LONG-TERM RESULTS OF USER PARTICIPATION IN HOUSING REHABILITATION: The Community Design Workshop in Pointe St. Charles
A Thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Snidies and Research in Partiai Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Architecture
DANHUI YOU
School of Architecture McGill University Montreal November 1998
O Danhui You, 1998 National Library Bibiiotheque nationale M ofGnaa du Canada Acquisitions and Acquisitions et Bibliographie Services seivices bibliographiques 395 Wellingbn Street 395. nie WdmWl OnawaON KlAON4 Oniwaffl K1A ûN4 canada CMede
The author has granted a non- L'auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive Licence dowing the exclusive permettant à la National Library of Canada to Biblioîhèque nationale du Canada de reproduce, loan, distribute or sell reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou copies of this thesis in microform, vendre des copies de cette thèse sous paper or electronic formats. la forme de microfiche/film, de reproduction sur papier ou sur format électronique.
The author retains ownership of the L'auteur conserve la propriété du copyright in this thesis. Neither the droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse. thesis nor substantial extracts fiorn it Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels may be printed or othenwise de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés reproduced without the author's ou autrement reproduits sans son permission. autorisation. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of al1 I would like to express my deep gratitude to Prof. Vikram Bhatt and Prof. Pieter Sijpkes. my thesis supervisors, for their continued counsel. encouragement and assistance in the execution of this research,
I am also greatly indebted to Prof. Joseph Baker for his invaluable advice and interests in the research.
Many thds to Prof. Norbert Schoenauer. Prof. Annmarie Adams and Prof. Abraham Friedman for their unfailing guidance and suggestions.
Many individuals have contributed to the realization of this study. 1 would especiaily like to express my gratitude to the following: the residents in Pointe St. Charles who participated in the study for their generosity and warmtb which will always be remembered and appreciated; Mrs. Sarah Humphrey. Mr. Emest Vaudry, Mr. Pierre Sylvestre and Mrs. July Stevens for their endiess support and assistance during my field work; and Batir son quartier. the technical resource group in Pointe St. Charles, for its cooperation throughout the entire study.
Finally. rny deepest appreciation should be extended to my parents, whose love and encomagement have been constant and unreserved throughout the years. ABSTRACT
User participation has ken regarded as an empowerment tooi to help low-income people to improve housing at a low cost. It was implernented by the Cornmuniy Design Workshop during the attempts at housing rehabilitation in Pointe St. Charles in the early 1970's. This thesis is focused on the long-term results of user participation employed by the CDW. Both the current physical conditions of the CDW's projects and the inhabitants' attitudes towards participation, one generation after its implementation, were studied. The research shows that the CDW's efforts involving users in housing rehabilitation not only resulted in improved housing conditions for the urban poor in the long run but had some positive impacts on the inhabitants as well. The success and failure of the CDW's work also provided empirical lessons for later participatory practice, La participation de l'usager hit considérée comme instrument de pouvoir pour aider les gens à
bas revenus à améliorer le logement pour peu de frais. Ceci fut mis en pratique au début des
années 70 par le Cornmunity Design Workshop durant les tentatives de réhabilitation du logement
à Pointe St-Charles. Cette thèse se concentre sur les résultats à long terme de la participation
de l'usager tel qu'employée par le CDW- Non seulement les conditions physiques courantes des
projets du CDW mais aussi l'attitude des habitants envers la participation une génération après
la réalisation des projets, furent étudiés. Cette recherche démontre que les efforts du CDW
impliquant les usagers dans la réhabilitation du logement non seulement résultaient en des a conditions de logement à long terme améliorées pour le pauvre urbain, mais avaient aussi des effets positifs sur les habitants. Les succès et les échecs du travail du CDW ont aussi procurés
des Ieçons empiriques pour une pratique de participation ultérieure. TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT RESUME LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Purposes of the Study 1 -2. Methodology
1 -3. Scope of the Study
1 -4. Organization of the Thesis
CHAPTER 2: USER PARTICIPATlON IN HOUSING: A LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. Definition, Forrns and Functions of User Participation 5 2.2. An Analytical Ovewiew of User Participation in Housing 6
CHAPTER 3: THE COMMUNITY DESIGN WORKSHOP
3.1. A Historical Review 3.1.1 . Background 3.1.2. The Establishment of the Community Design Workshop 3.1.3. Activities of the Community Design Workshop in Montreal 3.1.4. Organizations Subsequent to the Community Design Workshop 3.2. User Participation in the CDW's Work
3 2.1. Analysis of the CDW's Objectives Relating to User Participation 3-22Strategies of the CDW to Implement User Participation 3.2.3. Characteristics of User Participation Implemented by the CDW
CHAPTER 4: CDW'S WORK IN POINTE ST. CHARI[JES 4.1. Pointe St. Charles 4.1.1. General Description 4.1 -2. Situation in the Late 1960s
4.2. Housing Rehabilitation in Pointe St. Charles in the Early 1970s 4.2-1. Initiation of the Rehabilitation Project 4.2-2. The Community Design Workshop in the Rehabilitation 4.2.2.1. Technical Phases before the Acquisition and Renovation of Older Housing 4.2.2.2. Renovation Design i. Procedures of the Renovation Design ii. Residents' Reaction to the Participatory Design iii. Analysis of the CDW's Working Drawings 4.2.3. Construction Work
