16 Houses: Owning a Home in the City: Fifth Ward Community Reinvestment Corporation 1998 - 2003

16 Houses

As coordinator of five organizations — DiverseWorks gallery, The Graham Foundation, The Cultural Arts Council of Houston, the Rice School of Architecture and the Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation (who served as client and builder) — I commissioned sixteen architects to design a house that could be

16 Houses, Owning a House in the City. project

built within the parameters of a new federal voucher program designed to bring lower income individuals into market rate housing. The exhibition was titled 16

project type

Houses: Owning a House in the City and it opened in Houston on November 6, 1998. At the local level, these houses served the constituency of Houston’s

project

Fifth Ward (a close-knit African American neighborhood with a median income of less than $10,000/year). More broadly, the projects showed the depth and diversity of ways in which a group of American architects, many represented in the book Slow Space, responded to the challenges of moving federal housing

Planning and Architecture

The Venice Bienalle; Glass House @ 2 Degrees. Columbia University GSAPP.

tion and ensuing publicity generated considerable excitement in both the Fifth Ward and at the universities, some of which was directed toward building.

2000 Venice Biennale, 7th International Architecture Exhibition, Glass House @ 2 Degrees.

Construction for seven of these houses, including my own Glass House @ 2, was funded under by the Local Initiative Support Corporation of New York, and

budget

subsidies away from collective housing and towards the market practices of budget, square footage, tight regulations, and community participation. The exhibi-

four are sold and about to enter construction. Two projects are completed at this date. This project is realizing a multi-faceted goal in which architecture simultaneously serves as a template for diverse formal explorations, a pragmatic tool for a grass-roots social organization, and a political instrument of analysis with national implications.

location

16 Houses

16 Houses is a multi faceted redevelopment project for Houston’s Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation. Part exhibition, part building program, part research project—and most importantly a collective work of architecture and planning, it is focused on the redevelopment of the Houston’s historic Fifth Ward. 16 Houses was founded in 1996 by Michael Bell as a study of the economics and design of the single family house and this housing types newly pivotal role in down payment voucher programs initiated at the federal level of United States housing policy. 16 Houses provided a new model of collaborative design between institutions that could respond with innovation and vigor to new federal initiatives in housing policy. The Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation, The Cultural Arts Council of Houston and Harris Counties, The Graham Foundation and most importantly DiverseWorks collaborated over a period of three years. Michael Bell of Columbia University and formerly of Rice University in Houston organized the exhibition with Mardie Oakes of the Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation.

Juried Awards 1999 The Architectural League of New York, Emerging Voices Award Grants / Funded Research 2000 The Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation, Houston (FWCRC). Project: The Venice Bienalle; Glass House @ 2 Degrees.

Bank United, Houston, Texas Project: 16 Houses, Owning a House in the City. Co-applicant: Michael Bell, Mardie Oakes, FWCRC 1997 Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts, Chicago. Project: 16 Houses, Owning a House in the City. Preliminary Research Exhibitions and Installations

Columbia University GSAPP. Project: The Venice Bienalle, travel grant.

2000 Venice Biennale, 7th International Architecture Exhibition, Glass House @ 2 Degrees.

The Local Initiatives Support Corporation, New York. Project: 16 Houses, Owning a House in the City.Co applicant: Mardie Oakes, Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation.

1998 DiverseWorks, Houston, 16 Houses: Owning a House in the City, group show includes Glass House @ 2 Degrees.

The University of Texas, Austin, 1999.

1998 DiverseWorks, Houston, Texas.

Project: 16 Houses, Owning a House in the City.

Books

Cultural Arts Council of Houston and Harris Counties. Project: 16 Houses, Owning a House in the City.

2003 Having Heard Mathematics, by Michael Bell New York: The Monacelli Press. In Press 2002 Owning a House in the City; by Michael Bell.

New York: The Monacelli Press. In Press

Published Design by Michael Bell 2002 Perspecta 33, Mining Autonomy, Yale School of Architecture Journal, Glass House @ 2˚.

Commentary on Glass House @ 2˚ by K. Michael Hays.

2001 House, American Houses for the New Century, by Cathy Lang Ho, Glass House @ 2˚. p.

5, 7.

2000 Venice Biennale 2000, 7th International Architecture Exhibition Catalog, Massimiliano Fuksas, Curator. Glass House @ 2˚; Sweet/Gannon Studio; Alsbrooks Residence, p. 50 – 53.

Art Lies, “16 Houses” by Stephen Fox. Number 21, Winter, 1999. p. 46.

SallyPort, Rice university, Spring, “This is Pure desire and love and Passion,” by David Kaplan, p.

34.

Architecture, “16 Houses: Owning a House in the City,” by Shaila Dewan, Jan. p. 47 - 53.

1998 Houston Press, “Home Despots,” by Shaila Dewan, November.

Architecture, August, (ref: 16 Houses).

Radio Appearances & Internet Web Sites Reviews and Articles on 16 Houses Praxis, “Modern Housing at the Millenium,” by Gwendolyn Wright, No. 3, Housing Tactics, p. 116 2000 Dwell, “7 Houses,” February, p 76 – 79.

