and mews houses knitted between existing 11-storey apartment blocks. Street frontages are animated with front porches, while recessed balconies and roof gardens create a layering of landscape and highly articulated, rhythmic facades.

A mews street of two- and three-bedroom houses introduces a finer grain of development within the scheme, integral to which is the definition and reinforcement of the existing estates green spaces as communal gardens and protected play areas.

CreditsStart on site November 2014 Completion November 2016Units 100 (ABA) / 129 (LDS)Form of contract or procurement route Design and BuildEstimated construction cost 44 million approx Client London Borough of Brent

42

43

South Kilburn Estate

Buildings: Boroughs

Far left Completed interior Above left Existing schemeLeft Render of proposed development

Ground & first floor plan

Massing strategy

44

45

Buildings: Boroughs

The Bacton Low Rise Estate, Camden, London, UK by Karakusevic Carson Architects A passionate tenants and residents association with a focused local authority regeneration team created a dynamic partnership committed to delivering transformation and high-quality new homes in a five-to-six-year phased delivery programme. To reconnect the neighbourhood and surrounding area, a new pedestrianised street opens up views to the Grade I-listed church and provides the wider community with a public space.

Residents wanted mainly low-rise housing and a network of new streets, so medium-density family homes of between three and five storeys were combined with apartments and taller accents on key streets and corners. Communal and private entrances at street level encourage activity within the public realm, and a clear hierarchy of routes is achieved through the buildings scale. Rooftop amenity space, as well as recessed and outboard balconies, ensure open amenity at every level, while landscaped gardens and play spaces are shared by all residents. Public, semi-private and private spaces are balanced, fostering interaction while offering privacy and security.

To the north of the site lies a high-speed rail line, so acoustics and environmental health issues are a major constraint on the first-phase decant site. The solid timber frame helps to minimise disturbance from the trains.

This contextual and modern expression of urban family life is near to cost neutral; the programme of medium-density housing will give enough cross-subsidy, market-sale properties to help deliver the rented and shared ownership housing at minimum cost to the council.

Credits Design Team Camlins (landscape and public realm), and Quod (planning consultant)Client The London Borough of Camden Borough The London Borough of CamdenAwards Part of winning Karakusevic Carson Architects submission for Housing Architect of the Year Award 2013, Shortlisted for a Housing Design Award 2014, Shortlisted for New London Architecture Award 2014 Units & Density 293 homes153 dwellings per haGIA 32,000mTenure 40 per cent affordable (social rent), 60 per cent private saleStatus Detailed consent granted 2013Phase 1 on site

The Bacton Low-Rise Estate

Top Existing Bacton Low-rise EstateCentre Site under constructionAbove Proposed development

Goldsmith Street, Norwich, UK, by Mikhail Riches Won in an RIBA competition, this high-density scheme for 105 units in Norwich is on track to be the largest Passivhaus scheme in the UK. The city council initially expected to partner with housing associations. However, with changes to funding mechanisms and the possibility of borrowing money against receipts, it has taken the initiative to carry out the development itself. It appointed local company NPS as project manager, with Mikhail Riches as project lead and contract administrator.

Architecturally, Mikhail Riches scheme involves creating a mix of one, two, three and four bedroom houses and flats designed with no common parts, so every dwelling has its own front door on to the street.

This new series of terraced streets, introduced into an area dominated by 20th-century blocks of flats, opens up this area of Norwich and establishes new pedestrian and cycle routes and green links into a previously amorphous estate. Existing green links will be reinforced with a landscape scheme, which extends beyond the site boundaries to include local roads and a park. Street widths are intentionally narrow at 14m, emulating the 19th-century model.

Parking is on street where a 20mph speed limit will be applied. This is a low carbon scheme where all houses and flats face south, and the design seeks to provide sunny, light-filled homes with very low fuel bills of approximately 150 per year. The majority of the properties will be socially rented.

47

3

CreditsClient Norwich City Council Location Norwich City CentreStart on site Late 2015Completion TBC Units 105Gross internal floor Area 8,000 m2Form of contract Traditional JCT contract with bills of quantityConstruction cost 13 million

46

Buildings: Boroughs

The Bacton Low-Rise Estate

Typical plans0 1m

Top Sketch section through apartment buildingLeft Model showing new neighbourhood street linking to St Marks Church

This image Bridport house by Karakusevic Carson Architects

Voices 3

50

51

Voices

Hackney Council, Estate Regeneration Team

At Hackney, we are making use of our land to build more than 2,760 new council homes for social renting and shared ownership along with those for private sale to pay for it all.

