/ London’s affordable housing crisis: / examining the architects role in engaging the roots of societal impact / zaeem ahmed / 15004968
/ architect / noun: architect; plural noun: architects 1. a person who designs buildings and in many cases also supervises their construction. 2. a person who is responsible for inventing or realizing a particular idea or project. / origin / mid 16th century: from French architecte, from Italian architetto, via Latin from Greek arkhitektōn, from arkhi- ‘chief’ + tektōn ‘builder’.
/ advocate / noun: advocate; plural noun: advocates 1. a person who publicly supports or recommends a particular cause or policy. 2. a person who puts a case on someone else’s behalf. / origin / middle english: from old french avocat, from latin advocatus, past participle (used as a noun) of advocare ‘call (to one’s aid)’, from ad- ‘to’ + vocare ‘to call’.
Advocacy: Beyond Aesthetics AR6023 2015/16 Seminar Tutor: Angie Pascoe
2
London’s affordable housing crisis: examining the architects role in engaging the roots of societal impact
Contents 1 The dreams of men Anson’s revolutionary role of the architect 2 The plot against The proposed housing bill and it’s possible effect on the current crises 3 Seduction? Developers, loopholes and viability 4 Corruption? Accusations against RIBA 5 Breaking barriers Community Land Trusts Assemble 6 Case Study: The Y: Cube Temporary Housing and Off-site construction 7 Case Study: Neo - Bankside Private Housing and Off-site affordability 8 Moving forward 100 ideas for New London Architecture 9 Coming clean Mapping Londons housing struggles 10 Revolution Concrete action and meanwhile spaces 11 Self-build Re-living Walter Segals community housing 12 Fulfilling the dream Open-source architecture
3
fig 1. Mustafa Hulusi / Abstract Roses Flyposting
1 The dreams of men Anson’s revolutionary role of the architect ‘So long as there is blatant injustice in the way land is developed and construction is created (and goodness knows such injustice is rife these days) there will be a need for revolutionary thinking in architecture. I mean revolutionary in the social sense. I condemn the (architectural) profession, which, to my mind, has become the image-maker of Global Market Capitalism which is, literally, destroying our small planet and, specifically, the myriad of communities which inhabit it.’ - Bryan Anson 1
designer, or The ARC marching against the RIBA may have been seen to be controversial. However, his concern for the socially disenfranchised won him favour with his contemporaries. ‘He combines a considerable intellect with a deeply felt social conscience. His opinions about contemporary issues such as the suffering of the neglected sections of society, about life in cities and the function and form of architecture are extremely pertinent.’ - Richard Rogers1
Let’s go back forty years or so when Anson and his action group, the Architectural Revolutionary Council (ARC) was summoning to architecture embedded within the root of the social and political context. The ARC had a dream of shifting the architects attention from working solely with the rich minority and offering their skills and services to local communities. This attempt to establish an ethic of social architecture was accompanied with a constant criticism of the RIBA and calls for its abolition. 2
Only recently has this enagegment with the exluded community really been thrust into the limelight. The Pritzker Prize, the most prestigious Architectural accolade was recently awarded to Shigeru Ban, renowned for his post-disaster relief architecture. Cameron Sinclair, (Co-founder of Architecture for Humanity) stated “When I said architects should get involved in humanitarian issues, people laughed at me”2. The climate has changed.
Ansons’s
Could Anson’s vision of a reform in architectural thinking to nurture selfsufficient communities be about to blossom?
questioning
of
the
archiect
1 Anson. B. (2008) . Letter to Edward Bottoms 2 Duvillier. A (2015) . Brian Anson’s Architectural Revolutionary Council & its relevance today
as
1 Rogers. R. (2008) Letterfrack Letter 2 Sinclair. C. (2015) Dezeen Interview
4
fig 2
fig 3
fig 4
2 The plot against The proposed housing bill and it’s possible effect on the current crises The stage is set. The supply of Affordable housing has become a critical issue facing London. The facts are stark: 2015 saw London’s growing population surpass 8.6million. With no signs of slowing, at least 40,000 new homes per year are needed to house new residents.1 With the private sector at maximum capacity, small housebuilders decimated and a shortage of skilled labour we are running 9,000 homes a year short of current demand. However, new analysis published by Shelter, suggests these ‘Starter Homes’ will be a non-starter for 98% of families earning George Osbourne’s new National Living Wage.2 In additon to this, 25,771 people applied for asylum in the UK in the year to the end of June 2015. 20,000 refugees also hope to be resettled on the Isles by 2020, and if recent events in Germany are anything to take example from, the magnetic pull of a capital city could prove a likely destination. The issues don’t stop here. The number of homeless families living in B&Bs has hit a 12 year high in England and it is estimated
1 Murray. P. (2015) . NLA Insight Study, Foreword 2 Jeffreys. P. (2015) . Shelter Blog, Non Starter Homes
that only 20% 25-34 year olds will be on the property ladder by the end of the decade. Consequently, 48% of the same age are now renting compared to 21% 10 years ago, whilst spending half of their total earning, hence the young being named ‘Generation Rent’.1 In spite of this, social housing policy has been turned on it’s head with the new housing and planning bill being fast-tracked through parliament. On initial viewing it appears to replace the obligation to build homes for social rent with a duty to build discounted ‘starter homes’ capped at £450,000 in Greater London. The bill seems designed not to help renters onto the property ladder but to lose more homes for social rent under the Right to Buy. The Bill is also claimed to end secure tenancies, not to accommodate social mobility, but to free up property for private sale or demolition. 2 This could be amongst the most dangerous and negletcful pieces of legislation to be passed in this country.- A4SH Do architects have a responsibility to innovate housing solutions to combat this emergency? 1Spratt. V. (2015) Solutions for Britain’s renting crises 2 Elmer. S (2015) The End of social housing
5
fig. 5: Proposed £1.2 development at the old Heygate Estate
fig 6
3 Seduction? Developers, loopholes and viability
4 Corruption? Accustions against the RIBA
Even though the need for affordable housing is evident , especially for the socially disenfranchised, mechanisms such as the viability assesment are being exploited by developers. The Heygate was home to 1,194 social-rented flats at the time of its demolition, however, the new £1.2bn Elephant Park will provide only 74 such homes among its 2,500 units.1 Should the viability assessment be made publicly available and would this limit the amount of social housing from being eradicated by developers?
put the land in for free to be held in a trust.2 Therefore, over the longer period they would build on it, take a receipt from rental and in turnwould be able to deliver affordable housing. But, at the moment this is not possible. Authorities are asked to put land into any equation, benchmarked and then saved for private developers. A big problem for housing delivery.