Houston Press, “Not Your Standard Issue,” by Lisa Gray, 11/9/00.

1999 Interview by Rod Price, KPFA, Houston, Local National Public Radio segment, 16 Houses, Owning a House in the City

16 Houses

Architecture = Policy: Centripetal—Centrifugal

by Michael Bell

In 1996, the Clinton Administration’s plans to decen-

These initiatives operate at levels that are both prag-

16 Houses: Designing the Public’s Private House

tralize or de-concentrate the density of publicly

matic and demonstrative yet also deeply ideologi-

presents the work of architects and theoreticians

assisted housing in the United States were acceler-

cal—they couple fundamental urban paradigms of

who participated in a research project titled “16

ated by federal funding for housing vouchers. At the

density and centripetal force with issues of poverty

Houses: Owning a House in the City.” The primary

same time, the Quality Housing and Work

and the legislated management and deconstruction

goal was to examine the architectural implications

Responsibility Act of 1998 required public housing

of racial and ethnic territories. Between the years

of decentralization and dispersal, and also the

authorities to adopt strategies to diminish the con-

1996 and 2000 more than seventy thousand rental

degree to which such aims were to be accom-

centration of poverty in federally funded housing.

units of public housing were expected to be razed,

plished by market forces in housing production

Voucher assistance in home buying is intended to

and or converted in the United States as federal

and a more prominent role for the public/private

abet property ownership across a wide and lower

housing policy moved toward a reliance on

partnership model in low-income housing develop-

income spectrum of urban residents. The voucher

public/private partnerships to realize a larger share of

ment. Pragmatically 16 Houses is intended to

program provides a one-time down payment subsidy

federally sponsored low-income housing. In most

address the urgent need for inventive new housing

paid directly to the housing developer at the point of

cases these new housing developments have

for lower income constituencies.

sale—the voucher is in effect a down payment sup-

achieved the desired de-centralization by dispersing

plied for buyer.

former tenants and rental units into traditional singlefamily houses and low-rise housing blocks or combinations of condominiums and town houses within the broader urban landscape.

Theoretically 16 Houses addresses the issue of

The role of the federal government as a policy

The sixteen architects were asked to examine how

These sixteen architects had previously examined

decentralization within a range of spatial, econom-

organization and the government’s protection and

a Voucher House—a term that was assumed with-

the urban as well as the architectural fragmentation

ic, racial, and ultimately technical concerns. At its

endorsement of the market as a site of innovation

out a great deal of scrutiny by the architects during

that results from prototypical development

core, this work focuses on the role of architecture

set the stage for this examination of the potential of

the design process—could be expected to fulfill its

processes in market-rate houses and housing in

in the construction or mediation of a subject that

lower-income housing design. In this case study,

role in the construction of a renewed territory. The

the United States, and they had attempted to

has since the 1930’s been objectified within a

the single-family house is the end product of the

architects each directed practices that had already

moderate these pitfalls in private practice, often to

highly codified political history of housing form and

voucher program and also the evidence of inven-

carefully explored the relationship between archi-

great success. Yet most of these designers had

policy in the United States. The architects who

tion as a node or fragment of a larger political and

tecture and contemporary urbanism and in most

not directly addressed low-income housing or its

participated in 16 Houses were provided with a

urban agenda. The site of the work described here

cases they also teach in schools where urbanism

relation to territorial factors of race, income and

range of both practical and theoretical information

is the Fifth Ward in Houston, Texas. A neighbor-

and architecture merge around themes of subjec-

historic moments in federal legislation. The goal

that made the work specific to Houston and to the

hood on the northeast corner of the city’s down-

tivity and power. Though there are typically divi-

was to bring to this realm of development a

Fifth Ward. They were asked to respond within a

town that is predominantly African-American. The

sions between planning and architecture in many

renewed theory of architecture and urbanism and

set spatial and technical means that are very

Fifth Ward has the city’s lowest household income.

universities here the two fields by necessity inflect

also a critical theory of the city in relation to power

each other and at times fuse.1

and to territory.

directly architectural and often tectonic in nature.

They were also asked to respond to issues of subjectivity in regard to the negotiations and the power relations that exist in the construction of housing in the United States.

16 Houses

Exhibition/Research/Building Programs 1997—ongoing

Director/Founder Michael Bell Columbia University Graduate School of Archtecture, Planning and Preservation Formely of Rice University School of Architecture

Exhibition Design and Management Michael Bell, Curator

Construction Funding and Develpment

Funding for 16 Houses Michael Bell Fundraiser

Michael Bell and Mardie Oakes, Managers

Michael Bell and Kerry Whitehead, Installation Designers

Anna Mod, Construction Manager

The Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts

Partner Organizations

Kerry Whitehead, Steel fabrication and design

Emily Todd Executive Director, DiverseWorks Artspace, Houston (1995-99)

Gunar Hartmann, Logan Ray, Installation design team.