Our estate regeneration team is leading on the delivery of this building programme at all stages, from decisions on which estates and sites to redevelop through to setting the briefs for those sites, selecting architects, managing the design process and procuring contractors or developer partners. The 18-site programme adopts a portfolio approach, rather than focusing on individual sites, and nearly 300 homes have been built so far, including 201 for social rent.

The team is committed to good design and aims to build exemplary housing, public spaces and streets that will endure, be considered a success, and be a pleasure to live in. This commitment runs through all of the processes that are involved.

Ambitious, design-led briefs are developed for each project and talented design teams selected through design competitions. Particular attention is paid to elements often neglected in housing developments, such as the design of communal entrance lobbies,

Sarah Robbins, residents association, Bacton Low-Rise Estate About 15 years ago they wanted to knock down the Bacton Low-Rise estate. We (residents) opposed this as we would have been unable to stay within the local area they were going to ask us to move out of central London completely. So instead, we underwent a refurbishment programme.

Then, around five years ago, the local authority put forward a proposal for demolition and new build meaning we could stay in the local area and move just across the road. Because the refurbishment programme hadnt gone according to plan the first time around, we decided that if this was going to happen, we wanted to be heavily involved. We wanted to be part of the design process and then invited to all the meetings about the project.

Our main concern was to get a decent home. At the moment we have high fuel bills because the homes have no insulation. The way we live creates ongoing health problems in family units because of condensation, severe damp and mould.

We held exhibitions and drop-in sessions, together with numerous fun days for estate residents and the wider community, to help us get through to the planning stage. We worked a lot with Karakusevic Carson

defensible space, and storage and utility areas. Public realm is prioritised in the design process; the transformation of streets, squares and shared gardens is recognised as key to the success of estate regeneration projects. Every scheme is developed to a level of detail to ensure the design intent is preserved throughout the construction phases.

With the Colville Estate in Hoxton we worked with Karakusevic Carson Architects to design a series of streets that seamlessly connect with the surroundings. The materials palette has been selected to be similar to those found on a conventional London street. Informal play areas, community gardens and seating areas have been integrated into new streets to encourage a sociable and diverse street life. The project is characterised by a highly collaborative way of working with residents and extensive input from the resident steering group.

With the Kings Crescent Estate in Stoke Newington, the regeneration approach has been to treat the estate as part of the city. Existing buildings dating from the 1960s and 1970s are being retained, providing continuity and transition. Karakusevic Carson Architects and Henley Halebrown Rorrison are leading the refurbishment of these buildings, based on a sympathetic understanding of their structure, form and function. The proposals include converting ground-floor garages in existing blocks into new homes. Although technically challenging, the transformative impact on the estate in terms of making it a welcoming, safe and lively place will be considerable.

As well as large-scale regeneration projects, we are also developing smaller plots. At Aikin Court, which is a corner site in a terraced street in Stoke Newington, we are working with Stephen Taylor Architects to design seven new homes five will be larger family houses for social renting and two will be for private sale to help pay for the works. Particular attention has been given to how the new houses sit within the terraced street, the design of front gardens and thresholds, and the internal configuration of family living areas.

Architects, going through the design stages, and were heavily involved in selecting the materials that would be used externally and internally on the project. It has been a bit of a learning curve.

I would recommend to other people that, if they want to stay local and they want to have a high-quality home, then they must get involved in the process as much as possible. If we had not done this, we would have ended up with nothing like the design we have now; we would have all ended up in a tower block. Instead, we now have a low-rise block that is only six or seven storeys maximum but contains lots of family homes.

Following the build, there has now been some Section 106 funding and we have new play areas for the community in the open spaces. We also have a local city farm that needed some money and there was a chance that it might be closed, but a lot of people wanted to keep it in the area, so there have been other benefits as well. Just because you are a council tenant, it does not mean you cannot have a say.

