"You might see a few zombies walking up and down the street, but now you only see a few of them," said Williams, who lived in the Dearborn Homes as a child and later returned. "Now, you see people walking dogs and jogging."
Interesting look at a revival of some midrise public housing in Chicago through traditional architectural detailing. The buildings still look odd to me though. I really miss the 2 miles of 20 story slab towers with the chainlink fence balconies - I thought those were cool to look at - just not live in. Maybe the park like setting and lower density of these homes will be more successful.
yeah, I'm not crazy about the aesthetics of the renovation, but certainly better than before. They've been doing similar rehabs to various housing projects in the Boston area for a few years, and even when it's pastiche, it seems better than what they began with, and a good-faith attempt to make these projects a more inviting place to live.
There's a few jokes I heard from a planning professor once that address this idea:
Q: What's the difference between a ghetto and a European flat?
A: Crown molding!
Q: What's the difference between Queens and Brooklyn?
A: Three coats of paint.
Q: How do you get someone to spend 500 grand on a concrete box in a malaria swamp?
A: Paint it lime green, put a few plastic flamingos in the front yard and call it "Miami."
Q: What's the difference between an old inner-ring suburb and an inner-city ghetto?
A: Lawn statues.
But what most of these jokes hit at is facade work-- however phony and out of place it is-- makes or breaks neighborhoods. It maybe far from real architecture or the architecture they teach in schools... but a little molding, some fresh paint and few flower pots can be a pretty dramatic change for a neighborhood.
This is kind of the reason why I absolutely hate people who use the word "gentrification" because there is absolutely nothing "gentrified" about a little property maintenance. Anyone who demonizes a little facade work and a few fresh coats of paint in terms of "changing a neighborhood's character" loses any credibility on the subject.
There is a lot of research done on this in the planning side that this actually works. It may not be contemporary architecture or something from GSD-- but the phony neighborhoods of yesterday are the historic districts of today.
per hillandrock's comment: this 1982 article talks mostly about the "benefits" of police foot patrol, but touches upon the relationship between perceived social order and property upkeep.
There's a great story about leaving abandoned cars in the bronx and palo alto and what happens to them.
anyway, hillandrock is right - while we all keep lamenting this facade decoration as kitschy superficiality, it actually increases the perception of social order and safety.
I did some Stimulus Package work recently for the local housing authority. We added vinyl siding (with insulation beneath) and gabled or hipped roofs to the old post WWII bunker type projects. Also added a new coat of paint, repointed the bricks, added new windows. It's a generic suburb look, but it does look much much better, and I hate vinyl siding (In some ways it looks better than the generic suburb look because at least it has real brick and not just vinyl). These are really low income housing units. Like, we're talking, they get your paycheck to take the rent to make sure you pay. We're talking crazy funeral processions with gangstas in all black (but the MLB hologram sticker is still on the hat) because someone got shot (that's another story).
I think they look pretty decent. I wish I had a before photo to show you, but they were pretty Dachau looking. No joke. The work was done #1 to improve the structural issues with the aging brick and improve the look #2 add insulation, new windows and roofs, all of which should improve energy use.
I think the real issue is the lack of ownership. These places look so much better. They look like homes rather than people holders. But no one owns their place, so they don't care. I see trash everywhere, people spray paint the renovated buildings, leave dirty diapers in the shared yards. And it sucks. As I was surveying the brickwork, there were people that were so happy that the renovations were going to begin and then others go and ruin it. Really kind of pissed me off while I was doing that work.
Jun 12, 09 9:58 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Public Housing Face Lift
"You might see a few zombies walking up and down the street, but now you only see a few of them," said Williams, who lived in the Dearborn Homes as a child and later returned. "Now, you see people walking dogs and jogging."
Interesting look at a revival of some midrise public housing in Chicago through traditional architectural detailing. The buildings still look odd to me though. I really miss the 2 miles of 20 story slab towers with the chainlink fence balconies - I thought those were cool to look at - just not live in. Maybe the park like setting and lower density of these homes will be more successful.
trib
yeah, I'm not crazy about the aesthetics of the renovation, but certainly better than before. They've been doing similar rehabs to various housing projects in the Boston area for a few years, and even when it's pastiche, it seems better than what they began with, and a good-faith attempt to make these projects a more inviting place to live.
There's a few jokes I heard from a planning professor once that address this idea:
Q: What's the difference between a ghetto and a European flat?
A: Crown molding!
Q: What's the difference between Queens and Brooklyn?
A: Three coats of paint.
Q: How do you get someone to spend 500 grand on a concrete box in a malaria swamp?
A: Paint it lime green, put a few plastic flamingos in the front yard and call it "Miami."
Q: What's the difference between an old inner-ring suburb and an inner-city ghetto?
A: Lawn statues.
But what most of these jokes hit at is facade work-- however phony and out of place it is-- makes or breaks neighborhoods. It maybe far from real architecture or the architecture they teach in schools... but a little molding, some fresh paint and few flower pots can be a pretty dramatic change for a neighborhood.
This is kind of the reason why I absolutely hate people who use the word "gentrification" because there is absolutely nothing "gentrified" about a little property maintenance. Anyone who demonizes a little facade work and a few fresh coats of paint in terms of "changing a neighborhood's character" loses any credibility on the subject.
There is a lot of research done on this in the planning side that this actually works. It may not be contemporary architecture or something from GSD-- but the phony neighborhoods of yesterday are the historic districts of today.
Like Paris. That place is kind of phony.
horrible. we are all middle class.
per hillandrock's comment: this 1982 article talks mostly about the "benefits" of police foot patrol, but touches upon the relationship between perceived social order and property upkeep.
broken windows
There's a great story about leaving abandoned cars in the bronx and palo alto and what happens to them.
anyway, hillandrock is right - while we all keep lamenting this facade decoration as kitschy superficiality, it actually increases the perception of social order and safety.
look at the responses to that article...makes me sick
I did some Stimulus Package work recently for the local housing authority. We added vinyl siding (with insulation beneath) and gabled or hipped roofs to the old post WWII bunker type projects. Also added a new coat of paint, repointed the bricks, added new windows. It's a generic suburb look, but it does look much much better, and I hate vinyl siding (In some ways it looks better than the generic suburb look because at least it has real brick and not just vinyl). These are really low income housing units. Like, we're talking, they get your paycheck to take the rent to make sure you pay. We're talking crazy funeral processions with gangstas in all black (but the MLB hologram sticker is still on the hat) because someone got shot (that's another story).
http://www.kautterkelley.com/project_photos/large/Glenside%20Photo%201.jpg
I think they look pretty decent. I wish I had a before photo to show you, but they were pretty Dachau looking. No joke. The work was done #1 to improve the structural issues with the aging brick and improve the look #2 add insulation, new windows and roofs, all of which should improve energy use.
I think the real issue is the lack of ownership. These places look so much better. They look like homes rather than people holders. But no one owns their place, so they don't care. I see trash everywhere, people spray paint the renovated buildings, leave dirty diapers in the shared yards. And it sucks. As I was surveying the brickwork, there were people that were so happy that the renovations were going to begin and then others go and ruin it. Really kind of pissed me off while I was doing that work.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.