Mardie Oakes Project Manager (1995–2000), Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Agency, Houston,

Visual Arts Director

Jeff Balloutine Bank United, Vice President for Community Reinvestment

DiverseWorks Diane Barber

Rev. Clemons President, Board of Directors FWCRC

The Rice University School of Architecture, Houston

Farés El Dahdah Assistant Professor, Rice University

Bank United, Houston and private donors.

DiverseWorks ArtSpace, Houston Advisory Committee

Assistant Curators Mardie Oakes, Keith Krumweide Photographer “Fifth Ward” Deron Neblett

Aaron Betsky Director, Netherlands Architecture Institute

Stephen Fox Anchorage Foundation, Houston, Texas Robert Toliver Builder, Fifth Ward Resident Emily Todd Director, DiverseWorks

The Cultural Arts Council of Houston and Harris Counties The Local Initiatives Support Corporation, New York The Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation, Houston

16 Houses

3 Phases in Five Years

1995—98: Phase 1: Research Funding The Graham Foundation, Chicago

1998-99 Phase 2: Exhibition at DiverseWorks Funding DiverseWorks, Rice University, Bank United, The Graham Foundation, Cultural Arts Council of Houston and Harris Counties

2000-____ Phase 3: Houses Move Towards Construction

Left or Right? When the first public housing projects for Houston were proposed in 1938 by the newly formed Housing Authority of Houston there was immediate and strong reaction from home builders and savings and loan associations that accused the programs of being “unfair government competition with the free market.”

Today, 60 years later, at the outset of a new federal housing initiative that offers assistance to families to purchase a single-family home the debate has come full circle. Recent housing policies in the United States have, to an unprecedented degree, forgone the construction of collective rental housing types and focused government-housing initiatives in the open market of private developers and the single-family house.

In April of 1998 sixteen architects were invited to assemble teams to design a series of single family houses for the Fifth Ward Community Redevelopment Corporation in Houston, Texas. An exhibition of this work titled: 16 Houses opened in Houston on November 2, 1998 at DiverseWorks and it moved to the University of Texas at Austin in the spring of 1999. More than a thousand people crowding the gallery on the opening night. Over six hundred invitations to the opening of the exhibition were sent to Fifth Ward residents in addition to DiverseWorks mailing list of nine hundred guests. Two community events supported the exhibition: a noontime discussion with the designers was held for area students and a panel discussion held on December 12, 1998 invited guests from the community including Bank United Vice President for Community Reinvestment Jeff Balloutine. An advisory committee subsequently selected seven of the projects for construction and funding has been secured to build these houses from the Local Initiative Support Corporation of New York.

During the winter of 1999, Mardie Oakes and I sought support from the Local Initiative Support Corporation of New York to provide funding to the FWCRC to allow a selection of the original houses to move forward in construction. The generous funding prompted forming a committee to select six architectural teams that would each receive professional fees to complete a set of contract documents for their project. The committee actually selected seven projects, nominating the house by StudioWorks for special consideration. The seven architectural teams selected were: StudioWorks.

Keith Krumwiede, Lindy Roy, Morris Gutierrez Architects, William Williams, Carlos Jiménez Studio, and myself.

16 Houses: Designing the Public’s Private House presents the work of architects and theoreticians who participated in a research project titled “16 Houses: Owning a House in the City.” The primary goal was to examine the architectural implications of decentralization and dispersal, and also the degree to such aims were to be accomplished by market forces in housing production and a more prominent role for the public/private partnership model in lowincome housing development.

Funding

Local Initiative Support Corporation, New York.

The committee was composed of members of the Fifth Ward and the academic and/or architectural communities. Emily Todd, then Director of DiverseWorks, served as the chair of this committee that met at the DiverseWorks gallery for a one-time, closed-door session. The committee was comprised of: Reverend Harvey Clemons (President, Board of Directors FWCRC), Robert Toliver (Builder and Fifth Ward Resident), Stephen Fox, (Anchorage Foundation), Farés El Dahdah (Assistant Professor, Rice School of Architecture), Aaron Betsky (Director, Netherlands Architecture Institute), and Jeff Balloutine, (VP for Community Reinvestment, Bank United).

During the spring and summer of 2000 each of these teams worked with the FWCRC acting as contractor and developer to not only document the projects, but also to verify the affordability and practicality of constructing the houses. The funding from the Local Initiative Support Corporation provided each team with consulting fees and also funded the salary of a construction manager who joined the staff at the FWCRC. Mardie Oakes and myself acted as the liaison between the architects and the construction manager and also as the primary liaison between a collection of innovative sub-contractors such as Metalab of Houston.

