Goal 3-Quality

Good architectural design and thoughtful site planning are being increasingly recognized as necessary components of effective urban renewal. Slum clearance often means the destruction of structures which, although inadequate in terms of liv ing conditions, are part of an intricate pattern of community life, woven from many associations and tradi tions established by longtime resi dents, businesses, institutions. The renewal of this environment is a difficult and sensitive task that calls for the full imagination and resources of urban planners and architects, as well as articulate expressions of citizen preference. Low-income housing is a part of this picture. Its architecture and design must be related to the neighborhood setting; it must fit into the total environment.

In addition, if structure, space, and amenities are to be integral parts of an effort to assist low-income families in improving family life and social behavior, there must be new thinking in terms of structure type, architectural layout, and facilities. Housing for elderly persons must create a sense of security and attachment; housing for families must provide the kind of space, both inside and outside the home, that can accommodate the normal work and play activities of a healthy family. Another area for review in terms of architecture and design for low-income housing is the way in which such environmental factors are related to efforts of a low-income family to improve its total status, including advancement in employment, education, and health.

The past approach to architectural quality in public housing, has in large measure, stemmed from the words of the 1937 Housing Act that such housing should be..

"under

taken in such a manner that it will not be elaborate or of extravagant design or materials, and economy will be promoted both in construction and in administration." The imple mentation of this philosophy in prac tice has resulted in public housing design that, in most cases, is not imaginative or fitted to the needs of either the low-income tenant or to the neighborhood in which the housing is located. This generalization holds true despite the occasional bright examples of good architecture that are sometimes cited to disprove the poor design charge.

The relationship of good design to improved urban life was expressed by Dr. Joseph Laycock, executive director of the Welfare Council of Ottawa, Canada at the May 1963 meeting of the International Chapter of NAHRO:

"Too often in the past public hous ing developments have been drab and unimaginative, reflecting cheapness, as if we did not expect too much from the people living in them. Somehow, even when we proclaim respect for public housing tenants as people, we do not show clear evidence of that respect. There is no reason why public housing developments cannot be as well planned, constructed, and maintained as other housing. There is every reason why they should be even better planned and maintained; why they should reflect a sense of civic pride, just as much as a city hall, or a good school, or a new hospital, or a library. We do not plan hospitals today for rich and poor, or schools for economic classes, at least not from tax dollars.

"We all benefit from good housing -it is a civic matter, not an individ ual matter. It makes no sense at all to have children go to good schools,

good libraries, new churches, well staffed hospitals when they are ill, if we do not set minimum standards for the housing in which they liveif, through poor neighborhood planning and services, we fail to sustain and encourage within the confines of the immediate physical environment some enlargement of the spirit, some

1960

"The endeavor of the architects has been to design an environment for mass housing that reduces the scale to that of the individual. Intimacy of outside space has been created for the family and the child, not for grandiosity of the project."

That's how architects Hardison and Komatsu characterize their design for the public housing project in Rodeo, California, that is being built by the Contra Costa County Housing Authority. The site, which was formerly the location of a temporary war housing project, is a semi-circle of small, rugged hills that climb up from a flat basin. Individuality is the keynote for each of the 61 oneand two-story apartment buildings. In addition, landscape architects Eckbo, Dean, and Williams have retained the natural beauties of the site through use of on-site rocks and boulders as landscaping elements and through emphasis of grey sandstone bluffs that serve as dramatic, natural backdrops to curving drives and walkways, lawns, and planting

areas.

sense of real identification and belonging."

In June 1963, August Heckscher, Special Consultant on the Arts to the President of the United States, submitted a report on The Arts and the National Government. This report establishes the framework of what Mr. Heckscher would like to see as a national policy on "the progress of the arts as they affect the well-being, happiness and personal fullfillment of the citizens of the American democracy." A significant section of this report deals with the architecture of public buildings and pub. licly-assisted development. Following is part of the reference to the public housing program:

even

"Public housing is an area in which the federal government has greater and more direct responsibility and opportunity. Unfortunately, pub. lic housing has too often been the victim of indifference, suspicion, and even hostility on the part of officials and politicians, private builders, the general public, and even the architectural profession...

"The criteria (in the Housing Act) have often been unnecessarily interpreted to mean that public housing units under the law cannot be well and imaginatively designed and that essential services and amenities cannot be provided.