Consultation process Render of Colville Estate Phase 2 Existing Bacton Low-rise Estate Consultation at Bacton Materials palette

52

53

Strange days Owen Hatherley

The mid-1970s saw the end of an era in housing that is, the end of the notion that housing was best provided by the state, usually in local form via municipal governments, and that it was best constructed at great speed with industrial methods if need be in order to pull as many people as possible out of 19th-century slums (in western/central Europe) or age-old rural poverty (in eastern/southern Europe).

By around 1975 the job was mostly done. The horrors of what had gone before had become distant in the mind, and the criticisms many of which now sound rather hysterical didnt have to take much account of logic, because most importantly of all, this housing was associated with a political moment that had passed: the post-war consensus. Whether social socialist or Christian democratic, Gaullist or real socialist, this tended to have similar built results.

Different approaches were taken to its replacement interesting outliers such as self-build in south London or critical reconstruction in west Berlin were gradually supplanted by a new dominance of private and speculative housing, with an offsetting of social housing. This was usually charitable rather than municipal, in a new, 30-40-year consensus. The results could be relatively controlled, as in Sweden or

Germany, or extremely careless, as in Britain, Ireland and Poland. All, however, were part of the same basic family. Similarly, by around 2008, this all seemed to be over; discredited by a massive property crash, a financial crisis and an aesthetic revulsion at the increasingly vainglorious, chaotic results. Apart from a handful of London boroughs who have attempted to build housing within the strict limits theyve been set, by and large a clear alternative to the housing of the boom era has not emerged.

Neo-liberal housing in Europe has not been homogenous. Given that so much of its appeal was based on criticising social democratic housing as being repetitive and interchangeable, it simply had to be differentiated, especially as, unlike state-sponsored housing, it had to be sold on an open market. The extent of this was so closely tied to each countrys interpretation of the new consensus that it almost seemed to be illustrating an especially vulgar Marxist thesis.

London, Manchester, Dublin, Warsaw, Moscow et al, whether in exurban non-plan or inner-city urban renaissance mode, favoured a deregulated market and a deregulated architecture, without much in the way of architectural quality control, overall planning or infrastructure. The results from Dublin Docklands to Salford Quays to Stratford are messy, straggling, cheaply made, and usually if not exclusively in a bumptious architectural language of brightly coloured Trespa, barcode facades and irregular silhouettes.

Cities such as Stockholm, Hamburg and Amsterdam no longer built public social housing en masse, but they did maintain planning, some sort of rent control and a sense of architectural order. It might have been basically the same thing luxury housing on former industrial sites, usually on reclaimed, ex-working riversides, with dribs and drabs of selective social housing but as architecture or urban morphology, they can feel strikingly different, ordered, elegant, comfortable, sometimes even arcadian. As a result, the most impressive of 21st-century European housing schemes, such as Hammarby Sjstad (1) and HafenCity, retained the look of social democracy for

the purpose of neo-liberalism. By contrast, equivalents at Cardiff Bay or Stratford High Street were a nails-down-blackboard scree of aesthetic individualism and planning ineptitude.

That contrast must have struck visitors from the more outright neo-liberal countries. How could a visitor from London not fail to be embarrassed when given the guided tour around the strikingly pretty landscaping, visual coherence, social facilities and transport infrastructure in Hammarby? How could the traveller from Liverpool not guiltily recall what had been done on either side of the Pier Head when looking at what Hamburg had done with the disused dockland in front of its rather Liverpudlian towering brick warehouses?

Accordingly, something is happening to housing in the UK, or at least to the way it looks. It has shed its Trespa and terracotta covering like a garish 1990s dayglo jacket, and cast off its wavy roofs as last years kitsch. Design for London guidelines enforce a palette of stock brick across the city, with increasingly regular fenestration, flat roofs and planar, straightened-out plans and facades. Other cities are following suit. Obviously, this too is a matter of cladding, and this too is a matter of tiny flats that are let out to investors as part of the endlessly remunerative pyramid scheme that is the London property market. But the result is that Londons housing now looks ever more social democratic: calm, sensible and in keeping with the housing that dominates the real London stock-brick terraces and modular, often brick-infill, housing estates. In fact, given that the former were privatised or gentrified in the 1980s and this is happening to the latter now, all of these typologies are rapidly melding into one.