4.2.4. Financial Problems 4.2.5. Formation of Housing Co-ops 4.3. CDW's Projects Related to the Youngsters in Pointe St. Charles 4.3.1. Green Thurnbs and Sore Thurnbs 4.3 .S. Adventure Playgrounds 4.4. Relevant Events afier the Rehabilitation
4.4.1. End of the Housing Cooperative Formed in 1974 4.4.2, Second Renovation to the Co-op Buildings Rehabilitated by the CDW
CHAPTER 5: CURRENT STATUS OF THE CDW'S PROJECTS IN POINTE ST. CHARLES 5.1. Present Ownership of the CDW's Projects 5.2. General Description of Current Housing Situation in Pointe St. Charles 5.3.1. Co-op Housing 5.2.2. Housing of the City and Non-Profit Organizations 5.2.3. Private Rental Housing 5.3. Inspection of the CDW's Projects 5.3.1. Residentid Buildings 5.3.1.1. Site Inspection
5.3.1.2. Envelope of the Buildings 5.3.1 -3. Interior of the Buildings 5-32Cornrnunity Gardens and Playgrounds
5 -4. Modifications of the CDW's Projects afier the Rehabilitation 5.5. Sumrnary and Discussion
CHAPTER 6: INHABITANTS' ATTITUDES AND EVALUATION 6.1. Description of Respondents 6.1.1. Selection of Respondents 6.1 .S. Interview Process 6.1 -3. Respondents' Situation in the Early 1970's and at Present 6.2. Respondents' Attitudes and Evaluation of the Rehabilitation 6.2.1. Respondents' Description of the Rehabilitation 6.2.2. Success and Failure of the Rehabilitation 6.2.3. Inhabitants' Learning from the Rehabilitation 6.3. Respondents' Attitudes and Evaluation of Their Dwelling and Neighborhood 6.3.1, Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction with the Dwelling and the Co-op 6.3.2. Sense of Community 6.4. Inhabitants' Attitudes towards User Participation
vii 6.4.1. Current Participation Practice of the inhabitants 91 6.4.2. Onginal uihabitants' Attitudes towards User Participation 94 6.4.3. Attimdes of Chilâren of Original Inhabitants towards User Participation 99 6.5. Summary and Discussion 100
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 . Summary of the Researcb 7.2. General Findings 7.3. Recommendations for Future Research
REFERENCES 106
viii LIST OF TABLES
Table 5.1. Characteristics of Dwellings in Pointe St. Charles and in Metropolitan Montreal Table 5.2. Need of Repair of Dwellings in Pointe St. Charles and in Metropolitan Montreal Table 5.3. Remaining Life Spans of the Components of the Buildings' Envelope Table 5.4. Remaining Life Spans of the Interior Components of the Buildings Table 5.5. Percentage of the Five Inspected Buildings with Structural Problems Table 6.1. Resident Respondents in Pointe St. Charles Table 6.2. M 1's Situation in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview Table 6.3. Situation of M 1's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview Table 6.4. M2's Situation in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview
Table 6.5. Situation of M2's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview
Table 6.6. Fl 's Situation in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview
Table 6.7. Situation of F l 's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview Table 6.8. F2's Situation in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview Table 6.9. Situation of F2's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview LIST OF FIGURES
F ig . 3.1 . Areas that the CDW intervened in Montreal. Fig. 3 -2. The Bon Pasteur project in Quebec City. Fig. 3 -3. The user-needs gap. Fig. 3.4. Tenant initiated renovation. Fig. 4.1. Axonometric view of Pointe St. Charles in 197 1.
Fig. 4.2. The rehabilitation process in Pointe St. Charles in the early 1970's. Fig. 4.3. Rentai housing in Pointe St. Charles before the rehabilitation. Fig. 4.4. Sample renovation proposais by the CDW in Pointe St. Charles.
Fig. 4.5. Cover of one of the CDW's information pamphlets. Fig . 5.1 . Number of CO-ophousing and non-profit housing projects set up in Pointe St. Charles since 1970. Fig. 5.2. Housing sectors of different tenures in Pointe St. Charles. a Fig. 5.3. View fiom the street in 1973: 2488-2524 St. Charles. Fig. 5.4. View fiom the street in 1997: 2488-2524 St. Charles. Fig. 5.5. The five inspected buildings. Fig. 5.6. Renovation plan of the Smiths' flat in 197 1. Fig. 5.7. Renovation plan of the Smiths' flat in 1979. Fig. 5.8. Cornparison between the interior spaces of the Smiths' flat before and after 1979. Fig. 5.9. Photograph of the Smiths' bedroom. Fig. 5.10. Photograph of the living room of the Smiths' flat looking toward the vestibule.
Fig. 5.1 1. Photograph of different lighting installations in the Smiths' flat. Fig. 5.12. Photograph of the Smiths' kitchen. Fig. 5.13. Photograph of the glas door between the living room and the bedroom of the Smiths' flat. Fig. 5.14. Photograph of the extended rear balcony of the Smiths' flat. Fig. 5.15. Working drawing for the extension of the Smiths' rear balcony. Fig. 5.16. Photograph of the closet in the vestibule of the Srniths' flat.
Fig 517. Photagraph of the ernpty bedroorn afier the Srniths9 son moved out. CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Purposes of the Study
The main purpose of this study is to answer the following research question: what are the long- term results of the Community Design Workshop's efforts involving users in housing rehabifitation? The study was undertaken in the belief that user participation in housing rehabilitation can. in the long nin, be an effective way for low-income people to improve their physical housing conditions and to satis@ their individual needs. More specificaily. the present study has the following objectives: 1. To increase the understanding of user participation (employed by the Cornmunity Design Workshop) in housing rehabilitation. 3. To judge whether user participation in housing rehabilitation is an effective way to maintain the community. 3. To fînd out the current living conditions of the urban poor invoived in housing rehabilitation in the early 19701s. 4. To explore the inhabitants' attitudes towards user participation one generation afier its implementation.