‘We can’t rely on developers for affordable housing – they force councils to grant permission for things they don’t want’ - Dr. Bob Colenutt. Money talks. Let’s not forget authorities have spent years painstakingly developing policies in a democratic process, but maybe new mechanisms are needed. Interestingly, for the first time in 30 years, the government are empowering local authorities to deliver housing as well. In a recent panel discussion, Andrew Matthews suggested that local authorities don’t sell the land, but
1 Wainwright. O. (2015) Revealed...
‘The governments too concerned with what it might do to upset it’s housewarming friends in the city, so that’s quite a political hot potato in terms of delivering affordable housing.’ - Andrew Matthews Meanwhile, The RIBA is petitioning the government to bring in compulsory space standards. But do they not have a duty of care of to petition for a mechanism to ensure developers maintain compliance with Section 106? In the 1970s, the RIBA was still considered as a powerful institution. But today, does the RIBA hold any significance in the face of multinational developer firms, such as Lend Lease? Even if they did, recent allegations of institutional racism and calls for a radical overhaul seem like the organisation have internal struggles to prioritise first. 2 Matthews. A (2015) Advocacy Panel Discussion
6
fig. 8
fig. 9
fig. 7: Granby Street Interior Prototype
fig. 10
5 Breaking Barriers Community Land Trusts Assemble The new generation of architecural students are thinking twice about even joining the RIBA. Fitting then that, none of the 16 members of Assemble is a fully qualified architect, and some are not architects at all. Yet, Assembles Turner Prize winning project at Granby Four Streets has enagaged local residents to shape and build the housing regeneration efforts. Rather than leave the abandoned streets to developers keen on quick turnovers and hefty profits, the area has remained within locals’ grasp and influence.1 Relevant and sensitive, Assemble exhibit how artists and architects can engage with communities, and work creatively in the wider social sphere. During the 70s several artists, living in short-term properties temporarily regenerated patches of east London destined for demolition. 2With London housing at a critical state of being unaffordable, such ventures may need to be embraced. Being only one of 175, the Granby Street Community Land Trust could offer a substitute model 1 Foster. Dawn (2015) Assemble’s Turner prize win 2 Seale. A (2015) Power to the people!
of how the local society can collaborate to challenge the developer driven housing market . Community Land Trusts act as not for profit community-based organisations, run by volunteers. They aim to deliver housing and community facilities at permanently affordable levels for local residents. They achieve this by holding the land in trust, (just as Matthews was suggesting), separating its value from that of the building that stands upon it, and leasing it to home owners on long leases or letting it out at an affordable rent. The CLT is then able to deliver permanently affordable housing by fixing the price the homes should be sold at in the future.1 On the flipside, some may argue that initiatives like these serve to dethrone government intervention, which could lead to further withdrawals of public funds. Those challenges may go unheard. The ingenuity of Assembles beautiful scheme, and their ground up approach to regeneration demonstrate an innovative approach in creating community led social housing. Are other architects just as successful in their development of affordable housing ? 1 Granby Four Streets CLT. What is a Community Land Trust?
7
fig. 11
fig. 12
fig. 13
fig. 14
fig. 15
fig. 16
6 Case Study: The Y: Cube Temporary Housing and off-site construction ‘Breaking misconceptions about architecture frees the architect to exploit new technologies and manufacturing techniques. Given the world-wide housing crises, this issue can no longer be ignored.’- Richard Rogers 1
and developer hope this number will decrease as production efficiency increases.
Aiming to tacke the endemic of Londons social deprivation, RSH+P and the YMCAhave recently delivered a set of 36 self-contained one bedroom units in Mitcham, South London. The Y: Cube is constructed using modular, volumetric technology which enables them to be built off-site in a factory under rigorous BOPAS certified quality standards. Originally, the housing was designed as flat pack :
The Y: Cube being a small volume, 26m2 internally, meant that it was utilised to test the benefits of volumetric contruction. Also, due to being termed temporary accomodation, this internal space need not comply with London housing guidelines. Architects working on micro housing tend to agree that external semi-private courtyard spaces could compensate for the internal area. However, could RIBA’s Homewise documents see projects like the Y: Cube become unable to provide it’s housing solution to future generations?
‘We thought that was the most efficient but actually it sort of ends up being 50% off-site manufactured. Whereas now with the volumetric it’s 90%, and the 40% is quite critical because you can have a lot more control about detailing and quality.’2 - Andrew Partridge
‘It’s a very dangerous thing, for our institute to talk that kind of rhetoric about ‘rabbit hutch’ housing...I think our institute has done a very serious disservice actually with what it’s been pushing out at the press and it’s been doing it and ignoring it’s own professional advisors on that subject.’1 - Andrew Matthews
Off-site construction means one Y: Cube can be produced and installed for around
Despite the space debate, the benefits of the build programme are hard to deny. The Y: Cube is able to be delivered in approximately 5 months and typically costs 25% 8 1 Matthews. A (2015) Duty of care Panel Discussion
1 Rogers. R. (1997) . Cities for a small planet 2 Partridge. A (2016) Affordable Housing Interview
fig. 17
fig. 18
fig. 19
fig. 20
fig. 21
fig. 22
less than traditional forms of construction. The rent is set at 65% of the comparative market rent for the area, so where a room to rent in a shared home would cost around £200-£220, the one bed unit at the Y: Cube would be available for appoximately £148 per week. The YMCA state the project is seen as ‘move -on accommodation’ to house single people at their ‘point of need’1. The independance for individuals having their own front door, rather than sharing facilities in their previous hostel setting , is vital in them getting on the property ladder in an otherwise constricted housing market. A lot of boroughs are now approaching RSH+P for similar temporary accommodation solutions to get families out of bed and breakfasts, which can be seen as the real immediate problem that needs to to be resolved. However, there are issues. Upon visiting the Y: Cube, some residents feel the rental pricing is still ‘unaffordable’ compared to their previous hostel accomodation. Also, comments on a distinct lack of community interaction is interesting, given that the external walkways are said to have been designed with exactly this function in mind. Furthermore, the cubes 60 year design life is showing early signs of wear. In one of the upper properties, cracks are beginning to show between the walls and ceiling. 1 Tanner, S. (2015) Y: Cube interview
When questioned, the damage is claimed to probably have occured from either moving the cubes on site, or general decoration cracks. Given the £5m legal claim over RSH+P’s Oxley Wood Estate , due to water seepage through cladding panels, it would be reasonable to query whether the Y: Cube may be facing similar problems. However, Oxley Woods was ‘put together badly on site, they were not off-site built, with RSH+P never involved in the actual assembly process’.1 In addition, the Y: Cubes which are constructed off-site by SIG, using precision cut, sustainably sourced timber and replaceable panelled walls, seem better equipped to deal with any similar problems. There was also a lot of community interaction with the development of the cube, mainly with the testing of an early prototype where comments from hostel residents were implemented to benefit the current iteration. Despite this, some state it’s ‘riotously bright colours’ and dress in ‘child-like garb of a My First House’2, mean the cubes are distinctly out of context. But is this just journalistic cynicism which misses the point quite dramatically? Having provided a housing need for those in desperate circumstances, Rogers work is flexible, comparably affordable and true to it’s exploitation of new manufacturing techniques. But how socially empowering are the firms other projects? 1 Tanner. S (2015) Y: Cube interview 2 Wainwright. O (2015) Return of the prefabs
9
fig. 23
fig. 24
fig. 25
fig. 26
7 Case Study: Neo-Bankside Private Housing and off-site affordability ‘The profession must define an ethical stance. The requirement for architecture to contribute to social and environmental sustainability now charges architects with responsibilities that go beyond the limit of an autonomous brief. The status and power of the profession has declined under the weight of commercial pressure.1
works when commenting ‘private developments are designed to satisfy consumer demand rather than to consolidate neighborhoods’. The juxtaposition between the social revolution of the Y: Cube to the ‘stratospherically priced non-dom accommodation’1 could be seen as undermining the principles off creating socially mixed communities.
