While there can be no doubting the need for social housing, the architecture used in the projects can help add to the stigma surrounding these projects and leading to the ongoing reputation of such developments as being cheaply and poorly-made.
With the new ’18 VPO’ development in Spain, architecture firm Bailo + Rull is attempting to do away with some of the negative perceptions that tend to plague social housing projects. Built in Eugenia de Bega, Spain, 18 VPO consists of 18 apartment units built in a linear form.
The development features many features that are often overlooked when architects fail to take the proper care when designing a site. For instance, Bailo + Rull have used solar orientation techniques to help maximize the positive effects of the sun by allowing a great deal of exposure to natural light while preventing units from overheating through solar gain from the Spanish sun. The building’s orientation also maximizes residents’ exposure to the outside world.
Despite this, the building still bears a ‘social housing’ aesthetic, with design features bordering on minimalism. The units are extremely similar in design and includes perforated aluminum handrails and exposed, unpolished concrete, two hallmarks of low-income housing projects.
While the architects have taken pains to add splashes of colour outside, it does not appear overly inviting, another feature common to social housing.
Of course, architects and developers working on social housing projects often find themselves with their hands tied. Issues associated with tight timelines are commonly dwarfed by problems created by even tighter budgets. It is also often demanded that apartment units be as standardized and similar as possible. The problems endemic to social housing buildings can rarely be laid at the feet of those who undertake the projects.
However, there is little question that an aesthetic that screams ‘social housing’ does little to help alleviate the stigma surrounding these structures. That stigma can even perpetuate negative cycles by fostering a lack of community pride among residents. This lack of pride is only magnified if the buildings are not properly maintained and fall into disrepair.
Once again, a lack of funding can add greatly to this problem, as there is often too little money to go around to ensure necessary upkeep.
Couple those factors with the low incomes of social housing residents and the associated social factors, such as crime, to which those social factors can contribute, and the cycle of stigmatization can be exceptionally difficult to break.
Newer developments are sensitive to many of these problems, with Toronto’s ongoing Regent Park redevelopment building mixed neighbourhoods with market value condos and townhouses to go along with social housing apartments. Australia’s PIF House is another such example, with low-income housing spread out into different suburbs instead of clustered together.
The stigma and social issues surrounding social housing run deep and obviously cannot be solved through architecture and design. Delving deeper into the ways in which social housing is designed and operated, however, can help architects take steps to break down those barriers and become positive forces rather than contributing to the problem.