1.2. Methodology This research is a post-occupancy-evaluation (POE)of the Community Design Workshop's work in Pointe St. Charles (a poor neighborhood in Montreal) in the early 2970's. It involves a cornparison between the Community Design Workshop (CDW) designers' initial expectations for user participation and the results of their work afier a relatively long period. Since there is a time span of one generation between these two aspects of the study, the research combines a wide variety of source materials and borrows methods fiom severd fields of inquiry. In order to find out the designers' motives and strategies, several sources were consulted. including publications, information pamphlets and presentation materials made by the CDW designers, reports of the CDWs work in newspapers and fiom other mass media, and government documents concerning the projects designed by the CDW. Ah, proposais and working drawings made by the CDW were analyzed to identie the designers' purposes and strategies. Besides an extensive review of the literarure, interviews, either personal or by phone,
letter or e-mail, were conducted with former rnernbers of the CDW. Information was collected concerning not only their experiences and expectations in the 70's but also the influence of the CDW upon their later design work.
The results of the CDW's work were gathered from a field study in Pointe St- Charles. The field study focused on two aspects which shaped the results of the CDWs work: the current status of the projects done by the CDW and the inhabitants' attitudes towards user participation.
The first stage in the field study was a sample selection process. Since the CDWs efforts in
Pointe St. Charles resulted in the formation of housing CO-operatives,a list of CO-opmembers in the early 70's. obtained fiom a IocaI lawyer. provided names and addresses of the inhabitants
involved in the CDW's work. A cornparison between the list and Lovell's Monveal City Directory supplied information about the original inhabitants. who had been living in the houses
renovated by the CDW since the early 70's. This information was not only a criterion of sample selection. but also showed the mobility of the inhabitants involved in the CDW's work. An analysis of the percentage of the original inhabitants helped to explain whether user participation
in housing rehabilitation was an effective way to maintain the cornrnunity.
The second phase was an inspection of the houses renovated by the CDW. The inspection was carried out fiom April to June 1998 together with a technical resource group, Batir son quartier. a who exarnined the social housing situation in Pointe St. Charles with the support of Sociere d'habitation du Quebec. In addition to the inspection resdts which described the current living a conditions of those iuvolved in housing rehabilitation in the 70's, co-op records were consulted to obtain information about maintenance and physical modification. Furthemore, one original family which changed its house afier the rehabilitation was chosen for a detailed study. Factors leading to the modifications and the changing roles of the inhabitants in their domestic environment were identified. In the rare instances where historic photos of the projects done by the CDW existed, rephotography provided insights into the level of physical changes over time.
In the third phase, a survey questionnaire was delivered to each of the original families. who had lived in the renovated houses since the early 70's. The questionnaire asked residents about their residential history, demographic information (incorne, occupation, family size and structure. etc.). neighborhood, satisfaction and dissatisfaction, and main concem about housing. Based on the questionnaire, detailed, open-ended interviews were conducted with a subsample of original
inhabitants who were willing to participate in the investigation. Information was collected 0 concerning their learnings fiom user participation in the 70's, sense of community. practice of participation and willingness to participate. As one generation had grown into adulthood since the early 70's. the present attitudes of the children who were involved in the CDW's efforts related to the youngsters were also studied.
1.3. Scope of the Study
The thesis uses the CDW's work in Pointe St- Charles in the early 1970's as a case study for analysis. The long-term results of user participation employed by the CDW in housing rehabilitation are investigated in the study in terms of the current physical conditions of the CDW's projects in Pointe St. Charles, and the inhabitants' attitudes towards the rehabilitation and user participation. Although financial problems of the rehabilitation are mentioned in the thesis. an appraisd of the fiscal factors which might affect the results of user participation is beyond the scope of the study. Also, the CDW's projects which did not mult in co-op housing in Pointe St Charles are not included in the investigation.
1.4. Organization of the Thesis This thesis is organized into seven chapters.
Chapter 2 is a general review of the literature concerning user participation in housing. Chapter 3 presents particular issues relevant to user participation employed by the Community Design Workshop. Chapter 4 gives an overview of the housing rehabilitation in Pointe St. Charles in the early 1970's. and describes how the Cornmunity Design Workshop involved users in the housing rehabilitation process. Chapter 5 describes current physical conditions of the CDW's projects in Pointe St. Charles. and discusses housing modifications after the rehabilitation. Chapter 6 presents the current situation of the inhabitants involved in the CDW's work and discusses their attitudes towards user participation. Chapter 7 interprets the findings of the above chapters in order to provide conclusion. CHAPTER 2: USER PARTICIPATION IN HOUSING: A LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter introduces general issues relevant to the research, which were derïved fiom the review of the literature. The chapter is divided into two sections. The first presents the definition, fonns and fùnctions of user participation. The second gives an 'analfical overview of user participation in housing.
2.1. Definition, Forms and Functioas of User Participation
User participation refen, in its most general sense, to attempts to incorporate the actual or prospective users of a facility, program, or product into the planning and design of that environment. program, or product (Becker, 1977). Participation can be conceptuaiized as a continuum of control exercised by the actual or prospective users of some facility or program. At one end of the participation dimension, the user would have total control over decisions; at the other end there would be absolutely no input or voice into the design of the program or facility by its actual or potential users. Cohen (1976) has suggested a five-level mode1 of user or citizen participation:
(i ) Executive Decision Control: the level at which decisions about whether or not to undertake a project at al1 are made; (2) Administrative Decision Control: the level at which decisions about how to undertake the project are made; (3) Implementation and Support: the physical acts of participation. including construction. money-raising and canvassing; (4) input/Feedback/Evaluation: similar to administrative control, but the link between opinions and policy is much more tenuous; (5) Nonparticipation: it usually means simple noninvolvement with the project, but can also mean outright hostility toward the project.
Each of these forrns of participation can, however, occur at each of a number of stages in any deci sion-making process.
Participation, when it involves control of decisions, has ken viewed as fulfilling a fiindamental human need to create and control (Alexander et al., 1975; Turner, 1976). It has also been viewed as one of the most effective means for creating environments that are responsive to individual and group needs and values (Alexander et al., 1975). These two firnctions of user participation are not necessarily munially exclusive. However, when seen as fiilfilling a fiindamental human need, the value of participation is primarily process-oriented; while as a means of incorporating user needs and values, it is more product-oriented. and does not necessarily involve user control of decisions (Becker, 1977).