Rogers’ ethos is stated clearly in his book ‘cities for a small planet’. Contrary to this RSH+P’s private residential scheme, Neo Bankside, only goes to further express London’s iniquitous housing market. Despite being awarded the RIBA Stirling prize, the project has faced stark criticism for allowing developers to evade the council’s planning obligations with distinct ease. Originally the 2006 planning application, used its viability assessment to insist the borough’s 40% affordable housing target was not achievable – stating just 27.5% affordable housing could be provided instead. It argued this on the basis that the flats would sell for an average of £754/sq ft, however in reality, the scheme has sold for an average of £1,326/sq ft, with the penthouses now on the market for £22m. Ironically , this very scenario is stated in Rogers
So what came of intial social housing promises? Developers bought four council owned sites in other parts of the borough; one being a council-run children’s home, while another was a day nursery, however neither were reprovided. The Section 106 agreement confirmed the developers would need to build 130 affordable homes, with 94 being socially-rented. Unsurpisingly , the final outcome was a shortfall of 38 affordable homes and despite Southwark councils claims of the unit policy being only ‘indicative’, bigger questions begin to arise. Local resident Adrian Glasspool pertinently states no one is checking ‘developers fulfill their obligations, nor that the social housing is actually being rented at social rates’2. This could be a dangerous precedent. Is there a requirement for a compliance monitoring mechanism in similar situations? 1 Slessor . C Former editor Architectural Review
1 Rogers. R. (1997) . Cities for a small planet. p.69
2 Wainwright. O (2015) Neo Bankside
10
fig. 28
fig. 29
fig. 27 Controversy is never too far away with so called starchitects, but seemingly this is an offshoot of success. Marco Goldschmied, former president of the RIBA and partner of Rogers, accused the architect of hypocrisy over the ‘94% unaffordable’ Deptford scheme1. Rogers states ‘New buildings are preceived as little more than financial commodities...’ and unfortunately this seems to be the case at One Hyde Park. Purchased by mostly absentee owners, hiding behind offshore corporations, it provides a portrait of the new wealthy elite. However, this far cry from move on accommodation for the socially deprived, may indicate how architects are forced to strike a balance between social and private projects for financial reasons. Andrew Partridge (Associate Partner at RSH+P) also makes some valid points regarding the contested affordable housing situation: ‘I think the affordable nature of One Hyde Park and Bankside was followed through to the letter. It wasn’t necessarily adjacent to the site, because it isn’t really appropriate to put affordable housing in Knightsbridge. It’s quite an expensive place to live and if you put affordable there, people compromise slightly. I think it’s quite easy for people in the ******* to make cynical comments’2 ‘Is Rogers still a rebel?’ Are his past views on 1 Wilding. M (2011) Rogers blasted by ex partner 2 Partridge. A (Jan 2016) Affordable housing interview
fig. 30
consildating neighbourhoods for the poor still manifesting? His Inside Out exhibition says there can be no dispute about his acheivement, designing engrossing and enlivening 20th century buildings, but according to the critics this has recently departed from the democratic principle of creating the ideal city. They claim his ‘vision was something wonderful.The wardrobe remains defiant, but sod you architecture has put on a lounge suit’.1 It appears that the negative media reactions may be overlooking the bigger picture. There may be some inconsistencies between the social criterion upon which projects are chosen, but we must bear in mind that various factors effect the affordability of the well intended projects. ‘I think it’s a general thing where people do want to do good things for other people, it just tends to be difficult to have that manifest. A lot of the rules that stop people from doing bad things, stop people from doing good things aswell. You’ve got to seek balance.’2 Another affordable scheme being developed is PLACE/Ladywell. It seems as though the lounge suit has been traded in for a t-shirt and joggers, as the firm have got fully involved with the vibrant community. Toy workshops, short films and blackboards have allowed local participation to inform the projects design. New ideas are always welcome. 1 Bayley. S (October) Is Richard Rogers still a rebel? 2 Partridge. A (Jan 2016) Affordable Housing interview
11
fig. 31
fig. 32
fig. 33
fig. 34
fig. 35
fig. 36
fig. 37
fig. 38
fig. 39
8 Moving forward 100 ideas for New London Architecture New ideas for London’s housing emergency are abundant at the recent NLA exhibition in the Building Centre. Evidently there is no secret formula that will increase the level of house building and make up for years of under investment. Hence, the NLA have sought new proposals from architects, contractors, manufacturers, economists and housebuilders. Demonstrating evolving local strategies and aspirations for the future, the exhibition investigates the 33 borough’s key objectives, diagrams and information of areas of particular developmental importance. Each of these strategies help form the overall London Plan, aiming to deliver change and regeneration for the capital.1 The exhibition presents a selection of both practical and more radical ideas: from increasing self-building and co-housing, to building over infrastructure assets, infilling council estates, and densifying the suburbs including RSH+P’s Y:Cube housing.
It aims to provide one-off building permits, for otherwise rejected schemes under London’s current planning policy. The Licens would be granted for innovative buildings and designs to be carried out on challenging sites, such as floodplains or deprived areas.1
One of the proposals deals with utlising London’s bluefield sites, which could aid in the delivery of 7,500 affordable homes. BACA Architects have designed a two-bed prefabricated amphibious house costing £150,000. A key process in tandem with the project is the concept of an Innovation License.