Some hope has been placed in the promise of local councils setting up shell companies in order to build housing again. Among them is the London Borough of Southwark, promising more than 10,000 new council homes over the next three decades. Unlike similar projects Birminghams recent, small-scale council housing programme, for instance, where simple designs by local architects were crushed by the by contractors shoddy implementation the architecture

promises to be of a high quality. The pilot project is a small estate by architect Panter Hudspith, another set of sober, neat, regular and brick-clad Modernist buildings, a highly unusual 80 per cent of which are let at a social rent. However, it is designed mostly to rehouse people decanted from other estates in the borough, and even if it builds its seemingly ambitious full programme, Southwark will only barely replace the huge quantity of perfectly decent, structurally sound council homes it has demolished or sold to developers, meaning theyre essentially running to stand still, letting developers build in one site to extract the section 106 agreements needed to build council housing on another.

In the absence of any real structural change, the reaction to the collapse of an entire economy and ideology the belief that the market knew best, that finance capital could do anything, that entrepeneurs were superhuman, that private was always better than public has been entirely cosmetic. Although critiques are usually of towers of glass with iconic shapes, when theyre actually built, expect the clusters of residential towers in controversial London areas such as Mount Pleasant or Nine Elms to have flat roofs and be clad in the politest stock-brick panels, as if theyre actually badly planned escapees from Amsterdam South or Borneo-Sporenburg.

Accordingly, the moment were in is a strange one. Something has changed. People now talk about the bankruptcy of iconic architectural masterpieces constructed by indentured labourers, of skylines of bumptious competing towers and the privatisation of the city. But many of the things that protesters demand to be in keeping, to use local materials, to respect the local heritage, to refurbish great historic buildings are things that developers can do, if they can be bothered. In this, Kings Cross is the exemplar. What they cant do is build a social city, solve a housing crisis, make cities less unequal. Other questions need to be asked of housing. Who owns it? Who is it for? Who benefits?

Viewpoint

1

54

55

Paul Karakusevic Interviewed by Ellis Woodman

Ellis Woodman Many European cities are currently grappling with the technical and social failings of their post-war building stock but, in London, those challenges are complicated by our very considerable housing shortage. Is it not a struggle to maintain a sensitivity to the qualities of existing buildings and the communities that live in them when there is so great an onus on delivering more homes? Paul Karakusevic They dont have to be competing demands. We have worked on a number of estates where the building fabric has failed or where there are only certain functionality issues. The feedback we get from residents is that they generally want to be rehoused in and around their existing neighbourhood, but in reconfigured buildings or replacement homes that meet modern standards and expectations.

Most local authorities and residents groups fully understand the issues of cross-subsidy and know you have to re-masterplan and increase density to facilitate new socially rented accommodation. All the resident groups we have worked with so far have been fully supportive of some sort of intervention, whether wholesale regeneration or infill within the underutilised parts of their estate.

EW Does the need for density and cross-subsidy tend to favour wholesale intervention rather than refurbishment strategies? PK Not necessarily. On a lot of projects we are refurbishing: adding insulation, new windows, winter gardens, new access and security arrangements. And then we look at wasted or underutilised land to create new homes, which, in turn, helps cross-subsidise refurbishment work or the construction of new socially rented homes in and around the estate. We always look at re-use opportunities first and then investigate through the masterplan where the opportunities lie for easy-win new-build projects for social, intermediate and market housing. EW Housing has a unique capacity to define the form and character of the city. When you do rebuild, are you finding opportunities to significantly restructure sites? PK On projects like Kings Crescent (see p14) and the Nightingale Estate where tower blocks were pulled down in the 1990s and early 2000s, there are very large parcels of land where you can create new streets and whole new districts. On others, we may just be demolishing a small building, which sits within a much bigger land holding a surgical architectural intervention rather than a major exercise in city changing. We generally try and work with the existing context and add new buildings that are responsive or add to the character. EW At the Colville Estate (see p38), you are introducing taller buildings. How did the community respond to that proposal? PK The residents had been speaking to the council about regeneration for about 15 years before we were appointed. They had three failed regeneration attempts, the final one being unravelled by the beginning of the financial crisis of 2008. We were appointed shortly afterwards to develop a new

masterplan that the residents could support and would be deliverable over 15-20 years. The residents established a very strong residents charter with Hackney Councils support, which set out ground rules and non-negotiable points namely, that a lot of residents didnt want to be rehoused in tall buildings, but wanted low-to-medium rise homes ranging from four to six storeys.