We also worked with Bank United of Houston in establishing the eventual sales prices of the houses, but more importantly, the projected appraisals for a set of houses that had no economic or design precedent in the Fifth Ward. In most cases the projected appraisals were lower than the sales price, thus creating a deficit between the price of construction and the amount of funding available through mortgage financing. This situation is typical in low income or impoverished areas and, in the case of the FWCRC, it forced the agency to serve two roles: the role of developer was anticipated, but in many cases the FWCRC had begun to act as contractor. In both situations the FWCRC essentially removed profits from the construction process and attempted to deliver the project at a cost close or equal to its suppressed appraisal. Aggressive cost cutting techniques by the FWCRC would allow all seven of these houses to be built at reasonable costs, yet in each case the construction costs still exceeded the appraisal. The house by Carlos Jiménez came closest to balancing construction costs and appraisal. This was no doubt due to Jiménez’s experience in building lower costs houses in Houston.

a16 Houses If, after five years, the owner has neither sold or

As many as 70,000 units of existing rental public

The FWCRC: Fifth Ward residents, civic leaders,

sub-leased the property, the down payment is

housing will have been demolished by the year

business owners, ministers and educators organized

completely forgiven and the lien removed. The pro-

2000 to make way for new privately owned hous-

the Fifth Ward CRC in 1989. Its mission is to serve

gram provides down payment and closing costs

es and low rise housing. The 1998 Housing and

as a catalyst for rebuilding a healthy community

assistance and also offers courses in how to buy a

Urban Development budget includes funding for

through housing development, economic revitaliza-

house and how to maintain and manage credit.

100,000 new vouchers and in Houston alone

tion, safety and architectural innovation. Through

The revealing term of “improved bankability” is

there have been ambitious (though unrealized)

creative financing, Fifth Ward CRC has managed to

used to described the program’s educational goals

plans to distribute as many as thousands of down-

build in a community where investment is rare—they

and it gives rise to a critical investigation of the

payment vouchers.

have been able to open the door for architects to

program’s true value in providing representation to

The federal government’s plans for housing are as

return and actively participate in the critical problem

a largely invisible class of citizens.

economically encompassing as they were when

of housing in a low income neighborhood. By mak-

have made payment regularly on their primary

Public housing in the United States currently shel-

they focused on the construction of collective

ing use of a local armature of the voucher program

mortgage.

ters approximately three million individuals. In every

housing, however, in advocating the construction of

and other similar housing grants, the FWCRC is able

major American city it has been one of the most

the single-family house these initiative have largely

to build a $77,000 house yet the homebuyer’s mort-

aggressive and at time progressive attempts to

curtailed architectural and perhaps more importantly

gage totals only $52,000. Unlike other market driv-

orchestrate public policy as architectural and urban

urban design innovation. Houses offered to home-

en developers, Fifth Ward CRC’s mission encom-

design and the results. While often viewed as hav-

buyers in this market often receive little if any pro-

passes innovative housing as a priority over profit.

ing failed, these policies have at times been suc-

fessional design innovation. Designers who have

The very nature of community development is root-

cessful in ways that the voucher program hopes to

participated in 16 Houses have explored standard

ed in creativity and problem solving.

take part in. For example: while the City of New

facets of the affordable house such as modular

York provides housing for almost 600,000 resi-

construction and ease of construction, as well as

dents in more than 3000 public housing “projects”

issues such as climate and natural ventilation. More

it has had relatively less social problems in those

importantly, however, these designers have looked

developments than the city of Newark.

for new ways to relate the individual house to the

Speculations about why or how these projects

collective city. In doing so they have tried to enrich

have at times succeeded often point towards the

the voucher programs goals of civic inclusion by

fact that in New York the housing units tend to be

using design as an entrepreneurial element that

included in the fabric of the city — they are often

synthesizes these disparate houses with each other

smaller buildings atomized throughout the city fab-

and with the urban infrastructures that form this

ric — they don’t stand alone as housing projects.

contemporary city.

The City of Houston, Texas has recently established a program that provides down payment vouchers to assist lower income families in purchasing a house inside Houston city limits. The voucher program provides assistance of up to $9,500 to purchase a new home or up to $3,500 to purchase and renovate an existing single family residence. The funds are in the form of a second lien on the purchased property. The lien is held by the City of Houston during the first five years of ownership and the debt is forgiven if the buyers

Clearly this is one advantage that the Houston program offers.

from top

Interloop Architects David Brown Natalye Appel

16 Houses

Public Housing Becomes Voucher House

The history of Houston’s public housing began in

At times the combination of incentives has instigat-

Further, the programs conceal the history of power

1938 with the formation of the Housing Authority of

ed design decisions: historic-preservation tax

struggles between market and state forces in

the City of Houston (HACH). It was funded by the

credits are often coupled with low-income housing

development practices as well as between racial

United States Housing Authority and was formed

tax credits in a way that essentially mandates his-

groups and urban constituencies that have been

amidst New Deal housing reform which at a

torical housing types and also substantially lowers

historically segregated by housing policies.

national level was controversial from its inception.

development costs. In most cases, however,

The research that proceeded the founding of 16

There was strong opposition from homebuilders

these incentives have no clear architectural or

Houses has evolved through several stages that

and savings and loan associations, who launched

urban expression; the development processes

was initially to have ended with an exhibition and

vigorous attacks on public housing, accusing it of

have nevertheless generally resulted in traditional

publication. Subsequent funding from the Local

being socialist and representing unfair government

types typical of speculative housing design. These

Initiative Support Corporation allowed seven of the

competition with the free market enterprise . . .

