CC BY
28АРХИТЕКТУРА
FEATURES OF HOUSING FOR WORKERS ХIX- THE BEGINNING OF THE XX CENTURY IN THE UK Mukasheva M.M.1, Samoilov K.I.2
1Mukasheva Madina Malik kyzy - Doctoral Student, Assistant Professor;
2Samoilov Konstantin Ivanovich - Doctor of Architecture, Professor, DEPARTMENT ARCHITECTURE, KAZAKH NATIONAL RESEARCH TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY NAMED AFTER K.I. SATPAYEV, ALMATY, REPUBLIC OF KAZAKHSTAN
Abstract: сonsidered the features of a dwelling for workers in Great Britain of the XlX-early XX centuries. Given the brief overview of the stages in the formation of housing architecture for workers during this period.
Keywords: workers housing, workhouse, history of architecture.
UDC 721 (574)
In the first 30 years of the 19th century, the population of England grew by 2/3 and amounted to 15 million people. The situation of poverty and unemployment escalated. The industrial crisis only exacerbated the situation, throwing thousands of workers into the streets.
In 1834, Parliament passed a new law on the poor. The church parishes were replaced by a system of work houses [1, p. 140].
Workhouse - shelters for the poor in England 17-19 centuries. First appeared in the 17th century. The idea of a workhouse as a place where people with no livelihood gathered together originated in Holland, and the first such house was built in 1596 in Amsterdam. The workhouse was a massive building with living and working spaces and courtyards for walks.
In the years 1740-1850, the UK was undergoing an unprecedented demographic transformation.
Most of the urban settlements in England are workers' settlements. A working village usually consists of one or several parallel long streets, on both sides of which there are two-story small houses of the standard type or they form a long continuous row of two-story brick houses.
Philanthropists of the mid-19th century, imbued with a spirit of citizenship, became interested in building houses not for the most needy segments of the population, but for decent poor people, that is, who had at least a small but steady income and were able to pay for an apartment. In 1841, with the aim of buying or building "residential buildings, and then renting them out to the poor, especially in densely populated neighborhoods," the Metropolitan Association was founded to improve the living conditions of workers. She erected a five-story house - the first in London - at St Pancras station, where for a modest fee 3 shillings and pence per week could adequately accommodate 110 families, each with their own water supply, water closet and dishwasher, as well as a common laundry room and a room for drying clothes.
The American George Peabody, who moved to London, who founded the foundation of the same name, also never sought to provide housing for the unemployed or the poor. The first houses were built in 1864 on Commercial Street in Spitfield - five floors, with a central courtyard, where children could play away from the dangers of the street - as well as the inhabitants of neighboring slums. The interior decoration was stingy, the interiors are purely utilitarian. On the top floor there were shared laundries and bathrooms. The apartments had one to three rooms. In the first case, the lease was 2 shillings of 6 pence, in the latter - 5 shillings. Toilets and washbasins were on the landing, the inner walls were made of bare brick - guests were forbidden to paint them or wallpaper. A reasonable way to deal with bedbugs, which were even found in middle-class dwellings, hiding under paper or plaster. The garbage was supposed to be thrown into the garbage chute located on each landing.
Water supply, of course, was a giant step forward, but the hot water bath remained an inaccessible luxury for workers. And at the end of the week, those who lived near public baths took with them a bundle of clean clothes that they put on after washing and carried dirty ones with them.
In England, the need was realized to raise the quality of housing construction for the working class. Created on the initiative of Chadwick, the Society for Improving the Living Conditions of the Working Class in 1848 built the first houses for workers in London under the project of architect Henry Roberts. Following this decisive beginning, apartments on Streetam Street were built in 1848-1850, and two-storey cottages for workers, consisting of four apartments and built again according to Roberts' designs, were demonstrated at the 1851 World Exhibition. This primary model, in which the apartments were connected in pairs by a common staircase, influenced the construction of housing for workers throughout the century.
In the UK, factory housing began with the owner of the soap factory Lever, who moved his business to Liverpool in 1887 and built a "model village" of cottage-type houses for workers [2, p. 59].
So, returning to the starting point of our reasoning, what was the nature and quality of urbanization in Britain during the key period from the mid-18th to the middle of the 19th century? The argument that this was an erratic or chaotic process rests on a specific understanding of order and incorrectly interprets the nature of the process that actually took place. He was ordered, but ordered in the sense of a spontaneous order.