"The Public Housing Administration should be encouraged and supported in its new efforts to improve the design of public housing and to make its projects more responsive to the needs of its tenants."

While not in the public housing section of this report, there is some pertinent language in it on the subject of economy and design quality:

"A basic assumption of this report is that good design is not an added embellishment or an unnecessary extravagance. In fact, the position is taken that good design is economical

Basically, there is a need for the formulation of a policy that supports the case for the thoughtful design of housing that is suited to the lowincome family and that is intended to be a community asset. To set such a policy means that we must move away from the concept of housing quality oriented solely to reaching the lowest possible construction cost. We must place more emphasis on long-term program objectives and

EASTON, PENNSYLVANIA PROJECT WINS AWARD FOR "OUTSTANDING" ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN

Easton, Pennsylvania architect Hugh Moore, Jr. designed the 57unit North Union Street public housing project pictured for the Easton Housing Authority and walked off with a 1962 honor award from the Pennsylvania Society of Architects for his "refreshing departure in mass housing and... the airy, delicate, and domestic character" of his design. At dedication ceremonies for the project, in July 1962, Mr. Moore shared speaking honors with Public Housing Administration Commissioner Marie C. McGuire and took the opportunity to "express to her the thanks of the architectural profession for her elimination of virtually all of the mandatory requirements' and her introduction of a new era in public housing of the 'unshackled architect' that would permit us to design developments like the North Union Street project."

The project is built on 2.5 acres of Title I land that were acquired and cleared by the Easton Redevelopment Authority. Under the eagle eye of Mr. Moore, demolition and clearance crews kept their hands and bulldozers off of ancient stone retaining walls and old trees that dotted the site. "Every survey, all specifications, and demolition contracts were carefully watched to preserve the natural features," says Mr. Moore. The final design incorporated the old landmarks into the project and this factor, according to the awards jury, served as "the key to the architectural solution."

Because of the steep slope, near-grade access to all units was made possible; of the 57 units, 24 are of three- and four-bedroom size and are located in two-story duplexes; the remaining 33 units, of one- and two-bedroom make-up, are in three four-story "gallerytype" buildings. Project costs worked out to a few dollars over $700,000, exclusive of land costs.

Metal sculpture that adorns one wall of the project is the design of architect Moore's young son, Jason; struck by the "impact of this combination of youth and age," Mr. Moore had it installed on the end wall of one of the gallery units of the project where, fittingly, occupancy is almost evenly split between the elderly and young

families.

on value received for money expended.

Recommendation 3(a)

This recommendation calls for an amendment to the 1937 housing act that will express the importance of good architecture and site planning for all publicly-assisted housing. Specifically, it is not proposed that the amendment ask for the elimination of the present statutory language on extravagant design and materials for public housing. Rather, what is suggested is a supplementing of this language with a broader statement that cites the importance of good design in achieving the purposes of the low-income housing program, thus giving formal recognition to the role that a well planned physical environ ment can play in alleviating some of the social and economic problems of the low-income family. Such a statement of relationship between housing quality and low-income housing goals could provide the statutory framework within which more flexible administrative determinations might be made on planning, construction, and development costs.

Recommendation 3(b) Construction cost limits written into the national housing act make it difficult to carry out the establishment of the realistic policy on lowincome housing quality called for in recommendation 3(a). For this reason, NAHRO asks for the elimination of the present construction cost limits in the housing act. It has been recog nized for some time that national cost limits (even with supplements for high cost areas) cannot adequately reflect regional differences in construction cost levels. The result is that construction cost limits may be generous in one area and restrictive in another, with the end product uneveness in housing quality. Of equal importance, construction costs within the low-income program are not adequately geared to the housing needs of different types of low-income families; the housing needs and construction costs for large-family housing may be quite different from those of housing for the elderly individual. There are many areas that require thorough examination in terms of the kinds of design and construction cost standards that are most appropriate and meaningful for specific functions, climates, and economic circumstances. Such an approach is bound to be much more rewarding and significant than the present national cost limitation formula.