A scheme of average height and density would only generate about 600 homes, however, which would have left many tens of millions of pounds worth of funding shortfall and, in 2009, that was not going to be subsidised by central government. So we had to look at increasing the density on one small part of the site about 5 per cent of the overall land to create enough cross-subsidy to build all of the low and medium-rise socially rented homes that were on the programme. We suggested that the point on the south-western corner facing the park was a natural place for a series of bigger buildings, and so, after meetings and design workshops with the residents association, they were incorporated into the masterplan and designated for shared ownership and market sale.

Over 90 per cent of the residents were fully supportive of the tall buildings because of the opportunities it gave for the wider estate to be built at a finer grain. Without the tall buildings, the whole estate would have been eight and nine storeys high something that was not going to be supported by the existing residents. EW Do you think Londons housing needs can be accommodated solely through intensification? PK There is still a huge amount of space in London, even within the city fringe. We are working in Hackney, Camden, Enfield, Newham, Lewisham, Lambeth and Southwark, and there is a lot of underutilised space in those boroughs that can be intensified and improved. The councils are financially constrained and, as a result, there has to be some sort of cross-subsidy element to a lot of these projects, be that through

market sale or council-led build to rent. The local authorities own so much land

approximately 30 per cent of the capital in the city fringe and if that is carefully planned over the next 20 or 30 years I think there are lots of opportunities to create the homes that everyone in London needs. EW The past decade has seen a new generation of design-led British practices focus on housing in a way that hasnt happened since the 1970s. At least in London we do seem to be experiencing a revival of expectations and skills. Are you optimistic about the present situation? PK There has been an exciting revival of interest among architects in housing after 40 years of neglect. Five years ago we also saw a new era of local authority design officers coming through who were interested in quality and appalled by the low ambition of housing in the 80s and 90s. Everybody could see that the kind of recent development you encounter in places like Hackney Road is just an embarrassment to London: cheap, shoddy construction, delivered through Design and Build and forming one of the key routes into the city.

Many of the key London boroughs has now established its own design review panel with high-calibre members and advisers. The benefits wont be seen for a long time because these projects take so long to be realised, but I think in the next 10-15 years we will see that legacy of better projects coming through. Borough teams we are working with see design as the absolute key to unlocking the new housing they are planning because, without good design and resident support, nothing moves forward.

A new era of practices combined with ambitious local authority client groups will have a major transformative effect on Londons housing. It is really exciting that councils are participating in housing design and delivery again with a focus on building longevity and quality.

Interview

Colville Phase 3 consultation

1800 1830 1840 1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1910 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 20101980 1990 2000 2020 2030

1851The Great Exhibition Exhibited the influential model dwelling for four families that Prince Albert had commissioned from the architect Henry Roberts

1800s Rookery 18th and 19th centuries Slum housing composed of a dense mat of one- or two-room deep dwellings, penetrated by narrow alleys

1836Sketches by BozIllustrative of Every-day Life and Every-day People A collection of short pieces published by Charles Dickens with illustrations by George Cruikshank

1851Henry Mayhew, London Labour and the London Poorhouses small and without foundations, subdivided and often around unpaved courts. An almost total lack of drainage and sewerage was made worse by the ponds formed by the excavation of brickearth. Pigs and cows in backyardsslaughter houses, dustheaps, and lakes of putrefying night soil added to the filth.

1848 The Public Health ActThe act aimed to improve the sanitary condition of towns and populous places in England and Wales by placing the supply of water, sewerage, drainage, cleansing and paving under a single local body

1843TJ Maslen, Suggestions for the Improvement of our Towns and Houses ....I strongly recommend, for good of all classes, that courts and alleys be abolished, and let men live in wide streets, and act openly and honestly in sight of all.