First of all, the market nevertheless provided a sufficient supply of building land [3, c. 260]. Secondly, as all authors admit, housing was built enough to satisfy explosive demand. According to Olsen, "she [the unregulated market system] produced more housing for the middle class than he could master, and housing for the working class, although with minimal amenities, was in most cases adequate to people's needs and offered at a price affordable to the absolute majority workers" [4, p. 120].
Much has been said and written about the low quality of housing for artisans and workers during this period. Firstly, if the quality were higher, then housing would be too expensive for the majority of the population. In addition, neither the market nor the state could offer higher quality housing for the same money. In the real world, you had to choose between cheap housing and life without a roof over your head. Secondly, as Marian Bowley notes in his classic study, the price-quality ratio was fair. The quality of housing for artisans and the working class was higher than it seems to many today. Many of these houses lasted more than a hundred years and were destroyed only during reconstruction after the Second World War.
"Market failures" made themselves felt in regard to housing for the poorest segments of the population, and this was equally a problem for cities and villages. The lower strata of society, about 10% of the population, were forced to live in cramped and unsanitary conditions. These were immigrants - primarily the Irish - and seasonal workers engaged in hard work. However, it would be a serious mistake to believe that this status was inevitably permanent; for many, it was temporary.
Changes in the structure of society led to the loss of the importance of traditional types of buildings - palaces, castles, monasteries and temples recede into the background. New types include industrial and transport facilities, urban apartment buildings, residential settlements for industrial and agricultural workers, new medical and sports buildings, schools, theaters, banks, commercial and administrative buildings, exhibition halls. At the same time, the interior and its equipment are changing. The inner space becomes more functional [5, 144-147].
In cities dominated by residential buildings such as cottages for one or two families, therefore, each apartment is located on two floors. The houses are built of bricks and are either not painted or painted gray. A distinctive feature of the English apartment buildings is the abundance of doors facing the street.
The most important of the problems faced by English architects and builders immediately after the end of the First World War was the restoration of the destroyed housing stock and the construction of new residential buildings.
Despite the traditional British tendency to cottages with individual land plots for each family, already in the 30s, the extensive development of this type began to raise alarm in urban
64
municipalities. In the practice of municipal construction of the 1930s, the erection of quarters built up with houses of 4-5 floors with a density of 600-700 people per 1 ha gradually begins to occupy more and more space. Such a high density created crowded areas, lack of free space in apartments and created serious domestic inconvenience.
It was mainly designed residential buildings of the gallery type, in which the apartments were connected by floor-to-floor balconies - galleries, connected vertically by common stairwells.
In the mid-30s, the influence of functionalism began to manifest itself in the architecture of multi-story apartment buildings.
One example of a new type of dwelling is a multi-storey residential building in Highgate (the so-called Highpoint No. 1), designed by architects B. Lyubetkin and the Tekton group (1935). This building is designed for residents with a very high income. The floor plan has the shape of a double cross. At the intersection of the branches of the cross placed stairs and stairwells, passenger and freight elevators. Each staircase has four apartments on each floor. In addition to the huge lobby, as part of the common areas on the ground floor, there is also a tea room facing the garden, designed for meetings of residents of the house and their friends. In each of the upper floors there are four three-room and four four-room apartments. A flat roof is used as an outdoor terrace. The building is made of reinforced concrete.
In the development of architectural thought after the Second World War, functionalism took a strong position.
Least of all new trends have affected the field of low-rise construction. Here, the traditional type of cottage house, which has undergone only minor changes, continues to be preserved.
References
1. Энгельс Ф. Положение рабочего класса в Англии, К. Маркс и Ф. Энгельс, Соч., 2 изд. Т. 2. С. 512.
2. Брюсов А. Жилище. История жилища с социально-экономической точки зрения. Л., 1926. С. 87-88, 100.
3. Summerson J., 1970. Georgian London: An Architectural Study. New York: Allen Lane.
4. Sutcliffe A., 1980. The Debate on Nineteenth Century Planning. In The Rise of Modern Urban Planning, 1800-1914 / Ed. A. Sutcliffe. London: Mansell.
5. Станькова Я., Пехар И. Тысячелетнее развитие архитектуры. Пер с чеш. В.К. Иванова. Москва. «Стройиздат», 1987.