as

The social unrest that characterizes most of America's large urban centers is deeply interwoven with attempts to carry out physical renewal and to provide low-income families with the opportunity to improve their status. Over the past 14 years, since the inauguration of the urban renewal program in the Housing Act of 1949, much has been learned about the relationship of physical and social renewal. Initially, the renewal effort was conceived almost entirely physical renewal-a so-called brickand-mortar operation. Hard expe rience has taught that, as blighted areas are erased, much of the social fabric of the neighborhood is also lost. Renewal clearance has turned up for public view many families living in urban core areas who are existing on the verge of poverty and with all types of handicaps. In the renewal program, the economics of urban land use have more often than not dictated the displacement of lowincome families and the rebuilding of the cleared area for business and luxury housing, with little opportunity available to replace, or basically improve, either the physical, social, or economic values of the families displaced. These and many other deprivations of the low-income family -have come to a head in the 1960's -and have created a national demand for more adequate attention to the needs of these families.

The public housing program has been under way about twice as long as the urban renewal effort. Over the period of its experience, it has clung stubbornly to the concept that good housing and social goals for low-income families were somehow related. The program has had its ups and downs in the ways in which these two objectives were joined. But there has been some valuable experience gained in joint housing and social welfare programs. Renewal officials, who in the 1950's were eager to measure the distance and difference between the urban renewal and the public housing programs, are turning with new interest and respect to the experience public housing agencies have had in the working with low-income families.

Moreover, the recent exposure of the total community to the needs of low-income families with respect to education, employment, social guid. ance, and health has cleared public

housing of the irresponsible charge that it had somehow "created" problem families. The public housing program is now free to participate in a total community effort toward improving the lot of deprived families and it brings to this total effort a rich background of dedication and know-how.

One of the important lessons learned through public housing experience over the past 25 years is that good housing, by itself, will not

enable most families to solve all of their other economic and social difficulties. This is not to discredit the contribution that good housing can make in the total effort of a family

Most of the larger housing authorities in the nation now have at least one trained social service person on their staffs, with the task of identify ing the social services needed by lowincome housing tenants and of estab lishing a liaison with sources of assistance to bring such services to bear. A number of local housing authorities, in cooperation with local universities, are undertaking pioneering work in identifying social prob lems and matching social services for low-income families. Among the smaller housing agencies, executive directors and housing managers have become increasingly sensitive to social service needs and are actively

SOURCES OF HELP IN PROVIDING SOCIAL SERVICES State Department of Welfare

Example: Jersey City

Education on how to live in modern housing: that's what the Jersey City authority went after when it proposed that the home economics division of the state welfare department conduct classes in the community halls of the authority's public housing projects. Suggested "forum" subjects included housekeeping, nutrition, hy giene, family relationships, neighborhood relationships, how to shop for bargains. "Students" are from the some 550 families residing in the city's public housing who draw some form of welfare assistance; their attendance is voluntary.

The plan was proposed earlier this year by Jersey City tenant relations director Conrad J. Vuocolo; state officials picked up the idea early in June and classes were scheduled to begin during the summer. The set-up is informal, with experts in various aspects of homemaking, budgeting, and social relationships on hand to, as one local official says, "start with the basics and take it from there." In the case of Jersey City, the "basics" begin on the level of tenants whose problems include lack of such elementary knowledge as how to defrost a refrigerator. Where the experts will "take it," hopefully. is another step along the road to the ultimate goal of helping relief families become independent of public assistance.

to improve its status. It is simply to acknowledge that many families also need help in overcoming other handicaps. Among the low-income families served by the public housing program, there is a range of social service needs. Some families require a concentration of services; others need only limited assistance; still others can transform their good housing opportunity into meaningful im provement in their total status with out much additional help.

Local housing authorities, today, almost universally recognize their responsibility to assist low-income tenants procure needed social services.

seeking ways of bringing needed serv ices into housing. It is clear that a low-income housing program provides a significant opportunity to achieve maximum results in the ap plication of social services, because low-income families already have the advantage of good housing and of an interested housing management.

A significant action was taken in relation to social services and lowincome housing in the spring of 1962 when a joint task force was created between the Public Housing Administration and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The purpose of this task force effort is to

see how more of the services supported by HEW can be brought to public housing tenants. To date, task force activity has been focused in two directions. First, on the sponsorship of demonstration programs of "con. certed services" in three communities (St. Louis, New Haven, and Contra Costa County, California). The pur pose of these programs is to demon strate the value of massive social services being brought to bear on difficult areas of need. The second direction of the task force effort is to see how best the existing services of HEW (there are over 100 separate service programs operating through HEW) can be made available to public housing tenants through existing assistance channels. A brochure has been prepared describing the services available and relating them to the areas of social service need existing in public housing. Now efforts will be made to make housing authorities aware of services available.