types have also generally assumed the same low-

houses to proceed to working drawings and sever-

homebuilders played major roles in organizing local

level building and design practices evident in this

al of the houses presented here have now been

communities to oppose siting of public

speculative construction. Federal subsidies for low-

built and occupied. This new advantage provided

housing. The federal funds made available through

income housing in the United States remain high,

some success but also slowed the publication of

block grants to cities for down-payment voucher

however, the voucher programs moves this subsi-

the complete work and it required a greater depth

programs in 1996 was added to financial incen-

dies point of entry to strategic junctions in the

of investigation. As a collective project these hous-

tives already in place. Tax abatements, historic-

development—the funding arrives at the point of

es demonstrate the means by which political and

preservation and low-income tax credits, as well

sale. Unlike earlier federal housing design and

economic power is revealed or concealed in archi-

as donated city land, have provided important new

development that resulted in centralized and large-

tectural design. Most of the architects were as pre-

financial tools to the public-private partnership in

scale projects, here the subsidies arrive well after

occupied with the labor processes involved in the

housing development.

the design process is complete. The houses and

construction as much as the spatial or program-

housing built within voucher programs is essentially

matic questions of the house. The agency of

market-rate housing and as such the design

architecture is an important concern in these

process is virtually non existent. The voucher pro-

works: how the designs serve as a form of power

gram has a defacto effect of essentially eliminating

in their own right, or as a means to be a less

the professional services of architects. 16 Houses

acquiescent adjunct to other forms of power, has

was based in part on an assumption that the tradi-

been addressed by each architect and in the proj-

tional appearance of recent directly subsidized

ect at large.

housing belies the complexity of political and economic forces at play in the organization of the contemporary city.

from top

Carlos JimĂŠnez Keith Krumweide Szetsung Leong and Judy Chung

16 Houses

Decentralization Decentralization at a practical level and as a con-

This project is deeply steeped in a project of

Between 1996 and 1998 it was possible to see the

than undermined by urban processes of rationali-

cern of political consequence proved to be the

resistance; it intends to highlight an unresolved

crucible of this scenario in brief but strategic pas-

zation, production, and finance—yet also to open

most recurring issue in this endeavor. While the

urban and political crisis in relation to housing, but

sages in essays by Sanford Kwinter and K. Michael

the role of resistance. Each of the works shown in

architectural designs can stand alone, and ulti-

more broadly to address the construction and leg-

Hays. Regarding resistance Kwinter, in his Far

16 Houses at some level exhibits both positions,

mately must operate at an essential level, it is the

islation of social, racial and economic territories in

From Equilibrium column in ANY, described anyone

and directly applies themes that were presented in

question of political consequence that is decisive

housing as a sector of contemporary urbanism.

who “still” relied on the “efficacy of negative dialec-

Slow Space in a theoretical context. Here, proce-

and that remains at the mature phase of the work.

None of the work seeks to reconvene a particular

tics” as “gullible.”3 Hays’ introduction to Architecture

dural and temporal ideas of architectural and urban

16 Houses treads a line between supporting the

historical genre or form of architecture. For exam-

Theory, Since 1968 concluded that a younger audi-

production—systems of management, legislation,

effort to move federal housing initiatives toward the

ple, even as many of the architects rely on attrib-

ence may have such an “altogether altered” relation-

and finance; the role of the state as it protects the

market and critiquing the sub standard quality mar-

utes of modern architecture, none focus on syn-

ship to consumption that they had become hesitant

market—are given architectural manifestation as

ket rate housing in the United States. 16 Houses

tactical or formal transformations as a mode of

to engage in a practice that resist the dominant pro-

means of comprehending territory and of abetting

outlines the goals and techniques for a type of

automomy or self-reference. To a large degree, 16

ductive economies of the city. Hays suggested that

the sovereignty of a specific urban subject.

housing that offers an alternative to the concentra-

Houses is a collective work, and questions of

an overt resistance to the commodity processes

tion, isolation, and segregation that characterize

architectural form are continually plied within

that underlay the production of architecture may no

much federal housing design; it also recognizes

milueau’s that undermine the work’s formal autono-

longer hold appeal to younger architects.4 Hays’

16 Houses situates architecture at a historic transi-

that market practices have yet to produce an obvi-

my. As a generation a large number of these archi-

coda, unlike Kwinter’s, affirms that the role of nega-

tion between socialist and market interpretations of

ous high-quality alternative. In this realm, themes of

tect’s learned formal syntax as well as transforma-

tive dialectics remains in the face of a significant

federal housing policy—indeed most early federal

tional strategies from works byJohn Hejduk and

political and productive crisis, but that the sustained

housing projects were derived from modern housing

tics of urban form and housing policy—of decen-

Peter Eisenman—indeed from the publication Five

expansion of the United States economy had affect-

models and accused of being quasi-socialist by

tralization—become issues that are both practical

Architects—yet in their careeers these architects

ed the degree to which a new generation sought

banking and development interests. In the introduc-

and value laden. 16 Houses is useful as a set of

have opened their work to a broader negotiation

refuge against the market. The pliability of the formal

tion to Five Architects, Colin Rowe spoke of

practical proposals, but its core purpose lies in the

with themes of territory and power. In most cases

work presented here reflects this condition: the

American modern architecture as being devoid of

degree to which both the entire project and the

this opening has diminished the formal clarity of

architects were working between modes of engage-

clear “political pedigree.” In the first wave of United

individual works can be understood to have

the works. Nor does16 Houses also attempt to

ment and resistance and the house in turn reveals

States federal housing in the 1930’s it was in fact

emerged from applying spatial principles common-

re-invent grass roots political-action or the forms of

the strife of its own origins.