2.2. An Analytical Overview of User Participation in Housing
User participation in housing began when primitive humans built their first dwellings. A review of the history of housing shows that. for generations. the initiator and the eventual user were one
and the same person (Rudofsky. 1964). The communication of needs and preferences from user to designer was a relatively simple person-to-person exchange (Roberts, 1972). With the onset of the Industrial Revolution. and the need to shelter more people in existing industrial urban
settings, more and more rnulti-unit housing was built, and the division between the user and the initiator replaced the former direct user-designer link with the single initiator-designer contact in this type of housing design. The user was no longer part of his home building process while the share of the initiator (individual or authority) in the decision making process significantly e increased (Turner. 1972). Since the eventual user was often of a different age, lifestyle, and socioeconomic background from the ini tiator, the breaking of the user-designer link brought social and econornic problems, especially in mass housing projects where the gap between design and use was the Iargest.
Some professionals suggest that a solution to this Mght be the restoration of user participation in housing. N. J. Habraken is the fmof many theorists in this field. He founded and headed the Stichting Architecten Research (SAR) in the early 1960s. The SAR pioneers the support and detachable nits concept as well as the concept of levels of decision-making expressed in the terms Urban Tissue-Support-Infill. A support is the hework of communal services and infrastructure that contains a number of dwelling units which can be individually adapted to the ever-changing needs and desires of the user over the course of tirne. The detachable units are non-bearing components that are located where and when the user decides. The resident who rnakes the decisions is not a designer. and should not have to becorne one, just as someone buying dothes does not have to be a tailor (Habraken. 1976). These new principles are developed and implemented in Holland, a densely populated country where the housing production is centrally controlted and greatly influenced by the government. Modular coordination is used to permit the interchange of parts and to increase efftciency. Habraken
( 1976) also proposes a system of difierent zones that can be combined to organize the supports. The width of the zones is determined by a study of the space required by different layouts of bathrooms. toilets. kitchens. bedrooms. etc. and the standard measures of the elements they will contain.
Another group who tried technological solutions for user participation is Archigram. Warren Chalk (1 972). one of its members, believes that architects can no longer turn away fiorn the hard fact that everyone in the community has talent and creative instincts, and that the gulf between people. between the cornmunity and the designer wîll be eventually bridged by the do-it-yourself interchangeable kit of parts. While sorne architects are trying to develop systems or products that ailow people more fkedorn of decision, others are more concemed with the social participatory aspect, the most important and influential among whom are R. Erskine. R. Hackney, L. Kroll and C. Alexander.
Egalitarianism dominates Ralph Erskine's outlook on life, and characterizes his architecture. The redevelopment of a large working-class cornrnunïty in Byker Hill in Newcastle shows his emphasis on user participation. The architect's office was established on the site, and residents were encouraged to go there with their problems and expectations. This approach views housing in social tems, through the residents' eyes, in an effort to collaborate and identify with them. and to serve the community as a whole (Erskine. 1983). User participation in Byker is more than merely involving the comrnunity in initial design decisions. Ten years afier the construction began. it was no longer easy to distinguish the input of the professionals fiom that of the users
(Buchanan. 198 1 ).
Rod Hackney helped organize Britain's first self-help General Improvement Conservation area in Black Road. Macclesfield ktween 1972 and 1974- He worked as a comrnunity architect. and established the community based architectural office in the Street where the problems occurred.
The houses were upgraded. not to meet a certain standard. but to accommodate the wishes of ail the individual residents. The cornpleted improvements reflected the individuality of each occupant. No one house was the sarne. Also. working knowledge of building skills was passed on to the residents. Hackney (1982) believes that the result of cornrnunity architecture is longer Iasting and more worthwhile than the traditional schemes. Cornmunity groups should be allowed to participate both in the planning and implementation of the project. The architect should enable the user to take on the responsibility for maintenance. The experience in Black Road illustrated the potential success of CO-operation.self-help and mutual aid within the boundaries of housing rehabilitation. m- Lucien Kroll (1987) defmes his architecture and planning as organic, made of uncertainties, unlirnited. open-ended, Ieading to evolution, and creating complexity. In his opinion, problems associated with mass housing are impossible to solve with an object-orïented attitude, and industry is incapable of answering culNral needs. He believes that diversity encourages people to participate, even in the building of an extemal environment. In his words. "we don3 ask people to do heroic actions towards buildings, but to be there, to explain something, and to continue afierwards and to maintain the thing." He calls this concept postponed participation. His project. the Medical Facdty of the University of Louvain la Neuve near Brussels in 1970, is
the first building in Europe to be built with participation of the conununity and it so shocked the University authorities that they sacked him. In another project, the housing at Marne-la-Vallee new town in France. he used an approach which encouraged as much diversity as possible. "No two houses are the sarne. Even if it's mirrored. the windows are different. People can recognize themselves much more in a diverse landscape thm in repetition, and add their own action to the scherne." Postponed participation is evident in the project. "One and a half years later. people are already colonizing first the gardens. transforming the landscape in their own image" (Kroll. 1987).
Christopher Alexander and his CO-workersbegan to investigate a timeless way of building, and to
develop a pattem language to achieve it in the 60's. According to their theory. the pattem language people have used for centuries gives each person who uses it the power to create an infinite variety of new and unique buildings. From separate languages for different building tasks. the common language for a town is created. The common language can enable people to work together in the design of their own dwellings. The pattern language is open and can be enlarged and enriched by people through use. When it is used, no pattem is an isolated entity. Alexander believes that towns and buildings would not become alive unless they are made with the participation of al1 the people together sharing a common pattem language which is alive itself (Alexander et al., 1979). Besides describing the detailed patterns for towns and neighborhoods, houses, gardens and rooms in the source book of the timeless way. Alexander
and his colleagues also illustrate the production process with examples fiom their practices. One of them is the Mexicali Project, which employs seven principles of control as follows:
(1) The professional acts as an architect-builder who controls al1 aspects of planning, design, and construction in a very immediate way, with direct responsibility to the families who are going to live in those houses, and with the power to respond directly to their wishes.