One basic fact must be noted about the task force effort. To date, the thorny question has not been touched as to who will supply the funds for expanded social services. If the informational effort to acquaint local housing authorities of available HEW services should result in significant increased demand, the dilemma will be at hand. The question is whether demand for increased service can be handled through existing channels as expansions of HEW budget requests, or whether there is a financial obligation for social services that should be attached to the housing program. In a bill submitted to the Congress on August 9 of this year by Senator Joseph S. Clark (D), Pennsylvania, (The Community Development Act of 1963, S. 2031), there is a provision (Section 206) authorizing local housing authorities to undertake needed social services in relation to the low-income housing program, with reimbursement to come from the Public Housing Administration. However, there is a provision specify. ing that the costs PHA absorbs for such services shall be reimbursed under regulations established jointly by PHA and HEW and that such services shall be correlated with HEW programs. This provision of the new Clark bill may open up an avenue for meeting the financial problem, based on mutual agreements between local housing authorities, PHA, and HEW --and, of course, with the approval of the Congress.

Two other aspects of the task force

SOURCES OF HELP IN PROVIDING SOCIAL SERVICES Board of Education, Settlement House, Social Security Administration

Example: Philadelphia

In a program that has evolved through several stages over a 15 year period, the Philadelphia Housing Authority has worked with both the Board of Education and a neighborhood agency, the Friends Neighborhood Guild, to teach the basics of good housekeeping to low-income families living in public housing.

Originally, homemaking consultants were assigned to nine different communities within the city; given office space in a neighborhood public school; and, under the supervision of the staff of the public school's division of home economics and the school extension division, charged with the responsibility of helping when, where, and how they could to raise the level of homemaking practices of families who needed such help. Spark for the program was the request, 15 years back, from an active community council to the school system for help although it is pointed out that such help can be asked for by any community agency or by a family itself."

The program took a giant step forward when, in 1960, the housing authority turned to the neighborhood guild for additional help. This time, the set-up was more formal. The women were requested to attend once-a-week meetings for a period of 12 weeks and that period represented a time of grace: the families were on the brink of eviction due to impossible housekeeping habits; eviction was delayed for 90 days, during which this one last attempt to help the women bring their housekeeping habits up to satisfactory standards was to be made. The guild discussions covered "a vast range of housekeeping problems"; supplementing them visits to the women's homes during the rest of the week by a Board of Education homemaking consultant, who rolled up her sleeves and demonstrated such how-to-do-it's as taking a stove apart; washing walls; proper cleaning techniques and proper cleaning equipment. The success of the experi ment-none of the families involved were evicted after the threemonth program encouraged the neighborhood guild to apply for a research demonstration grant from the research division of the Social Security Administration of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. A $22.133 grant was made and, in June 1961, the guild got going, in cooperation with the University of Pennsylvania School of Social Work, on a two-year demonstration program, based on the pilot project with about-to-be-evicted families.

Much more comprehensive than the original program, the demonstration was, nonetheless, aimed at a group of the same kind of families: those about to be evicted because of poor housekeeping habits. Personal interviews with families, in their homes, preceded a series of group discussion sessions where emphasis was on such basics of good home care as proper organization of work; involving all family members in housekeeping chores; sound budgeting; maintenance of equipment in good repair. Additional elements of the program included home visits, to bring the word to fathers and teenagers who did not attend the regular meetings; family-night get-togethers; and demonstration visits, in the home, by homemaking consultants. At the end of the 90-day period, only four of 20 families had made no improvement in caring for their public housing homes and had to be evicted.

Still further steps are planned by the neighborhood guild: next year, according to present schedules, families involved in this year's demonstration program will be followed up to find out whether the intensive services actually "took" and the changed homemaking pat terns have held up.

More community agencies, says Mildred W. Guinessy, director of the guild's housekeeping staff, can, and should, be involved in meeting the problem of chronic poor housekeeping. The essential fact, she says, is that such agencies which have the ability and the knowhow to help--admit, as does the staff of the housing authority, that poor housekeeping is an important social problem.