understood as a form of socialism ; the federal gov-

ly held in architecture to an arena of public policy,

litigation that accompany contentious housing

Similar themes were the basis of my previous

urban form and political goals. The works in 16

development. Instead, it tests the current potential

book Slow Space, completed with Sze Tsung

Houses gain political and social significance

of both resistance and engagement against the

Leong, simultaneously with the outset of 16

through of spatial transformation —the projects are

conditions of the architectural production within

Houses. The two endeavors share many contribu-

literally volumetric and tectonic responses to policy

current United States building practices.

tors. Slow Space framed the local, small-scale,

centrifugal and centripetal

space2

as characteris-

goals. This group of architects begins what may

volumetric and tectonic ambitions of architecture—

be a generational movement towards renewing the

for instance the introduction with a renewed read-

political purpose of architectural space and pro-

ing of John Hejduk’s Bye House—against the fluid

duction in the history of housing design.

and global processes of urban finance, trade and labor. Slow Space characterized Houston, in particular as an emblematic of post-war United States city with formal and architectural attributes that have become increasingly fragmented and visually inchoate, as its financial, media and production

from top

Lars Lerup with Thumb, Walter Hood, Sanford Kwinter and Bruce Mau Deborah Morris Albert Pope and Katrin Brunner

systems have become unified and virtually selfperpetuating. Slow Space posited that architecture’s renewed urban agency, and its ability to participate in the construction of an urban subject, would find potency in an enzymatic role or as retroactive cohering agent. The goal was and still is to view architecture as being sustained rather

Ever Modern

ernment was understood to be undermining market processes in its housing policy. In Europe, Rowe contended modern architecture was an adjunct of socialism, ideologically rooted in Marxism. American public housing has often been funded in a manner consistent with (or at least easily accused of being) socialist, yet the homogeneity of its population in terms of race, gender or income has continually belied the classless aspirations that social housing was imbued with in Europe. In other words , it is not clear that United States public housing was ever ideologically modern at all, even if its forms appeared to be so. 16 Houses is a collection of small-scale houses, but its potential to lead to a significant shift in the ideology of public housing in the United States is enormous. This is the early juncture these works occupy: these houses are seeking a form and space of architecture in the midst of competing histories and procedures that threaten as well as enable work on a behalf of its constituency.

16 Houses

Numeric Houston: Lost Time

Ownership/ Equity / Representation /

What is the scope of the voucher program

On a given weekday the aggregate population of

Design in Houston

in relation to other Houston expenditures?

gram will not provide more than personal satisfac-

the city of Houston drives an average of

Three questions were posed for the site of

The voucher program will provide housing assis-

tion and self-esteem. This data does not account

53,000,000 miles. Translated at the average

Houston in an attempt to define individual repre-

tance to 25,000 families. The total value of the

for federal income tax deductions that accompany

speed of commuter traffic this amounts to an

sentation as it relates to the house, to real estate,

program depends upon the ratio of new to existing

a mortgage nor does it include added monthly

aggregate drive time of 35 years per day. To drive

and to the financial processes of purchasing a

houses purchased within its guidelines. The pro-

costs such as insurance, property tax, school

those 35 years a day, Houston purchased more

house. The questions attempted to answer the

gram could offer as much as $225 million in assis-

taxes or utility costs. Ownership in this average

than 460 million dollars worth of automobiles in

broader question of how through the voucher pro-

tance or as little as $75 million.1 If compared with

scenario clearly does not provide the economic

1996—the United States accounted for 525.9 bil-

gram does ownership provide, representation,

expenditures by the Texas Department of

empowerment and representation it is assumed to,

lion dollars in car sales that same year. If valued

empowerment, and inclusion? Taken at a practical

Transportation in Houston some startling insights

nor is it necessarily a better economic situation

against one of the more prominent cultural monu-

level the voucher program has created an opportu-

surface. For example: the Texas DOT2 currently

than renting. Is there a way that architectural

ments built in the last decade, auto sales in the

nity for more people to purchase their own house.

administers almost $1.4 billion in Houston area

design could abet a faster accrual of equity? For

United States in 1996 could have funded 525

It is not clear, however, that ownership actually

highway construction contracts. During the last

example: full equity in a $25,000 automobile could

Getty Centers in a single year. These numbers are

abets representation or even economic empower-

year alone road construction in Houston costs

be accrued in five years at a monthly expense of

technology’s numeric benchmarks culled from pro-

ment although it does provides a psychological

reached $457 million and maintenance of existing

$502.34.5 In Houston it may be conceivable to

cedures whose mechanics have outpaced archi-

sense of inclusion and stability.

