What was learned from the proliferation of high-rise housing in the 1960's and 1970's was that: - it was cheap to system build, and capable of high densities - if the system build had flaws, they were replicated - if one floor had a problem, they all did, and if one building had problems, all its siblings would - maintenance and updating was difficult and expensive - it was difficult to control heating and ventilation in a large compartmentalised structure where thermal gain and loss through glass varied with time of day - fire hazard, fire doors and safe escape had to be very carefully managed. Of course, those structural issues were confidently regarded as manageable, and the economic case for high-rise density was as persuasive as it is now. But what really skewered high-rise was people: - Corbusier's ideas about 'streets in the sky' were idealised nonsense. Living in physical, social and psychological silos was damaging for people. This was the difference between battery and free-range living. People often felt, and were, physically trapped and isolated from street level life. - shared areas belonged to nobody, so nobody took care of them. They were the first things to be neglected if money was tight. They often became inescapable areas for ASB, hidden from the authorities who might have intervened at street level. Hence graffiti and proliferation of vandalism, urination, crime etc - security was impossible without a costly concierge service controlling admission 24/7; electronic doors are easily bypassed by waiting for a resident to enter or leave, or just pressing a few buttons until someone lets you in - people seldom got to know their neighbours, and old people in particular tended to become isolated. The 'street in the sky' contained few chance encounters and opportunities to begin friendships - it was impossible for parents to keep an eye on  children playing in shared areas or in the street, so mostly they were kept indoors. - numerous studies have showed increased stress, rates of physical and mental illness associated with living in high-rise apartments. There's another major one due out later this year. Some teachers claim they can reliably tell which kids have grown up above the 3rd or 4th floor by how they relate to others. - residents with problems such as ASB and drug use had a disproportionate negative effect on the wellbeing of everyone else, who felt trapped with them. (EG Trellick Tower became known as the Tower of Terror with very good reason, thanks to intimidation, muggings and burglaries. By the early 1980's a lot of the flats were empty because - even in the middle of dire housing shortage - nobody on the housing list could be persuaded to live there. I had friends who lived in a 27th floor hard-to-let. The flat was fine, but entering or leaving Trellick intact generally required vigilance, courage and luck. Because of all this, for the past 30 years nobody has built housing above the 5th floor, except for the use of the wealthy who can afford proper Fort Knox management, and overseas 'property as bullion' investment off plan. I have no idea why LBE has decided that none of these lessons apply to them. 'Affordability' is a flawed reason to build upwards and condemn new generations to the predictable consequences. The costs will come later, just as they did in the '60's and '70's.

Entire Thread

Topic	Date Posted	Posted By
West Ealing Tower Block	14/06/19 17:38:00	Roy Baker
Re:West Ealing Tower Block	15/06/19 13:49:00	Tony Sleep
Re:Re:West Ealing Tower Block	15/06/19 14:23:00	N V Brooks
Re:Re:Re:West Ealing Tower Block	18/06/19 02:49:00	Audrey Walton
Re:Re:Re:Re:West Ealing Tower Block	18/06/19 06:23:00	Philippa Bond
Re:West Ealing Tower Block	18/06/19 07:00:00	Philippa Bond
Re:Re:West Ealing Tower Block	18/06/19 08:56:00	Philip Coe
Re:Re:Re:West Ealing Tower Block	18/06/19 16:20:00	Audrey Walton
Re:Re:West Ealing Tower Block	18/06/19 11:52:00	Philippa Bond

Forum Home