In addition, A New House For London responds to the question: can design help us meet London’s housing challenge? Utilising shipping containers and a design that is pared back to low-cost components and processes, this unit costs less than an average 10 per cent deposit in the capital. It suggests that units could lease land-rights and with the project being open source, Carl Turner architects are encouraging an innovation in housing. They ‘believe the plug-in home with self-build elements needs to be developed further and invite collaboration.’2 These timely ideas offer the new London mayoral candidates much to deliberate over. This is the first election where unanimously, housing is the big political issue and The Mayor, London boroughs, government, private and public sector developers, construction companies and architects must work together to drive delivery of new homes.
1 New London Architecture (2015) Transforming the boroughs
1 Mairs. J (2015) BACA Architects floating home 2 Building Centre (2015) A New House for London
12
London’s housing struggles 2005 - 2032
15.5 km2 value of the land £52 billions 164 203 residents affected (evicted?) more than 820 500 m2 of land changing ownership from public to private £27 billions invested more than 70 social housing estates going through regeneration demolition of more than 30 500 homes
1:50 000 1 km
fig. 40
fig. 42
fig. 41
fig. 43
9 Coming clean Mapping Londons housing struggles
10 Revolution Concrete action + meanwhile spaces
This ‘utopian’ ideal of colloboration between professions will not be easy to bring about in the midst of the exluded community being further ostrcised through major private development. This can be witnessed as a number of social housing estates are being demolished, residents evicted and the change of London land ownership is shifting from public to private entities. As architects, how do we alter this position we are currently plagued by?
One of these upcoming networks is called Concrete action. It is a wiki-leak website designed to counter regeneration schemes, with an independant network of professionals working in architetcure and its related industries. Concrete Action intends to; disseminate knowledge to vulnerable communities under threat of development, provide alternative plans based on community participation, be a catalyst for reflection and change within the architectural community.1
Some have suggested that by acting as knowledge brokers and aiming to uncover the hidden realities of the housing struggles, the duty of care is to connect various people, engage them in discussion and enable a transparency between those who are ignoring each other. This could refer to the planners of the site, developers, politicians ,architect, residents and activists.1 But seeing as varying intentions and motives play a huge role in the replacement of social homes with unaffordsble private property, the freedom of knowledge through mapping Londons housing struggles may have the potential to act as an initiating agent in causing social change through revolutionary thinking.
To acheive this the website allows undisclosed planning documents to be available publicly for campaigners and journalists, a sort of wiki-leak for regeneration. Could aspects of this model be used to provide a database for temporary liveable spaces in the city? What if long term disputed planning struggles could open up the use of temporary housing? Meanwhile space are a company which manipulate the intelligent use of unproductive empty buildings and underused land. They are currently working with RSH+P and the local public to develop transitional community spaces at Ladywell. But what if the architects also saw themselves as ‘enablers’ to help people design their own social houses?
1 Duviller. A (2015) London’s Housing struggles
1 Duviller. A (2015) London’s Housing struggles
13
fig. 44
fig. 47
fig. 48
fig. 49
fig. 50
fig. 45
fig. 46
11 Self-build Re-living Walter Segal’s community housing We only have to look at our recent past to revive lessons derived from Segal’s self-build experiments of the 1980s, which revolutionised the UK’s approach to providing low-cost housing.1 Interestingly , Richard Rogers, whose work and ethos has already been discussed, sent a letter to the self-build housing pioneer Walter Segal, thanking him for a tour around his systemised housing. The then young architect’s eye was caught as he mentioned it to be ‘certainly one of my most exciting experiences.’2 It seems as though the early revolutionaries in rethinking the duty of care of an architect were all contempraries , able to appreciate and benefit from each others works. Should those currently responsible also remember Segal when designing the cities of the future? Segal innovated a simple and lightweight design, where the buildings were constructed of readily available and inexpensive timber. He removed the need for bricklaying and plastering, and reduced the foundations to simple concrete bases. Architect Broome describes: ‘Walter reinvented building from first principles and reduced it to its simplest 1 Grahame. A (2015) ‘This isn’t at all like London’ 2 Wainwright. O (2013) Richard Rogers: the world as it could be
terms which led to the post and beam frame.’In the late 1970s, after much negotiation, self-building emerged as a way to help people into low-cost home ownership. ‘He was dead keen on people having input into how they were designed. He sat down with each household and figured out the plans with them.’1 The emergence of this self-build led to a special community spirit developing early on, with the calmness and character of the scheme certainly differing from the rest of London. The encouragement of inetraction was certainly one of Segal’s intentions. Segals belief is that a house should adapt to its occupants, not the other way round. The construction methods implemented allow for adjustable walls and the easier extension of the home. The project has now inspired a new generation to create well-designed eco-friendly community housing. Rural Urban Synthesis Society, is a community land trust who are in negotiations with Lewisham council to build low-cost homes on a nearby vacant site. Modern interpretations of the Segals ethos are also being realised. Two of these include the Granby Street Project by Assemble and the WikiHouse. 1 Grahame. A (2015) ‘This isn’t at all like London’
14
fig. 61
fig. 51
fig. 52
fig. 62 fig. 53
fig. 54
fig. 55
fig. 56
fig. 57
fig. 58
fig. 59
fig. 60
fig. 63
12 Fulfilling the dream Open-source architecture WikiHouse is an open source construction system, whose aim is to use digital manufacturing to make it possible for anyone to cheaply design, download, ‘print’ and assemble structures without the need for conventional construction skills and tools.1 With the CNC machine new parts can be made over its life, in addition to the build of the 4.0 Wikihouse taking relative amateur a matter of days to build. So are we on the cusp of seeing the development the seed of a completely open-source, citizen-led social housing model? Founder Alistair Parvin thinks the questionfacing the next generation of architects is, how are we going to turn our client from the richest one percent to the 100 percent?2 According to Ban, ‘balance’ must be struck. Parvin, is of the opinion to not reinvent the wheel every time, but take what already works, and adapt it to our own needs. Are these signs demonstrating the architects duty to enable a change in building techniques, focused on the socially excluded? Highly acclaimed architects, such as those at Paperhouses, are now designing refined open source housing solutions for the world wide community. A revolution. 1 Archipreneur. (2013) How WikiHouse is making Affordable housing 2 Parvin. A (2013) Architecture for the people by the people
They say things come full circle. It appears as though Anson’s early vision for a social reform in architectural thinking is now playing out before our very eyes. Recently having been announced as the 2016 Pritzker Prize Laureate, Alejandro Aravena thinks ‘It’s time to rethink the entire role and language of architecture.1’ Not only does this accolade add strength tothe argument that architects have a responsibility to engage in broad social conversations, significantly, it shows that perceptions within the profession have also shifted, like Anson dreamed. The battle for a a social housing is a collective effort that requires everybody’s forceand knowledge. Funders of public housing must encourage and favour small housing co-ops, community land trusts and indiviuals instead of large housing associations. Genuine community participation is the key to producing relevant affordable housing that can transform lives. It seems clear that the architects duty is to responsibly battle for better housing solutions in the current crisis. However, the architect is only a piece of the cog, as the challenge requires collective effort and everybody’s force and knowledge. Can Ansons dream even be exceeded by the current generation? God knows. 15 1 Araveno. A (2015) It’s time to rethink...