roadways amounted to an expenditure of $57 mil-

build a $25,000 3-bedroom house. If this house

In answering these questions, data was compiled

lion. In this context the voucher program is relative-

offered even modest innovation in energy efficien-

within design/research studios that I taught at Rice

ly small if not insignificant. Should it be more?

cy it could be possible to allocate savings in

University and Columbia University during the aca-

Could it be more? The construction of one recent

monthly utilities expenditures to the greater mort-

16 Houses asked architects to examine dimen-

demic years 1996–2001. These studios addressed

segment of freeway in Houston costs approxi-

gage payments that would come with a short term

sional and numeric attributes of major urban infra-

the issues of housing within the economic process-

mately $22 million a mile3; at this rate, three and

loan. Equity could be amassed at a tremendously

structural systems in comparison with those of a

es of commercial development. The interests that

one half miles of freeway could fund the entire

accelerated rate. It may be possible to design a

new federal program that provides financial assis-

guided the formulation of the research were not

voucher program at its low estimate and in fact the

house in which full equity were accrued in five

tance to lower income families seeking housing in

aesthetic or even initially architectural; our goal was

total costs of the 8 mile freeway in question were

years, even within the costs guidelines of the

major urban centers. The comparison provided

to ascertain the constituent value of a single-family

more than $182 million. Houston has somewhere

voucher program. Innovation in energy use alone

insight into architecture’s ability to act as a localiz-

house within the larger scenario of Houston’s econ-

in the range of 8,700 miles of freeway; the actual

could make a dramatic difference in how afford-

ing or territorializing armature for the organization of

omy. Houston is almost exclusively a city of single

distance and value is almost impossible to figure.

able these houses are; innovation in labor

life as it competes with economic mechanisms

family houses even though it is the fourth largest

Is it possible to design a house in Houston whose

whose prowess in shaping urban space has been

city in the United States. The following data is

equity could be accrued at an accelerated rate?

presumed to be omnipotent if not predatory.

offered as a survey that reveals what home owner-

tecture’s attempts to dimensionally shape space— public space, work space, living space, productive space, etc.

ship is within the larger mechanism of urban finance. In terms of the voucher program this data is only the beginning of a renewed comprehension of how ownership apparently abets representation, empowerment and inclusion. It is clear that architectural design has much to offer, and that the voucher program as it stands has no way of gain-

processes involved in construction could also alter the affordability and quality of the houses.

The average single family house in Houston is sold approximately every nine years. At that point, assuming an initial mortgage of $50,000, the average home owners would have amassed $5,622 in equity. To amass this equity they would have made mortgage payments that total $33,984 or approximately $354 per month.4 As these calculations demonstrate, ownership within the voucher pro-

ing access to its potential. from top

Blair Satterfield and Marc Swackhamer Taft Architects and Nonya Grenader William Williams and Archie Perez

16 Houses How Does the Market Develop Houses in Houston?

The voucher program assumes that the market will

Building materials that compose a single house at

1 This estimated value of the voucher program is

and can produce houses more efficiently than fed-

Sable Ridge have a relative value of approximately

based only on value of vouchers and does not

eral or city housing agencies. Developer houses in

$10,000 per house if bought on a per house basis

include costs of administration of program. It is

Houston are routinely offered for sale at prices as

at a retail hardware store. The rest of the costs is

based on the program’s plan to provide assistance

low as $55,000 and these houses are within the

accounted for by labor, advertising, and profit. The

to as many as 25,000 home buyers.

reach of many families who would rely on the

market provides no incentive to build in the city

2 Texas Department of Transportation information

voucher program.6 Innovation, however, in simple

center or to use architectural services. Clearly the

gathered from T.D.O.T. internet web site.

functionality, design, or quality of materials is non-

market does not provide the components or the

existent. The voucher program hopes to rely on

innovation that could make the voucher program a

the free-market to provide a decent level of hous-

success in terms of providing meaningful civic rep-

ing. Will it? Does the building industry have the will

resentation. It will build houses and it will assert

to innovate? Clearly architects have had little suc-

that the geometric dimension of the box, the plot

cess in infiltrating the machinations of housing. The

of land, and the street are all capable of providing

term “housing starts” that often indicates the health

economic representation, but the simple fact

of the economy almost invariably indicates the

remains that this is only a psychological boost.

demise of architecture as we have valued it.

The four, five, and even asymptotically n-dimen-

Consider the following case study of Sable Ridge.

sional permutation of housing finance have fully

(The following data was culled from private inter-

outpaced the three-dimensional box or street.

views with its developer; the name Sable Ridge is

While architects may offer formal solutions that

fictitious to provide anonymity.)

Harris County in the year 1995 was

mime topology, it is certain that architecture’s criti-

77,774,000,000 dollars.