(2) The builder's yards are decentralized, and each one lies physically close to the houses and is
responsible for the physical development of the local neighborhood so as to place control within reach of the people who are affected. (3) Groups of families of a smail si% have control over their own common land between the houses and lay out their own lots according to their own designs and wishes. (4) Farnilies design their own houses within a fixed cost limit and with certain necessary ground desand pattern languages. (5) The operational aspect of the construction is standardized, but the actuai size and shape of what is done can Vary according to the feeling and requirements of the individual building. (6) The flexible cost-control system benefits from local initiative, which allows each house to be made. step by step, within a fixed budget, but without controlling the exact way in which the budget is spent. (7) The spiritual importance of these houses becomes a real and effective daily part of iife. in uehich the construction process is a "house raising", a time of special importance for the farnilies, lived through by the families and the builders together in a way that celebrates its importance and its happiness. Alexander believes that these principles fom an invariant kemel which must be present in any reasonable process of housing production if it is to reach human needs (Alexander et al., 1985). John F. C. Turner is more concemed with supports for structuring govenunent policy and directing professional interventions (Fiamdi, 1991). In Peru, he absorbed the lessons offered by illegal squatter Settlements, and found that those ideas were also true of the richest nation in the world. His point of view is that, when dwellers control the major decisions and are fiee to make their own contribution to the design, construction or mimagement of their housing, both the process and the environment produced stimulate individual and social well-king Dweller satisfaction is not necessarily related to the imposition of standards. Deficiencies and imperfections in housing are infinitely more tolerable if they are the responsibility of the dweller (Turner. 1976). For Turner (1990): "the most important supports are those that increase access to affordable and well located land, to secure tenure, basic services, appropriate technologies, affordable standards and procedures and credit." Turner (1972) proposes that, instead of the authorharian control exercised by govements, future users should be the ones who control the housing process. For this, government housing policies should be restnictured on the basis of actions that generate support for networks of open housing services, and should deal with the
systems that produce houses rather than with the production of houses thernselves. The building industl should produce compatible components which people could use and assemble in their own ways. New investment in housing should be concentrated at the component and element levels and there should exist a form of professional aid to self-helpers or owner büilders through official instruction. Turner (1976) makes it clear that user participation does not necessarily mean self-help or "sweat-equity" housing prograrns. It refers simply to control over certain operations necessary for developing a housing system. including design. construction and management. In the case of Iow-income families. however. he thinks that self-help construction can contribute to the physical improvement of housing conditions.
Like John F. C. Turner. Nabeel Hamdi pays a lot of attention to user participation in low-income cornrnunities. He assumes that the problems faced by the urban poor have not ken well served
by orthodox planning (1997). The sacred routine of planning fint and acting later should be 0 replaced with a process which is problem driven, community based, participatory, srnall in scale, fast and incrernental. Five levels of community involvement, categorizcd as none, indirect,
consultative, shed control and full control, are proposed for each of five strategic stages of project planning, Le., initiation, plan making, design, irnplementation and maintenance. In a typical project without emphasis on participation, the level of participation declines as one moves on through the stages of the project. Hamdibelieves that this planning tool is not
proficient at delivering benefits to low-income residents. ïherefore, he suggests that each stage of the project should involve the comrnunity and the city in a relationship most advantageous to their mutual interests. Advocacy planners wouid, in this scenario, work more ofien as intermediaries between the regulators and the regulated. The phcipal training tool for the new professional roles and responsibilities is field-based, and conducted mostly in group or workshop settings. The training runs parallel to project development in which cornmunities play a strategic role. Hamdi also implemented his theory ui the Million Houses Program in Sn Lanka, which
was a participatory program on a national scale. Active, intense community-based workshops lasting two to five days were carried out periodically with the aim of explorhg development plans. The workshops were propmmed over specified intervals with the implementation of agreements during the interval. Participants at the workshops included a cross-section of comrnunity representatives. and technical oficers from the various departments. The shared relationship between the professional technical inputs and the community was integral to the method. The approach developed in Sri Lanka was emulated in Bangladesh. South Africa USA and Poland. The fûndamentals in al1 these prograrns were rapid. intense. field-based workshops. a probiem-driven agenda, equal comrnunity/technical participation and documentation. CHAPTER 3: THE COMMUNITY DESIGN WORKSHOP
This chapter presents particular issues relevant to user participation employed by the Community Design Workshop. The chapter is divided into two sections. The first provides a historicai review of the Community Design Workshop. The second analyses the objectives and strategies employed by the Community Design Workshop to implement user participation.
3.1. A Historical Review
3.1.1. Background In Montreal in the late 1960's and the early 1970's, the old residential areas were threatened by private investors. Since the City of Montreal did not suppress or diminish the destruction of viable residential areas for financial gain. the usual way to erase urban blight was to level the buildings with a bulldozer and stan over again. However. an inspection conducted by the Montreal Housing and Planning Department in 1970 showed that most of the housing units to be dernolished could be made both safe and cornfortable for less than the cost of new construction
(Santiago, 1975).
Unfortunately. most of these housing nits were inhabited by low-income tenants. Although the actual residents were reluctant to leave their neighhrhood, it was the absentee landlords who could decide the future of the houses. This put the architect in an ironic situation. While he was designing new commercial developments, the surrounding communities were suffering frorn unemployment, poor housing, and lack of environmental arnenities.