Appendices Unit 04: Social Housing Solar House in Colombia Rapid Deployable Housing in Calais Interview: Affordable Housing Andrew Partridge (RSH+P) Panel Discussion: Housing Crisis Angie Pascoe (CASS) Christina Norton (Soundings/Fluid) Andrew Matthews (Proctor/Matthews) Harbinder Birdi (Hawkins\Brown) Interview: The Y:Cube Simon Tanner (YMCA LSW) Bibliography Image References
16
Unit 04: Social Housing Solar House / Colombia Rapid Depolyable Housing / Calais
fig. 64
fig. 66
fig. 67
During our first term studying at the CASS, we designed and built a solar house, ready for competition in Cali. The intention behind the work was to develop a sustainable, energy-effiicient house which would be affordable for the lowest strata in Colombian society. There were some key lessons we learnt which hopefully, stand us in good stead when proposing
fig. 70 Refugee camps last on average 17 years and are no longer temporary places of residence. Architects may be seen to have a duty of care to utilise their skills and act as ‘enablers’ for the provision of base housing to the socially excluded.
fig. 65
fig. 68
fig. 69
ideas for Londons housing crisis. Firstly, the spirit and reward of a self-build, not only strengthens bonds, but also allows you to appreciate the hard work in building a house. Secondly, engaging the community to help design the project, through their ideas and needs should not be neglected. Overall, an experience that has provided us with beneficial knowledge.
fig. 71
fig. 72
At Unit 04, we plan to design rapid deployable housing for the residents of ‘The Jungle’ in Calais. We hope to innovate shelter which will bring a sense of safety and community in an otherwise hostile situation. 17
Angie Pascoe RIBA AADip FRSA Principal Lecturer at The CASS London Metropolitan University
Andrew Matthews BA (Hons) DipArch MA RIBA FRSA Architect // Proctor and Matthews
Transcribed/Paraphrased Panel Discussion Wednesday 16th December 2015 Location: London Metropolitan University, Calcutta House Topic: The Architects duty of care
Christina Norton BSc (Hons.) | AA Dip Arch, RIBA Architect + Director // Fluid / Soundings
Harbinder Birdi BArch (Hons.) RIBA Architect + Planner Hawkins\Brown 26
AP: Andrew perhaps we start with you as being the first, talking about space standards. I know the students who are involved in developing their own attitudes towards the argument for the duty of care. Quite a few of them have been quite engaged in this whole notion of whether or not the RIBA ought to do more in terms of regulation and whether the profession is dragging its feet and architects are losing there position within the construction team. Is this just a blip, whats happening with this discussion about space standards and regulations. You definitely put forward the view that we work with whats happening globally and economically and it’s our job perhaps to work and make things as good as they can be without having any kind of minimum standard. What’s your view on that? AM: With those projects that I was showing I was trying to open this debate out, because I couldn’t see with what the RIBA is doing with HomeWise and their ‘Space for Case’ documents, how that was going to help very well meaning clients like South Yorkshire Housing Association and indeed Family Mosaic in delivering those projects which wouldn’t be possible if we started to impose those kinds of standards. So, I wanted to demonstrate why we have been signatories to the letter back to the RIBA about the space standards issue. Quite apart from the fact that actually, the news release attacked a number of house builders and developers. I think the profession has, over the last 15 years, had a position with a lot of house builders that it didn’t enjoy in the 1980’s and I think the profession by engaging with a number of house builders helped push the whole issue about what design can mean for housing in this country. So it think it’s a very dangerous thing, for our institute to talk that kind of rhetoric about ‘rabbit hutch’ housing. I was trying to open that up and expand on what was written in that letter, since we were one of the practices that had their name attached to that. I’m not sure that space is the big deal. If you listen to David Birkbeck from Design For Homes, he also posed the question that why if you impose a minimum standard in housing, say you impose a standard of 51m2 for a one bedroom apartment, then that makes it impossible for a young person to live close in the South East, they would have to go quite a long way out, because of the costs of building it imposes a distance for younger people who actually probably want to live
in the centre of town and are quite happy to live in 30m2 studios as their first purchase...I think our institute has done a very serious disservice actually with what it’s been pushing out at the press and it’s been doing it and ignoring it’s own professional advisors on that subject. So I was trying to show this rather significant rift in our profession at the moment around the regulation of housing. AP: Absolutely. What we do within this module is question the whole gamut of professionalism from what the profession does and individual designers and chartered architects carry out. All of you were talking about housing to some extent or another and you’re all involved in the development of the centers of the city and how housing comes about. Another issue that quite a few students have been discussing is this notion of affordable housing, it’s in the press all the time, and what it means to be affordable or not affordable. This is all the section 106 stuff, and whether you have views on affordable housing as councils having to reduce the number of affordable housing on schemes because the developers are not prepared to put that sort of money in. Does that strike a cord with you? What is affordable housing, what does it mean? CN: It’s two separate things isn’t it. You have to separate them out, there’s the discussion about what’s affordable, but if you accept there is a principal of affordable, then you there is conversation about developers. We’re often working on consultation projects like Bishopsgate Goods Yard where the level of affordable housing is offset against the need to provide or to build on a very difficult site, to decontaminate, to manage the infastructure that’s there, to build over it, or to offset it against other community benefits. With the Section 106, it seems to me like the issue there is often actually transparency. Until developers actually show the argument for viability, it all comes down to viability...it comes to a point where it needs to be communicated. Actually, quite often it isn’t viable, some of the projects I’ve looked at where it’s the ‘evil’ developer and the viability of the project is at that point where, clearly they have to make some profit, they’re not going to build for the sake of it. Hopefully, a project can actually be a positive change to an area and bring benefits. Because they are not trusted and because there are those that are just trying to make as much as possible, 27
if you can’t show why it’s not viable then I think it continues to build up that level of mistrust between the public, the world out there and the development framework and structures. That’s just one thing I have found, we need to find a way for developers to be much more transparent. I’d heard that councils are going to insist on more transparency. AM: Well they have their viability testing independently checked at the moment. CN:
But
it’s
not
made
public
is
so that’s quite a political hot potato in terms of delivering affordable housing, because a lot of local authorities would do that. Just like the private sector they [would] have their viability testing checked and they have to be seen to be transparent in their value of the land, they just want to be able to say we will pop the land in for free to deliver affordable housing, which historically they were able to do. CN: They are doing that in Tottenham at the moment. They are talking about that in the agreements.
it?