1850s The Barrack Block was seen as a solution to slum clearances modelled on Henry Roberts Empire Exhibition model dwelling

1862Peabody Trust Established by London-based American banker George Peabody

1898 To-morrow: A Peaceful Path to Real ReformEbenezer Howards manifesto later republished as Garden Cities of To-morrow

1890The Working Classes Dwellings Act placed a new responsibility to house displaced residents, which led to the building of new philanthropic housing such as Blackwall Buildings in Whitechapel, East London, and Great Eastern Buildings, Hackney, East London

1896Arthur Morrison, A Child of the Jago Wretched houses with broken windows patched with rags and paper: every room let out to a different family, and in many instances to two or even three ... filth everywhere a gutter before the houses and a drain behind clothes drying and slops emptying, from the windows.men and women, in every variety of scanty and dirty apparel, lounging, scolding, drinking, smoking, squabbling, fighting, and swearing

1885 The Housing of the Working Classes Act gave local authorities the power to undertake rehousing schemes. In 1890 the London County Council set about demolishing the Old Nichol Rookery and replacing it with the Boundary Estate

1875 The Artisans and Labourers Dwellings Improvement ActAllowed local councils to buy up areas of slum dwelling in order to clear it and then rebuild

Era of philanthropyThe pressure for decent housing increased from overcrowding in the large cities during the Industrial Revolution in the 18th and 19th century, and many social commentators, such as Octavia Hill, reported on the squalor, sickness and perceived immorality that arose. Some philanthropists had begun to provide housing in tenement blocks, while some factory owners such as Saltaire (1853), Bournville (1879), Port Sunlight, Stewartby, and Silver End as late as 1926 built entire villages for their workers

Social Housing Timeline

Projects

Events and Policy

Statistics

1851 Barrack Block1800s The Rookery Victorian Slums

1914 1918 First World War

1917The Tudor Walters Report on the quality of housing provided for colliery employees is published. Based on the design principles of the garden suburb movement, it provided a standard of quality in the construction of homes for the working classes. It recommended that every house should contain a living room, parlour, scullery and at least three bedrooms, a bathroom and a larder

1930The Greenwood Housing Act required councils to prepare slum clearance plans

1937London City Councils London Housing manual is published

19431944The Abercrombie Plan Governed the planning and rebuilding of London in the post-war era. The document put emphasis on council-led housing and new infrastructure

1944The Dudley Report promoted mixed developments and higher densities than previously

1939 1945Second World War

1951Festival of BritainShowcased the new Lansbury Estate in Poplar, East London. Live Architecture Exhibition

1955RIBA Symposium on High Flats Forewarned of problems with low-income families living in high-rise housing

1946The New Towns Act and 1947 Town and Country Planning Act shaped council house provision. Houses were typically semi-detached or in small terraces. A three-bedroom, semi-detached council house was typically built on a square grid (6.4m x 6.4m), with a maximum density of no more than 30 houses per hectare. New towns and many existing towns had countless estates built to this basic model

1956The Housing Subsidy Act offered local authorities a greater subsidy, the higher they were prepared to build

1961Homes for Today and Tomorrow report The Parker Morris Committee drew up an influential report on public housing in the UK, which made recommendations for improving the quality of social housing, particularly regarding size standards

1967Parker Morris Standards: Set out in the Ministry of Housings Design Bulletin 6 - Space in the Home, these space standards became mandatory for all housing built in new towns, and were extended to all council housing in 1969

1968Ronan PointThe problems associated with contractor-led panelised systems were brought into sharp focus after the partial collapse of Ronan Point, a tower block in Newham, East London, after a gas explosion

1979The Conservative Party wins the General Election, which is instrumental in the Right to Buy scheme being implemented

1973The Essex Design Guide for Residential AreasBased on visual criteria and a reaction to the qualitative standards of the 1960s, this guide advocated neo-vernacular styles that gained great popularity in the marketplace and with planners. This caused the Essex neo-vernacular to spread

1980The Local Government, Planning and Land Act abolishes the Parker Morris Standards. Developers respond with a new product the starter home

1989Secured by DesignPolice initiative is established to improve safety in new housing projects

1980Right to BuyA central policy in the Conservative manifesto was to transform Britain into a home-owning democracy. The Housing Act of 1980 duly gave council tenants the right to buy their homes. Over the following three years, 500,000 council homes passed over to private ownership. Further local authorities were barred from building new homes with proceeds from sales

1997The Labour Party wins the General Election

2000Planning Policy Guidance 3: HousingBrownfield site preference led to a proliferation of one- and two-bed properties in city centres instead of larger family units

2000EcoHomesEstablished to improve environmental standards in new housing

2006Local authorities are empowered to build council homes again and encouraged to establish local housing companies to deliver a range of tenures on council-owned sites

2007 2010Financial crisis reduces housebuilding and with less funding from central government ambitious