Advocacy architects thought the problem lay in the patronage system. whereby architects were either working for private clients, who rnight have little interest in the well-king of the community as a whole, or for public clients, where stifling bureaucracy prevented them fkorn a working for the people who were theoretically their clients. As a result, fiom the late 60's to the early 70's, an increasing number of architects and researchers attempted to change the practice of architecture fiom within the profession by organizing poiitically, by formïng pressure groups, by
developing new foms of practice, by trying to alter the education system, or by working for community groups.
3.1.2. The Establishment of the Commuaity Design Workshop
The Cornmunity Design Workshop (CDW) was founded by Joseph Baker in McGill University
in 1969. At that time, Joseph Baker was an assistant professor at McGill's School of Architecture and the CDW consisted of a number of senior undergraduates and indentwed
graduate students under his guidance. Its fmt stafTer was Tom Gluck, a graduate whose thesis proposed a series of srnall-scale modifications in the working class district of St. Henry. In the
fa11 of 1970 and following the policy of McGill's Academic Policy Subcommittee on Community Programs. whose aim was to bridge the gap between theory and practice, the CDW became an integral part of the architecturai design course in the Undergraduate Housing Program in the School of Architecture. Joseph Baker (1973) stated the aims of the CDW as follows: (1) To provide professional or technical services related to architecture and planning for community groups which could not othenvise afford them. enabling them to translate community goals into design programs and proposais. (2) To give the student an appreciation of the needs of a real community and an awareness of the kinds of client that exist potentially and the kinds of relationships that can be established in professional roles. (3) To expose the student to the political, administrative and financial constraints imposed upon a real project. Men the CDW was founded, it was the only source available in Montreal for anybody seeking assistance in matrers related to architechue. However, the CDW was not a single group, but a popular phenornenon in the western world at that tirne. Similar organizations in other parts of Canada were the Urban Design Center in Vancouver and the New Street Group in Cdgary. In
Great Bntain, the CDW also had its counterpart, narned the Newcastle Urban Workshop, which . was founded in 1977 by Anthony Collier, a member of the WBA Working Party. The Newcastle Urban Workshop, later named the Newcastle Architectural Workshop, is sponsored by the RIBA Community Architecture Working Party with the RIBA Northem Region and the University of
Newcastle School of Architecture. Its aims are to provide information and support services on architecture and planning problems to comrnunity groups and individuals and to work
educationally like a field center. Moreover, the desire to be of service to the comrnunity was felt not only in architecture schools - for every architecture chic or workshop there was a medical or legal one. It was a classicai example of a zeitgeist at work (Baker & Sijpkes, 1996).
3.1.3. Activities of the Community Design Workshop in Montreal
Among the CDW's activities in Montreal were those related to housing (advice on codes. funding. rehabilitation and new construction), community facilities (rehabilitation and recycling of existing buildings), urban renewal (proposals and counter proposais) and physical planning (information and education). The areas in which the CDW intervened included St. Antoine. Griffintown, Pointe St. Charles, Milton Park and Mile End (Fig. 3.1).
In St. Antoine ward in 197 1, the CDW worked together with a citizens' committee, Operation St.
Antoine. The neighborhood was faced with demolition for the Trans-Canada Highway ramp at that time. To determine the possible continued residential use of the area. a two-man CDW tearn went through every house on the block. They found that the houses were spacious and solid and a the residents were determined to stay. Their conclusion was that the neighborhood should be Fig. 3.1. Areas that the CDW intervened in Montreal. (Courtesy of Joseph Baker.)
Fig. 3.2. The Bon Pasteur project in Quebec City. (Courtesy of Joseph Baker.) conserve& and it led to their three proposais that mabled the neighborhood to avoid demolition. To win sympathy and support for the alternatives they propose& the CDW, together with the citizens' cornmittee, made slide presentations to the municipal association and the ci The city council was so convinced that it managed to persuade the provincial govenunent to accept the alternative route. Later a non-profit corporation took over the properties fiom the provincial govenunent. Similar to its efforts in St, Antoine ward, the CDWs work in Griffintown, whose zoning laws had been changed by the city to limited new building exclusively to industrial purposes. gave professional support to the local residents trying to save the neighborhood fiorn destruction. Meetings were held with the residents to discuss the planning criteria, and to explore residential alternatives to industrial developments. Their studies were presented to city oficials, councilors and services clubs. Moreover. the five-man CDW team, with modest financial support fiom McGill's Center for Learning and Developrnent, rented a flat on Barre Street and initiated an evening program that encouraged the kids of the neighborhood to paint and play. The program got an Opportunities for Youth grant later and local teenagers were brought in to monitor it. However, these efforts did not change the zoning laws, and Grifintown soon lost its 1st semblance of community. Pointe St. Charles is the area to which the CDW devoted most of its energy. The CDW not only provided renovation designs for more than one hundred housing units, but also helped to form the housing CO-ops in Pointe St. Charles. Also. as in Griffintown. some of the CDW's experiences were reiated to the youth of the neighborhood. These will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. Milton Park is a center-city residential neighborhood which was naturally affected by the a building boom during the construction of Montreal's commercial core in the 1960's. From 1972 to 1973. 255 dwelling nits and about twenty shops in the area were pulled down for new high- rise developrnents. The CDW set up its Milton Park office in 1971 to help the Milton Park Citizens' Committee to stop demolition and to encourage and assist the physical improvement of the neighborhood. A study was made of al1 houses for sale. to determine the possibilities of maintaining the low-rent housing stock under the ownership of a non-profit housing corporation. An application was made to CMHC to buy back and renovate vacant buildings. Also. proposais Lvere made for a detailed study of alternatives to the massive apartment/hoteWshopping complex. Three members of the CDW staff even joined in the Iiberation of closed-up houses and were arrested by the Montreai police. Although the housing struggle did not achieve much success. to some extent, it prevented the whole area fiom demolition. A few years later. Milton Park becarne Canada's most ambitious CO-operativehousing project. In Mile End. the CDW organized a surnmer Opportunities for Youth project that employed children in Devonshire School in 1971. The main construction of the project was a giant concrete mushroom in the children's playground, and wall murals on two gable ends of adjacent houses. The effort by the parents and children of Devonshire School impressed the City Parks Commissioner so much that plans were prepared for a complete landscape scheme. Unfortunately. the plans were never implemented and the mushroorn was later replaced by CO-op housing. 