AM: I’m not sure actually. I think once planning permission has gone in it is made public, so you can see what tests have been made on the viability. But I think the big issue is, because the attitude to affordable housing is coming from the private sector, and is it is to do with the model of whether the model to delivering housing through the private sector developers is sufficient to deliver the numbers. The government is putting it’s eggs in that basket. Is it sufficient to deliver the numbers and can the private sector deliver affordable housing for sale, which is where they want to go with it. What’s interesting is, for the first time in 30 years, they are empowering local authorities to deliver housing as well. The problem is, they are saying, because the housing lobby is a very powerful one and it’s balance sheets are supported by the value of it’s land banks, they won’t allow the local authorities to take their land bank and put it into development for free, to be held in a trust over a long period of time. In other words, don’t sell the land put pop the land in for free, held in a trust, and therefore it makes an opportunity for local authorities to build pretty cost effectively. Because in the equation the land costs them nothing. They are not allowed to do that and yet there is quite a lot of people in the industry that are calling for that as a way to address affordable housing. Because if the local authorities hang onto their land, over the longer period they build on it, they take a receipt from rental and they can deliver affordable housing. But, at the moment they can’t do it, because they are asked to put land into any equation, benchmarked and save the land as private developers land, so that is a big problem for housing delivery. The governments too concerned with what it might do to upset it’s housewarming friends in the city,
AM: Well they are not allowed to do it. Local authorities are not allowed to value their land at nothing in any given equation at the moment. AP:
But
they
can
reduce
it.
CN: Yes, maybe sub zero, but they can take it right down, otherwise it’s not viable. AM: To help the viability, what they really want to be able to do is put it in the books at zero. Because they own it anyway, so don’t sell it, hang on to it. CN: I think that’s a really interesting conversation, a lot of people will say are you selling your assets off again? AM: No, you hang on to it. You go into a trust. CN: On that model you’re talking about, but not in normal processes. They are selling the land aren’t they? AM: They are selling the land rather than hanging onto it, putting it in at zero and then going
and
joint
venturing
on
development.
CN: Whereas I think in Brixton on the Somerleyton Road that’s exactly what the council are doing, which is becoming the developer themselves and holding onto the asset. There still has to be a mix between market and affordable, because they have to deliver the project but they’re maximizing social rent and they’re keeping hold of the land, they will pay that off over time. AM: But they still have to put the land value in to the liability testing? That’s the issue. But anyway, that makes the 28
delivery of affordable housing pretty difficult. It’s interesting to listen to private developers because they’re quite worried about it because they see the relationship they’ve historically had with housing associations is quite a beneficial one. Because often housing associations will cash flow parts of their development and be able to deliver more housing. Now they’re being asked to build low cost for sale housing, and a lot of them are worried how they will cash flow larger developments, so that might even slow up the private sector delivering housing numbers. So in a sense the government and those setting policy have not really understood the mechanics of the market for housing delivery. So, it will be interesting to see what does happen. We have got to build about 250,000 homes a year. Mind you, you’re point was a very good one, you might turn around and say theres not a housing crisis in this country. What there is, is a crisis of where the economy is centered, and actually if they were really wanting to solve the housing crisis, then they’d solve the Northern powerhouse problem. Connect Manchester, Sheffield, Leeds, there’s about 8 million people living in those cities across the Northern belt and theres less than 8 million in London. If they connected them properly it could work as a Metropolitan area to rival London, then you wouldn’t have a housing crises because actually there’s quite a lot of empty housing up there. Newcastle, Hull, actually there are some very nice places. Why would you want to be in a 30m2 East End flat on the 20th floor when you can live in Deepdale or somewhere like that?...It’s an economic problem and not a housing problem, so it’s interesting. HB: 8/9 years ago every architect grad from the provinces would get a one way ticket to Waterloo, St. Pancras, Kings Cross, Euston. Even if you just think about our profession, this is where most of architecture occurs within the UK. Actually architects are creative people that can inform our environments, if we took just 10% of the architects here into the regions can you imagine what a change they could actually have there. But, generally people tend to be here, and that cultural pull of London town that sucks you in, what we’ve found is that actually often people who have been here for 3 or 4 years, to actually get them to go to the regions and get them to go, actually, God I’m going to
really turn it around and make it my place etc start things up and look for opportunities is really hard. This gravitational pull is so strong, and you all know it because, you know where theres little microcosms are of ‘trendiness’ that you crave to be near, and you go will I find that in Bolton? Probably not. But actually, there are other things on offer there. A lot of practices now are setting up in Manchester, in Birmingham. More professionals left London for Birmingham than ever before, simply because businesses are moving out and then we have this drama now about [the] third runway. I think in terms of global companies 476 global companies have their head offices in London. In Berlin it’s 87. Yet Germany, has got an airport where they have got 4 runways and we’ve got two. London is the fourth largest French city by populous, and that’s because you can work here Monday to Friday and then in an hour ten you can go back and see your mum.
fig. 79
fig. 80 29
Bibliography The Qu’ran A new translation by: M.A.S Abdel Haleem Oxford World Classics Chiastic structure of essay plan derived from Surah 12: Joseph Brian Anson The banner and the Question Mark.London:Architects’ Journal (November-December 1980).
