Hope VI: emerging examples of inner city New Urbanism

Early results are encouraging in HUD’s program to build more human-scale, pedestrian-oriented public housing. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which built high-rise, superblock style projects in the 1940s through 1960s, is now banking heavily on new urbanist designs in its 1990s recreation of public housing. The demolition of large-scale modernist public housing projects in recent years due to the $2.5 billion Hope VI program has been greeted with much approval. The new, more human-scaled projects that are planned and under construction are bound to perform better, partly because they will be better managed. Whether Hope VI can restore respectability to public housing remains to be seen. A list of 15 selected Hope VI pro-jects (page 4) shows that some well-known new urbanist designers are actively involved in HUD’s transformation. The projects are becoming test cases to evaluate neotraditional theories and development in many inner city settings. Two have been built, three are under construction, two are in groundbreaking and eight are still in planning. From an aesthetic and design standpoint, the early results are encouraging. Two types of projects The Hope VI projects examined fall under two broad categories. Many projects embrace basic elements of New Urbanism: nice streetscape, reestablishment of city street/block pattern and providing plenty of “eyes on the street” for public safety. Those are labeled urban infill. Some go farther, incorporating the finer points of urban design: town centers and squares, terminating vistas and a palette of housing types, civic and commercial “civic art.” Those can be called inner city TNDs, or traditional neighborhood developments. Of the 15 projects listed, 12 fall under the TND category. Projects like those in the “urban infill” category are rarely found outside of the inner city — probably because suburban projects are connected to no public realm at all. Even “hybrid” TND projects on greenfield sites usually contain public gathering places like a town center and neighborhood greens. In inner city areas, where some urban fabric remains, doing nothing but restoring a quality street network may be a logical approach in some cases. Be that as it may, committed new urbanists have a tendency to add more sophisticated design elements to a project, placing greater importance on creating a public realm. For example, CHK Associates included a six-sided village square in the 21-acre Pleasant View Gardens in Baltimore “because the community open space is important to the residents given the density of the site,” says Cheryl O’Neill, CHK’s urban designer for the project. “It was important to give the space a local quality. We didn’t want it on major public streets, so we put it on the interior of the site. Having houses front the square gave it needed spatial definition, and provided defensible space.” Therefore, the reasons for adding these elements are not formulaic, but pertain to specific project goals and sites, explains O’Neill. Sophisticated design elements cost money and may reduce the number of units that fit on a site. Therefore they may seem, to late 20th century sensibilities, extravagant in public housing projects — but no more extravagant than the ornaments on 70-year-old post offices. The more exciting Hope VI projects certainly go well beyond creating nice streetscapes in their efforts to make a beautiful public realm. Promoters of New Urbanism are betting that, in hindsight, HUD and the public will determine that the money and effort were well spent. Two projects are highlighted in this article, chosen partly because they are among a few on the list with significant completed construction. They also illustrate two types of Hope VI projects. Pleasant View Gardens One of the most ambitious projects to date opened in October, 1997, in Baltimore, Maryland. Pleasant View Gardens, with 228 townhomes and 110 apartments for the elderly, replaces the 577-unit Lafayette Courts high rise project torn down in 1995. The rebuilt project also has day care, recreation, community service and health clinic facilities. Designed by CHK Architects and Planners of Silver Spring, Maryland, Pleasant View Gardens reestablishes nice streets and public spaces, using the 19th century Baltimore townhome as the basic housing unit. The centerpiece of the project is a well proportioned central green, 240 feet from facade to facade in both directions. Beveled corners give the otherwise square space an interesting shape. A short avenue connects the green to the prominent entrance of a community building with support services, meeting rooms and project management offices. The design lends authority and visibility to project management — which is contracted out to a private firm. The streets feel good because of the proportions, building materials and architectural details. The standard street is 24 feet curb to curb (including a one foot gutter on both sides, making the street feel even narrower), with two-way traffic and parking on one side. Other streets are 18 feet and 32 feet. The wider streets have parking on both sides and “neck downs” at the corners to reduce pedestrian