3.1.4. Organizations Subsequent to the Community Design Workshop When Joseph Baker left Montreal for Laval University in 1975, the CDW as an organization came to an end. But under the influence of the CDW. several technical resource groups such as the Conseil drr Developpement du Logement Communautaire (C.D.L.C.) came into king in Montreal at the same time. The C.D.L.C., now called F.C.D.H., consists of architects, project e managers and financial administrators. Its main clients are CO-opsand non-profit institutions and its work usually includes both tenant organization and project administration. Iîs objective is to involve users in renovation, maintenance and administration of their houses. Proposais made by the architect are always made in consultation with the inhabitants to ensure consensus between designers and residents. The F.C.D.H.believes that user participation in housing rehabilitation is an effective way to bring empty houses dive in Montreal. When Joseph Baker was elected Director of the School of Architechue in Laval University, the whole school worked as a cornmunit. design workshop (Baker & Sijpkes, 1996). One of their designs was the Bon Pasteur project (Fig. 3.2), which transfonned an enormous convent into six housing CO-ops.altogether consisting of about two hundred units. In Quebec City, Joseph Baker helped to set up the Chique d'architecture, an autonomous, self-financing resource group with the same objectives as the CDW. The CDW has also made a notable impact on those students who have worked in it. One of its student memben. Barry Pinsky. founded an organization called the Roofiops in Toronto afier his work in the CDW. The Roofiops is engaged in bringing the community participation aspect into various parts of the world. including Mozambique. South Africa Lithuania and China. Barry Pinsky believes the CDW led him into long-tenn work with housing CO-opsand many of the CDW experiences are used in his later work (Pinsky. 1998). 3.2. User Participation in the CDW's Work 3.2.1. Analysis of the CDW's Objectives Relating to User Participation Among the three stated objectives of the Comrnunity Design Workshop, the following tw are closely related to user participation: (1) To provide professional or technical services related to architecture and planning for cornrnunity groups which could not otheNvise afTord them, enabling them to translate cornmunity goals into design prograrns and proposais. (2) To enable students and indentured graduates to obtain an appreciation of the needs of low-income communities and an awareness of the kinds of clients that exist potentially and the relationships that can be established in professional roles (Baker. 1973). The main purpose of the CDW's efforts to involve users in housing rehabilitation is to rebuild the broken link between the user and the designer (Fig. 3.3). The two objectives rnentioned above imply two aspects that the CDW tries to emphasize during the process of bridging the gap. The first objective emphasizes empowerment. It pays more attention to the social aspects of the inhabitants than to the physical improvement of the neighborhood. The CDW believes that user control over the management of resources and design decisions is essential. However, generally the client groups are the working-class inhabitants of deprived. transitional or threatened urban areas. In many situations, problems linked to low wages are compounded by a withdrawal of public investment in housing and urban services. and a flight of private capital- Normal access to the systern of mortgages, grants and loans is barred. The groups are therefore unable to generate resources for building work. or to command design and managerial services. Consequently. they have no power to control events. If the power has to be restored, there should be an enabler. the person who helps them to make things happen, and on the way, gives the client groups the opportunities to lem how it is done. The work may be provided free. so the enabler must be non-profit. Also. the work demands far more skills than the design capacity. The CDW founder believes that the schools are a potential resource for the cornmunity and that architectural teachers and students can be such enablers. A great deal of the bread and butter work of schools cm produce usefùl results --- physical, environmental and social surveys can provide valuable a materials for cornrnunity groups, or can define problems and bring them to the attention of the Fig. 3.3. The user-needs gap. (Counesy of John Zeise!.) OiNNEA PROFLSSIONALÇ Fig. 3.4- Tenant initiated renovation. (Counesy of Barry Pinsky and Pieter Sijpkes.) authorities. Schemes of adventure playgrounds can be opportunities for live design work. More substantiai planning and design work can provide community groups with counter proposais to tocal authonty and pnvate development. As an enabler, the CDW emphasizes its concem for the support of residents' own initiatives, and encourages their confidence to do things themselves. rather than rely on experts. The CDW designers regard the enfranchisement of working-class inhabitants as an effective way to restore human dignity, self-worth and pride, to upgrade skills and earning power, and to stimulate a self-help spirit. This self-help spirit will, in tum, stimulate individuaï and social well-king in the low-income neighborhood and is, therefore, key to the success of housing rehabilitation (Baker, 1998). The second objective of the CDW underlines the need to find and serve "new clients". The CDW believes that architectural practice is determined by unaccountable patronage and architects have been too removed fiom comrnunities. Creative architecture should be available to al1 people in society, regardless of their economic circumstances. A professional degree should not only be regarded as a license to market one's service but also as a responsibility (Baker. 1973). Therefore, the profession should restructure itself intemally and in its relation to the rest of society. According to the CDW designers, there are four groups likely to initiate a renovation project: municipal, federal or provincial govenunent agencies; pnvate or corporate property owners; non-profit corporations such as church groups. service clubs. social agencies, universities. etc.; and housing tenants. In the tenant-initiated process. user input mavimizes control and satisfaction with the renovation project (Fig. 3.4). However, because renovations of low-income housing are not profitable. have high risk-benefit ratio. and are certainly unglarnorous. there was almost complete absence of professional involvement in this area. Therefore. a new kind of professional is needed. These people would work directly with tenants and owners in subsidized, locally established field offices supplemented by professionals with more general backgrounds (Pinsky & Sijpkes, 1974). The new clients are tenant groups and CO- ops. Working for these new clients will make the expertise available to a much wider section of people, and will make architect a part of the community. 