Oliver Wainwright Revealed: how developers exploit flawed planning system to minimise affordable housing (June 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/jun/25/ london-developers-viability-planning-affordable-social-housing-regeneration-oliver-wainwright
New London Architecture. New Ideas For Housing. NLA Insight Study (October 2015)
Oliver Wainwright Is RIBA a sexist, old boys club? (December 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2015/dec/08/is-riba-a-racistsexist-old-boys-club
Albane Duvillier Brian Anson’s Architectural Revolutionary Council & its relevance today https://www.academia.edu/12771040/Brian_Ansons_Architectural_Revolutionary_Council_and_ its_relevance_today
Dawn Foster Assemble’s Turner prize win (December 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2015/dec/08/assemble-turner-prize-housing-crisis-toxteth
Richard Rogers Letterfrack letter (Summer 2008) http://www.indymedia.ie/article/94879
Adrian Searle Power to the people! (December 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/ dec/07/turner-prize-2015-assemble-win-by-ignoring-art-market
Cameron Sinclair Dezeen Interview (August 2015) http://www.dezeen.com/2015/08/27/cameron-sinclair-interview-architecture-for-humanity-small-works-disaster-relief/ Pete Jeffreys Non-starter Homes (Shelter Blog) (August 2015) http://blog.shelter.org.uk/2015/08/non-starterhomes/ Vicky Spratt Y:CUBE IS HERE. WOULD YOU LIVE IN IT? (September 2015) http://www.thedebrief.co.uk/news/real-life/ycubeis-here-20150952743 Simon Elmer The End of Social Housing (December 2015) https://architectsforsocialhousing.wordpress.com/
Granby Four Streets CLT What is a Community Land Trust? http://www.granby4streetsclt.co.uk/whats-a-clt/ Richard Rogers Cities for a small planet (1997) Westview Press Oliver Wainwright Return of the prefabs (2015) http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2015/sep/08/inside-richardrogers-ycube-homes-for-homeless-people Stephen Bayley Is Richard Rogers still a rebel? The Spectator
38
Oliver Wainwright Richard Rogers: the world as it could be (July 2013) http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/ jul/15/richard-rogers-architect-royal-academy Peter Buchanan Irritable Bowelism The Architectural Review Mark Wilding Rogers blasted by ex-partner over housing (December 2011) http://www.bdonline.co.uk/rogers-blasted-by-expartner-over-housing-scheme/5028743.article Oliver Wainwright Neo Bankside: how Richard Roger’s new ‘nondom accom’ cut out the poor (July 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2015/jul/21/neo-banksidehow-richard-rogers-new-non-dom-accom-cut-outthe-poor Nicholas Shaxson A tale of Two Londons (March 2015) http://www.vanityfair.com/style/society/2013/04/ mysterious-residents-one-hyde-park-london Magazine Riba Stirling Prize 2015: NEO Bankside (October 2015) http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34418481 Building Centre A New House for London (2015) http://www.buildingcentre.co.uk/exhibitions/anew-house-for-london
Alice Grahame ‘This isn’t at all like London’: life in Walter Segal’s self-build ‘anarchist’ estate (September 2015) http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/ sep/16/anarchism-community-walter-segal-self-build-south-london-estate Oliver Wainwright Richard Rogers: the world as it could be (2013) http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/ jul/15/richard-rogers-architect-royal-academy Alejandro Aravena It’s time to rethink the entire role and language of architecture (2015) http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/nov/20/ rethink-role-language-architecture-alejandro-aravena Alistair Parvin Architecture for the people by the people (2013) http://www.ted.com/talks/alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_people_by_the_people/transcript?language=en Archipreneur Social Archipreneurship http://www.archipreneur.com/social-archipreneurship-how-wikihouse-is-making-housing-affordable/ Peter Barber Thoughts on Housing Production Response to then Minister of Architecture, Building Design
Jessica Mairs BACA Architects floating home Dezeen (2015) http://www.dezeen.com/2015/09/18/baca-architects-floating-homes-ltd-amphibious-resolve-london-housing-crisis/ 39
Image Reference Front Cover Image (Map of London): https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=NB5Oz9b84jM / The London Evolution Animation (LEA) was developed by The Bartlett Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (UCL), as a partnership project between English Heritage, The Centre for Smart Infrastructure and Construction (University of Cambridge)/Dr Kiril Stanilov and Museum of London Archaeology (MOLA) (with the Mapping London and Locating London’s Past projects), and was initiated and directed by Polly Hudson (PHD). / Back Cover Image (RR Watch): http://www. theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/jul/15/richard-rogers-architect-royal-academy Fig.1 (Mustafa Hulusi Roses) : http://www.mustafahulusi.com/abstract-roses.html
Fig. 10 (Granby Furnishing): http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/nov/27/liverpool-locals-took-control-long-neglected-streets#img-4 Fig. 11 (Y: Cube Sketch) : http://www.rsh-p.com/ projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702 Fig. 12 (1:200 3d printed model) : http://www. rsh-p.com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_ N8702 Fig. 13 (Site plan) : http://www.rsh-p.com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702 Fig. 14 (Concept Street Elevation) : http://www. rsh-p.com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_ N8702
Fig. 2 (Annual Housing requirement) : NLA Insight Study, p.12
Fig. 15 (1:25 single unit layout model) : http://www.rsh-p.com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702
Fig. 3 (Trend in Household Tenures) : NLA Insight Study, p.10
Fig. 16 (Section) : http://www.rsh-p.com/projects/ gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702
Fig. 4 (Housing Bill) : https://architectsforsocialhousing.files.wordpress.com/2015/12/housingand-planning-bill.jpg?w=702
Fig. 17 (Cube loading) : http://www.rsh-p.com/ projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702
Fig. 5 (EP Development): http://www.theguardian. com/cities/2015/jun/25/london-developers-viability-planning-affordable-social-housing-regeneration-oliver-wainwright Fig. 6 (ARC Poster): http://www.architectural-review.com/today/architectural-association-archives/8617213.fullarticle Fig. 7 (Granby Interior Prototype): http://www. theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/dec/07/ turner-prize-2015-assemble-win-by-ignoring-artmarket#img-2 Fig. 8 (Winter Garden): http://www.theguardian. com/artanddesign/2014/nov/27/liverpool-locals-took-control-long-neglected-streets#img-2 Fig. 9 (Team Assemble) : http://www.theguardian. com/artanddesign/2015/dec/07/turner-prize2015-assemble-win-by-ignoring-art-market#img-1
Fig. 18 (View from Woodstock Way) : http://www. rsh-p.com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_ N8702 Fig. 19 (Cubes lifted by crane) : http://www.rsh-p. com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702 Fig. 20 (Assembly of Y: Cube) : http://www.rsh-p. com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702 Fig. 21 (Studio space. Photograph by Martin Godwin) : http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2015/sep/08/ inside-richard-rogers-ycube-homes-for-homelesspeople#img-5 Fig. 22 (Third Storey cubes with solar panels) : http://www.rsh-p.com/projects/gallery/?i=1111&p=10260_N8702
40
Fig. 23 (Views) : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ magazine-34418481 Fig. 24 (Courtyard) : http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/ magazine-34418481 Fig. 25 (Sun Path Diagram) : http://www.bbc. co.uk/news/magazine-34418481 Fig. 26 (Axonometric) : http://www.bbc.co.uk/ news/magazine-34418481 Fig. 27 (Neo-Bakside) : http://static.guim.co.uk/ sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2015/7/21/143 7474249589/77a60910-01cf-426f-a1b3-32b0f9f6e7c3-2060x1236.jpeg Fig. 28 (Ladywell / PLACE popular requests ) : http://www.place-ladywell.co.uk/ thank-you-from-placeladywell/ Fig. 29 (Community opinions) : http://www. place-ladywell.co.uk/thank-you-from-placeladywell/ Fig. 30 (Toy making workshop) : https://www. facebook.com/PlaceLadywellSE13/photos/ Fig. 31 (NLA Exhibition) : Personal Photograph Fig. 32 (Public Comments) : Personal Photograph Fig. 33 (London Scale Model) : Personal Photograph
Fig. 38 (Regeneration concepts) : http://newlondonarchitecture.org/programme/exhibitions/2016/ new-ideas-for-housing... Fig. 39 (Large New London Model) : Personal Photograph Fig. 40 (Mapping housing struggles) : https:// mappinglondonshousingstruggles.files.wordpress. com/2013/03/london-housing-struggles-map_ dec-2014_low-res.pdf Fig. 41 (Developer territory) : https-//mappinglondonshousingstruggles.files.wordpress. com/2014/12/a1_map-developer_low-res_1.jpg Fig. 42 (Concrete action website) : www.concreteaction.net Fig. 43 (Meanwhile Space / Ladywell PLACE) : http://media.meanwhilespace.com/media/images/ ladywell2_jpg_1280x800_crop_q85.jpg Fig. 44 (Walters Way) : https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=0JbqJNAUOR8 Fig. 45 (Aerial view) : https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=0JbqJNAUOR8 Fig. 46 (Construction) : https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=0JbqJNAUOR8
Fig. 34 (Building Centre) : Personal Photograph
Fig. 47 (Family Home) : http://www.theguardian. com/cities/2015/sep/16/anarchism-community-walter-segal-self-build-south-london-estate
Fig. 35 (Borough Plans) : http://newlondonarchitecture.org/programme/exhibitions/2016/new-ideas-for-housing...