crossing distances. Sidewalks range from eight to 11 feet, with stoops protruding into sidewalk areas — just like typical Baltimore rowhouses. Generally streets are 45 to 50 feet facade to facade with the exception of Asquith, a wider existing thoroughfare that runs through the northern end of the project. The fronts and sides of the townhomes are brick. From the street, the townhomes appear to have the flat roof and cornice typical of the city. Invisible from the street is vinyl siding in the rear, and slightly sloped roofs. Overall, the streets feel just about right for pedestrians, with plenty of windows providing community surveillance to guard against crime. Other positive aspects of the project are the proximity of services, including an elementary school and a grocery store within about a three-minute walk. Pleasant View Gardens has some failings. The health clinic does not connect well to the street. The connection of the overall project to surrounding blocks is dubious — but that’s more due to the failings of the immediately adjacent streets. East Orleans Street, which forms the western edge of Pleasant View Gardens, feels particularly pedestrian unfriendly, although the project presents a welcoming elongated square on this side. To the south, the project completely turns its back on Colvin Street with its mail processing and warehouse buildings. Pleasant View Gardens is integrated best along Asquith Street and East Fayette Street, the latter fronted by a new recreation and day care center built nearly to the sidewalk. To say that Pleasant View Gardens is an improvement over its predecessor is an understatement. The previous bleak high-rises floating in a superblock probably contributed greatly to the demise of surrounding streets and blocks. Ten percent of the project’s new rowhomes are being sold to income-qualified buyers. These townhomes look identical to the public housing units, except that they have a basement; therefore they are raised up higher with six-step stoops, as opposed to the two or three steps in front of the public housing. The taller foundation improves their appearance significantly (although the public housing units do not look bad). The for-sale units are located on the edge of the project, providing a transition from the public housing interior to the surrounding blocks. Henry Horner Homes The Henry Horner Homes project in Chicago is one of the few where one can see public housing in transition, from the old philosophy to the new. The 19-building, 1,785-unit high-rise superblock complex is being torn down and replaced in stages. Five buildings have been demolished to date, and another six are slated for demolition. Whether the final eight will stand or be torn down is undecided. About 100 new homes now are built on smaller city blocks, and others are under construction. The Horner project is only one factor in a transformation which is raising property values in this once moribund Near West Side of the city. The United Center, a new arena for the Bulls and Blackhawks just two blocks to the south of Horner, is another factor in the resurgence. The appearance of the new Horner housing will not bring down of the value of homes being built and rehabilitated privately in the Near West Side. The Horner homes look very similar to, and sometimes better than, private residential housing in the neighborhood. “The first thing we tell architects is to design the homes to look like market rate housing and make sure they fit contextually in a neighborhood,” says Philip Hickman, senior vice president of the Habitat Company, selected to develop all new public housing for the Chicago Housing Authority. The Henry Horner homes were designed first through a concept plan by Calthorpe Associates. The basic street and block layout of that plan was preserved, but a central park, small neighborhood parks and carriage homes were eliminated in subsequent plans by Solomon Cordwell Buenz & Associates and Johnson & Lee. Traditional Chicago blocks have been reclaimed and the streets are being lined with nice-looking townhomes and one and two flat apartment buildings. Infill housing has been built on vacant lots in blocks near the demolished high-rises. The streets will become the primary public places in the new Horner Homes — just like in traditional Chicago neighborhoods. A strong emphasis is placed on “defensible space.” Unlike the high-rise buildings, the new Horner Homes have no hallways, and every unit has its own street entrance. The scale of the buildings and their proximity to the street helps to maintain community surveillance. Yards are separated with unobtrusive fences. The aesthetics of the Horner redesign was taken very seriously for social reasons, according to Hickman. The goal is to create a mixed income neighborhood, to encourage working class culture and values. Fifty percent of the units will be reserved for households earning 50 to 80 percent of the median income of the area ($25,000 to $42,000 for a family of four). The rest will be typical public housing residents, who earn an average of 10 percent of the area income. “It must be an attractive environment to attract working class people, who have other housing options,” says Hickman.