Social Housing in Brasil (Podium renders)
-
tom,
you are right as far as those examples are concerned, but you are forgetting there has been much change in architecture since the 60s. no one in his or her right mind thinks any more about subsidized housing in terms of razing the existing to the ground and building towers to replace it. this kind of thinking has been dead since the 1980s, thanks to people like jane jacobs.
if you research the subject you will not find in the last 20 or 30 years more than a couple of examples of that kind of rootless "social housing" as opposed to hundreds of very good and livable examples everywhere.
-
I would also like to add that giving people individual houses, and a yard etc. although it sound nice, is also not necessarily the answer. This policy was followed by the Govt. of Canada in its dealings with the First Nations people. We went about supplying standard housing on the reserves.
Most of these are now mold infested nightmares.
I don't think there is one answer, as social context is so important.
-
Maybe you need to take an Architect's holiday here in Britain, where flats (okay maybe they are only 5 or 6 stories high) are still being raised from the ground from areas that needed redeveloping anyway! We haven't learnt yet, and we are a country that was supposed to have been one of the richest in the world.
Maybe it is ONLY Britain where we still have to endure this? FWIW, we do have such architectural luminaries such as Prince Charles. I wish Prince Charlie would take a very long running jump!
But, that still hasn't answered my original question about the space underneath between the stilts/pillars. Are these buildings intended for long-stay tenancies? I'm just trying to think of how anti-social it would be if someone was trying to start their car at say 4am in the morning, when you had to get up for work the following day. Are they sound proofed?
-
@dale said:
I would also like to add that giving people individual houses, and a yard etc. although it sound nice, is also not necessarily the answer. This policy was followed by the Govt. of Canada in its dealings with the First Nations people. We went about supplying standard housing on the reserves.
Most of these are now mold infested nightmares.
I don't think there is one answer, as social context is so important.Well of course, and this is probably another really good reason that social housing shouldn't necessarily be cheap or badly built either. You get mould because wood is either badly treated, or it is in contact with the floor, causing rising damp, and judging by that photo you have provided, that's hardly surprising!
-
@tfdesign said:
Well of course, and this is probably another really good reason that social housing shouldn't necessarily be cheap or badly built either.
you are absolutely right. I would even say that social housing must be well built as the people living there will have no money for costly maintenance.
-
Good piece of social housing Edson. Would like to see more renders.
I do not want to get into discussion as it is without point. I would just say: Saying that flats are bad is quite brave comment. Sayng that everybody likes living in the house with 2 cats in the yard is not true and also not possible.
-
I presume and hope that anythingthe govn't of Brazil will build will be better (cleaner/safer) than the squatter dwellings that are stacked miles high, just waiting for a Haiti-style-earthquake disaster to strike.
From what I saw in my time in Brazil and Haiti they are both equal in construction quality for most residential buildings. Brazil is FAR better than Haiti in quality of construction when professionally builtprojects are done! But most housing in Brazil and Haiti is built one clay block at a time by the dweller, with little understanding of proper construction techniques.I can't imagine the constraints you must be under with this project, Edson, but I wish it all success. I, too, hope that it will be well lit, and safe. This type of open ground concept has been done over and over and over, and I know you've done your research, so... I wish all the best.
-
I'm a big fan of Richard Rogers' social housing designs. These are a nice example;
http://news.architecture.sk/2007/10/145-inteligent-prefab-modules-houses-by.php
I'm slightly worried though about what some class as "sustainability", using cheaper, more readily available materials as a basis for "good design". You can't use cheap materials, because after 10 years, they need replacing. That's why we need mass production, so that well designed and built houses can be sustained. The German Huf Haus is a prefab design, but these are mostly bespoke, and don't use off the shelf components, making them very expensive to construct and erect. A well designed and mass-produced solution is what is really needed, and not a sticking plaster (which is often the case in Britain for eg, largely because of architectural idiots such as Prince Charles!).
-
@sepo said:
Saying that flats are bad is quite brave comment.
Well it's true. Flats are bad!
Do you want to live in a house where you can hear a car being revved up underneath, while someone else has loud sex above you? Would you like a garden for your children and would you like not to have to carry every single bag of shopping up the stairs one at a time? Of course you don't! Flat's are a bad invention!
In England we need to stop moaning about the environment (despite that 70% of land is actually owned by the aristocracy), and build on both brown and green sites. We have a really bad housing crisis in the UK, where few can get on the property ladder. Heck my brother-in-law cannot afford a house, and he and his wife are both solicitors!
-
@tfdesign said:
Well of course, and this is probably another really good reason that social housing shouldn't necessarily be cheap or badly built either. You get mould because wood is either badly treated, or it is in contact with the floor, causing rising damp, and judging by that photo you have provided, that's hardly surprising!
Well I could supply a never ending bunch of pictures, some of which would be of the same house that would be in a residential neighbourhood off reserve (sometimes only blocks away), same house design typical era 50's 60's houses in Canada. One in disrepair, one in fine shape.
Why. Social context perhaps, extreme poverty, lack of proper healthcare, poor education standards, etc. etc. etc.
The United Nations in all of their development projects, have recognized for quite a while, that in order to be successful, projects must adhere to Triple Bottom Line Accounting. Think of it as a three legged stool. One leg is Social, one leg environmental, and the third is financial. Cut one of the legs off and the stool can't stand.
If there is any element missing quite often, at least in Canadian Social housing, it is the recognition that housing alone is not the answer.
This is where I think there is potential in this design to allow residents to take the parking space in question, and adapt it to their needs. Quite different in my view from the government building, and the residents having no say in what the outcome is. -
tfdesign
@unknownuser said:As a Serbian, I'm rather shocked that you don't think this exists in our modern world, especially as your own country used to be part of the Soviet Union?
My country was never part of SSSR. Internet is a good thing. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070758/An example of contemporary social housing:http://www.flickr.com/photos/89707735@N00/36232682/ Showing this because there is a beautiful movie about this building somewhere on net. There are much more social housing examples.
-
@srx said:
An example of contemporary social housing:http://www.flickr.com/photos/89707735@N00/36232682/ Showing this because there is a beautiful movie about this building somewhere on net. There are much more social housing examples.
Sorry, but I think you are missing the point. I am not talking about beautiful buildings, I am talking about the practicalities of living in them.
Do you live in such a building?
-
"Well it's true. Flats are bad!"
You may repeat it million times but it will still not make it true.
-
An example of contemporary social housing:http://www.flickr.com/photos/89707735@N00/36232682/ Showing this because there is a beautiful movie about this building somewhere on net. There are much more social housing examples.
...not beautiful building, but beautiful movie about this design.
-
@sepo said:
"Well it's true. Flats are bad!"
You may repeat it million times but it will still not make it true.
Well instead of just laughing, why don't you make a case? So far you haven't made a case at all.
-
very nice input. what render engine did you use on this?
-
@srx said:
An example of contemporary social housing:http://www.flickr.com/photos/89707735@N00/36232682/ Showing this because there is a beautiful movie about this building somewhere on net. There are much more social housing examples.
...not beautiful building, but beautiful movie about this design.
I'll try and find it. But I still think you are making a case for beauty of design as opposed to practicality. I mean Le Corbusier made beautiful houses, but many had corridors that only the thinnest could live in, making them cramped and not very well designed.
-
@ckosio said:
very nice input. what render engine did you use on this?
I think it may be a good time to split this topic? Moderators?
-
This is rarely good series of movies about architecture.
And this is the one about Jean Nouvel social housing mentioned before: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Agdt4go7EUY&feature=related
And it is beautiful in a broader sense. -
Thanks
Advertisement