Fig. 48 (Street) : http://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/sep/16/anarchism-community-walter-segal-self-build-south-london-estate
Fig. 36 (BACA Floating Home) : http://www. dezeen.com/2015/09/18/baca-architects-floating-homes-ltd-amphibious-resolve-london-housing-crisis/
Fig. 49 (Community build) : http://www.theruss. org/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/walterswayselfbuild4.jpg
Fig. 37 (Carl Turner Shipping Container Home) : http://www.buildingcentre.co.uk/exhibitions/anew-house-for-london
Fig. 50 (Interior) : https://www.pinterest.com/ pin/448952656582334681/
41
Fig. 51(WikiHouse) : https://www.ted.com/talks/ alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_people_by_ the_people?language=en
Fig. 64 (SOL_ID Exterior) : https://www.flickr.com/ photos/132872091@N02/23937002862/in/album-72157662874573002/
Fig. 52 (Inequality Graph) : https://www.ted.com/ talks/alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_people_by_the_people?language=en
Fig. 65 (Solar House Interior) : https://www.flickr. com/photos/132872091@N02/24018733656/in/ album-72157662874573002/
Fig.53 (Virtual 3D House) : https://www.ted.com/ talks/alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_people_by_the_people?language=en
Fig. 66 (Graffiti Wall) : https://www.flickr.com/ photos/132872091@N02/23674411354/in/album-72157661061548134/
Fig. 54 (Cut Plwood components) : https://www. ted.com/talks/alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_ people_by_the_people?language=en
Fig. 67 (Community Interaction) : https://www.flickr. com/photos/132872091@N02/23935704980/in/ album-72157663289114575/
Fig. 55 (Assembly) : https://www.ted.com/talks/ alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_people_by_ the_people?language=en
Fig. 68 (School dance) : https://www.flickr.com/ photos/132872091@N02/24231300755/in/album-72157663289114575/
Fig. 56 (Nearing completion) : https://www.ted. com/talks/alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_ people_by_the_people?language=en
Fig. 69 (Tour visit) : https://www.flickr.com/ photos/132872091@N02/23935250792/in/album-72157662874573002/
Fig. 57 (In progress) : https://www.ted.com/talks/ alastair_parvin_architecture_for_the_people_by_ the_people?language=en
Fig. 70 (Banksy Calais Mural) : http://www.widewalls.ch/banksy-steve-jobs-calais/ All images courtesy of banksy.co.uk
Fig. 58 (Disaster relief architecture) :http://spacecraft.co.nz
Fig. 71 (‘The Jungle’ Refugee camp) : http://www. telegraph.co.uk/men/the-filter/11801006/Insidethe-Calais-Jungle-where-men-live-in-solidarityand-shame.html
Fig. 59 (WikiHouse 4.0 build) : http://www. ttjonline.com/news/wikihouse-makes-smartchoice-4371680/image/wikihouse-makes-smartchoice-4371680-458851.html Fig. 60 (Prototype) : http://www.archipreneur.com/ social-archipreneurship-how-wikihouse-is-making-housing-affordable/ Fig. 61 (Paperhouses open-souce architecture) : http://paperhouses.co Fig. 62 (Modular House) : http://paperhouses.co/ house/the-folk-house/
Fig. 72 (Temporary shelter) : http://futurebrixton. org/somerleyton/somerleyton-road-plans-in/ Fig. 73 (Y-Cube Model at NLA Exhibition) : Personal Photograph Fig. 74 (Leadenhall entrance) : Personal Photograph Fig. 75 (Lobby outside RSH+P) : Personal Photograph Fig. 76 (Leadenhall exterior) : Personal Photograph
Fig. 63 (Free design) : http://paperhouses.co/ house/the-module-house/
Fig. 77 (Neo-Bankside) : Personal Photograph 42
Fig. 78 (London Panoramic) : Personal Photograph Fig. 79 (Somerleyton Road Project) : http:// futurebrixton.org/somerleyton/somerleyton-road-plans-in/ Fig. 80 (Soundings idea bubbles) : http:// www.soundingsoffice.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/idea_bubbles.jpg Fig. 81 (Stages and Cash flow) : Diagram from prospectus Fig. 82 (Roles and relationships) : Diagram from prospectus Fig. 83 (Business model) : Diagram from prospectus Fig. 84 (Commercial principles) : Diagram from prospectus Fig. 85 (Exterior) : Personal Photograph Fig. 86 (Circulation) : Personal Photograph Fig. 87 (Balcony terrace) : Personal Photograph Fig. 88 (Interior) : Personal Photograph
43
Humankind’s capacity to transmit accumulated knowledge from generation to generation, to anticipate and to solve problems, has been it’s greatest asset. - Richard Rogers
44