High rise: heaven or hell?

In this recent article from Star magazine, Bill Hodgson looks at the history of what went wrong with tower blocks. It's fascinating stuff... According to a recent survey by the Architecture Commission, less than one per cent of people would live by choice in a tower block. Which is why tower blocks are being torn down while others are being built! (like the one pictured, in Glasgow, being demolished last year).
Over to Bill for a history lesson...
The recent row between council leader Clyde Loakes and his deputy Keith Rayner over the role of tower blocks in public housing has re-opened a long running debate on the merits of high rise living. While Councillor Loakes believes new blocks could solve the borough’s potential housing shortage, his deputy argues such a move would repeat the costly mistakes of the past. The dispute erupted following the publication of research suggesting 12,000 homes must be built in Waltham Forest to accommodate a projected population increase of 20,000 people.
Click on "Read More" below to read the full article.

On the up
In May 1949 London’s first council housing tower block was opened in Holborn. A staggering 2,700 more would follow around the capital in the years ahead. The early blocks were inspired by the Swiss architect Le Corbusier who sought to solve the problem of overcrowded cities by building elegant ‘streets in the sky’ for socially diverse communities. “We must decongest our cities by increasing their density,” he said. “We must improve circulation and increase the amount of open spaces”. He envisaged residential towers with lavish communal roof gardens set amidst vibrant green spaces with transport freeways to ferry inhabitants to their workplaces.
His ideas were seized upon by councils across Britain, desperate to replace slum dwellings and re-house citizens made homeless during the Second World War. Le Corbusier’s vision seemed irresistible at a time when economical construction methods using prefabricated panels and concrete promised a brave new world for the urban dweller.
The early blocks offered spacious and well-appointed living space but it was not long before financial constraints forced compromises in both materials and dimensions. Le Corbusier’s emphasis on green spaces and public facilities was also sidelined in the rush to accommodate as many people as quickly and cheaply as possible.
The crowning glory of London high rise living emerged in the 1960s when the heavily bombed Cripplegate area provided the setting for the new Barbican Estate. An enormous concrete jungle softened by artificial lakes and networks of terraces and trees, the Barbican offered affordable accommodation for City workers with social housing available on the neighbouring Golden Lane Estate. “The intention is to create a residential precinct in which people can live both conveniently and with pleasure,” said chief architect Peter Chamberlin. “Despite its density the layout is spacious. The buildings and the space between them are composed to create a sense of order without monotony”. The project was perhaps closest to Le Corbusier’s intentions and the aspirations of the post-war planners. Ironically, as the Barbican prepared to welcome its first tenants, the reputation of British tower blocks was about to be dealt a fatal blow.
Disaster
The fall from grace of tower blocks began on 16 May 1968 in Newham when the newly opened 23-storey Ronan Point partially collapsed following a gas explosion, killing residents and causing chaos in the local area. Although blocks would continue to be built for housing throughout the 1970s, the disaster destroyed public confidence in their structural safety while reports of poor insulation, inadequate security and insect infestations further tarnished their appeal. Many blocks had also been hastily constructed at inconvenient out-of-town locations with little provision for transport, welfare or shopping which isolated them from the wider community. Problems with faulty elevators made them especially unpopular with the elderly, young families and disabled tenants. Meanwhile, poorly maintained and badly lit communal areas provided a breeding ground for petty crime which left many residents living in a climate of fear. The blocks were now firmly recast as ‘slums in the sky’, blighting the landscape and perpetuating the social problems they were designed to eradicate.
Widespread demolition of tower blocks began in the 1980s with mass removal programmes carried out around the country throughout the 1990s, echoing the post-war slum clearances which had preceded them.
When Labour swept to power in 1997, architect Richard Rogers was appointed to formulate a new model for urban living and social housing. Planning laws were introduced to encourage sustainable low rise developments of three to six storeys. Lord Rogers developed blueprints for human scale urban villages with a ‘ten minute walk rule’ to ensure residents would have easy access to shops and services.
Yet a select few tower blocks remained surprisingly resilient and would eventually inspire a cautious reassessment.
Rebirth
In the 1980s, Notting Hill’s Trellick Tower was London’s most notorious housing block. Stories concerning vicious rapes in dimly lit stairwells, children being attacked outside their homes by heroin addicts and squatters setting fire to flats made lurid newspaper headlines. The block’s fortunes were unexpectedly revived when ownership transferred to a tenant’s management organisation that introduced a range of improvements including a concierge, intercoms and CCTV. Crime dramatically fell and the block was boldly reinvented as an icon of urban cool. Now a mixture of private and social housing, it gained the ultimate seal of approval when English Heritage listed it. Tellingly, Trellick stands amidst some of the country’s most attractive Victorian housing and is a stone’s throw from the fashionable bustle of Portobello Market. Less than 10 minutes from the West End by tube, it makes a strong case for the viability of tower blocks situated in an already popular location.
Similarly, the Barbican Estate has confounded the sceptics and is now regarded as a stylish London address. “It is of special architectural interest for its scale, cohesion and ambition,” said former arts minister Tessa Blackstone. “It is much loved by residents and has earned itself a place in the hearts of Londoners”. Location has again played a major role in the Barbican’s appeal with one of the world’s greatest arts institutions on its doorstep and the City of London a gentle stroll away. Nowadays one bedroom apartments sell for £350,000, well beyond the reach of the average City worker for whom it was designed.
Nevertheless, one local housing expert warns these examples are not indicative of the bigger picture. “Despite a few notable exceptions, the overwhelming evidence is clear,” she said. “Exceeding five storeys does not work in the context of social housing. It is a proven recipe for disaster and shouldn’t even be considered”. She points to a recent survey by the Architecture Commission which found less than one per cent of people would live by choice in a tower block.
With much brownfield land earmarked for development in the neighbouring boroughs of Newham and Tower Hamlets and the government planning a massive expansion of London to the east via the multi-billion pound Thames Gateway project, perhaps councillors should really be debating whether Waltham Forest needs substantial extra housing at all.
Article reproduced courtesy of Star Magazine/The Lightside.