Sable Ridge is a Houston subdivision of 347

cal role in the city will find its resonance in the infil-

houses (boxes) built in the early 1980s at a total

tration and re-arrangement of the clandestine and

cost of $16 million. It is situated outside the

essentially predatory forms of finance and develop-

Houston Beltway or Loop in an area currently

ment. How can architecture not represent the

5 Equity and payment based on a 25,000 dollar

growing in population at a rate of more than 10%

topological, but instead take part in averting its dis-

loan at 7.9% for 5 years.

per annum. Compaq Computers, whose head-

ciplinary machinations. Can architecture involve

6 The average weekly wage in Harris County in

quarters are in this area, alone accounts for much

itself with the morphologies of investment capital?

1992 was $554.03; advertised mortgages on

of this growth. The square foot costs of construc-

Can architecture involve itself with the spatialized

Sable Ridge homes were approximately $550.00

tion for housing built at Sable Ridge was $33 sq/ft.

chemistry of new materials and their relation to

per month.

Architectural fees for this project of more than

investment and labor?

500,000 sq/ft were $4,550 or 0.00028% of total

The guidelines set by the Houston voucher pro-

construction. The entire subdivision of Sable Ridge

gram are drastic but not without potential or even

could have been constructed on an average

aesthetic challenge. A family of four must earn less

downtown Houston city block at a height of 5 sto-

than $36,800 to qualify for assistance. Proposed

ries (there are countless empty downtown Houston

designs for new and renovated houses built within

blocks) Architectural fees for such a low rise proj-

the limits of the market as it applies to this income

ect would have amounted to more than $1.4 mil-

group could mark a real and significant contribu-

lion7—the developers of Sable Ridge made a profit

tion not only to this strata of our population but to

of about two million dollars.

our conception of the contemporary city as a

3 The freeway costs estimate describes an 8 to 10 lane portion of Texas I-8. The costs estimate is based on an 7.97 mile stretch of mostly concrete pavement. The duration of the contract extended approximately one year from March of 1993 to October of 1994. The final costs is estimated at 182,824,356 dollars. Another segment of freeway, State Highway 99, was built the same year was estimated at 3,850,000 dollars per mile, or a total costs of 63,220,000 dollars for a 16.42 mile segment of 4-6 lanes. The total personal income for

4 Equity and mortgage payments based on a 50,000 dollars loan at 7.9% for 30 years.

7 This estimate assumes that a downtown building could be built for the same costs as the subdivision.

whole. We might very well be able to show that these voucher houses could be some of the best

from top

works of architecture of our time.

StudioWorks Stanley Saitowitz Lindy Roy

Small Scale Action: Large Effect.

First in San Francisco, then in Houston and now in New York City, I have been preoccupied by the program of the house. At each location the direction of design and accompanying writing, research and teaching has been affected by the new urban contexts, but what has remained constant has been a focus on the program of the house. With the initiation of the research that lead to 16 Houses the program of the house gave way to the programming and the political history of housing. The consistency provided a control factor as my architectural practice evolved towards an increasingly urban agenda—it also allowed the design project to evolve and to address new scenarios. Architecture reveals as much about the complexity of its site and context as it does about itself. In a similar way, it has allowed architecture to reveal political, social and economic circumstance. A small-scale architectural practice rooted in the design o f the house has the undeniable potential to serve as the basis for a large-scale and collaborative endeavor in housing.

above

Michael Bell, Glass House @ 2Ëš

Notes 1 According to Lawrence Anderson, Wurster’s directives while dean of the MIT School of Architecture and Planning segregated the concerns of planning and architecture.

Planning faculty were not trained in design but in economics and public policy; the planning department created analyst, public policy makers and activist. The architecture department focused on training designers. See Anderson in, Inside the Large Small House: The Residential Design Legacy of William W. Wurster, ed. R. Thomas Hile, (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1994), 10.

2 Michael Bell, “Having Heard Mathematic’s: The Topologies of Boxing,” and Michael Bell and Sze Tsung Leong, “347 Years: Slow Space,” in Slow Space, Michael Bell and Sze Tsung Leong, eds., (New York: Monacelli Press, 1998), 22, 107. Themes of urban decentralization are essential to the editorial direction of Slow Space and to the essay“Having Heard Mathematic’s: The Topologies of Boxing.” Peter Eisenman’s analysis of Guiseppe Terragni’s Casa Giuliani-Frigerio is referenced in both essays. Eisenman’s analysis is used to describe a spatial ambiguity developed from two opposing conceptions of space in Terragni’s work. Terragni’s architecture was ultimately understood to encapsulate an expansion and contraction of two types of space or the simultaneity of both centrifugal and centripetal space. 16 Houses applies this work to the analysis of federal housing policy and recent goals toward decentralization in relation to poverty and to the potential use of the market as a technique for decentralizing federal housing initiatives.

3 Sanford Kwinter, “Playboys of the Western World,” ANY, Number. 13, (New York: Anyone Corporation,1996), 62.

4 Michael Hays, “Introduction,” Architecture Theory Since 1968, K. Michael Hays, ed.,(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1998), xiv