3.2.2. Strategies of the CDW to Implement User Participation Under different circumstances, varied strategies are employed by the CDW to implement user participation. In mon cases, the strategies not only enable midents to participate in the physical irnprovement process but also emphasize social impacts of participation. Working as a consultant for the community group is a strategy the CDW employs in mobilizing the community group to fight a threat, defining problems and enabling it to exercise continued control. Information about mning, housing codes. funding, or development proposals, is provided to community institutions that lack sufficient funds to pay for normal professional services. When counter proposals to an urban renewal project are needed, a survey of existing housing and an investigation of inhabitants are usuaily undertaken. To win wider suppon for the counter proposals. the CDW works together with the residents and makes presentations to the authori ties. In renovation designs done by the CDW, user participation is reflected in the decision-making process. Before plans are made, the architects meet with each farnily to inquire about the inhabitants' requirements. Field offices are set up so that residents can discuss renovation plans with designers during the design process. Afier construction plans are made. residents are consulted to arrange construction for everyone's maximum convenience. Local labor is used as much as possible in the renovation construction industry. The CDW helps to organize the local construction company but the residents run the company themselves. The construction crew work under the supervision of an atchitect in the renovation work and they are able to progressive1y improve their technical skills. To enable usen to initiate, control and sustain a project to a successful conclusion. the CDW organizes tenants into cwps. To obtain government assistance, the CDW develops a socio- economic profile, which determines the need for assistance and the eligibility af the participants for a CO-opproject. Also, negotiations for the purchase of the apartment units fiom the pnvate landlords are handled by the CDW. Once the CO-oporganization is approved, the CDW begins a physicai assessrnent of the work required for renovation. The CDW also helps to complete application forms for various govenunent-sponsored cooperative assistance programs. To use the law in pursuit of community ends is important in this strategy. Once the co-op has been set up. residents take control of the management of resources and program of work. They have security of tenure, and do not risk losing their homes because of decisions made by non- residents. Last but not least, the CDW regards education and information as a stimulus to participation. Pamphlets are produced to inform people how to go about gening the necessary permits. subsidies. and inspections which they may need in order to carry out construction work. Information brochures are delivered to each household and presentations keep the residents up to date with the progress of the renovation work- In addition. the CDW provides imaginative comrnunity projects that create employment for local youngsters under govemment sumrner prograrns. including evening painting programs. transformation of vacant lands into vegetable gardens and adventure playgrounds. The CDW designers believe these programs create incentives for some of the local kids to successfully continue with their education (Baker & Sijpkes. 1996). Joseph Baker indicates that the most fniitful way to produce and inspire change in the urban environment might be through the very young (Baker, 1973). 3-23.Characteristics of User Participation Implemented by the CDW User participation implemented by the CDW shows three characteristics. First. as most of the users involved in the CDWs work are low-income, working-class people. who face the greatest social and econornic obstacles to user participation, the user aspect makes user participation in the CDWs work unique. Economically and politically, the low-income group enters the debate unevenly matched. Rebuffed again and again. it is unlikely that it will maintain its enthusiasm or hold together its adherents. Joseph Baker (1973) attributes the inability of the residents to improve their situation not to the lack of rational argument, adequate technical advice, or wiltingness to CO-operateconstmctively, but to the lack of economic power of the residents and the social and cultural differences between the residents and those in whose interests society is truly administered. Also, the residents place so much confidence in outside professionals that they do not even bother to participate. There is much to do in terms of pride and feeling of self-fulfillment in the residents, if they are to take over the task of organization. Another strong characteristic of user participation in the work of the CDW is on the designer aspect. Most of the members of the CDW were undergraduate students who stafTed the workshop during academic terms and summer recess. On one hand, they were extremely enthusiastic and felt that it was their responsibility to deal with the problems experienced by low- income people. As a center for consultation, the workshop was assiduous in seeking out and providing information. whether on matters of zoning. housing codes or development proposais. In the area of physical design, the workshop carried out feasibility studies on new housing, community facilities. rehabilitation and parks. and there was little to fault in either the manner in which the work was approached or in its tangible results (Baker, 1973). On the other hand, the undergraduate personnel were inexperienced. Furthemore, the comunity group lacked a sufficient cohesiveness and even basic organization. The participation of the poor in institutional relations organizations was ordinarily not voluntary, and was mandatory for the acquisition of resources necessary to sustain life (Brager, Specht & Torczyner, 1987). Therefore, the architects found themselves obliged to fûlfill two des; one for which they had the professionai capacity and the other king that of community animator, for which they were not equipped. For a community organizer, both technical and interactionai skills were needed in the stages of group development. Initially, organizers needed to be able to establish a relationship of trust with the tenants. Then they should slowly help to establish trust among tenants by getting them to share information with each other. Through the development of exchanges they would succeed in fostering strong social bonds. At the same time, they would create an inventory of problerns, prioritize them and identifi their resources and potential solutions (Brager, Specht & Torczyner, 1987). The lack of these skills mong the CDW members resulted in lowering the morale both of the CDW staffers and the people whom they were trying to assist. The third characteristic cornes from the operation system of the CDW. Since it is university based and sponsored by the university and government, it has less constra.int when the funding is abundant. However, the financial support is not guaranteed. When the money runs out. the CDW's work can not go on as it is scheduled and graduaily it will hand over its tasks to some other technical institutions. This leads to inconsistency in user participation in the CDW's work. CHAPTER 4: CDW'S WORK IN POINTE ST. CHARLES This chapter gives an overview of the housing rehabilitation in Pointe St. Charles during the early 19701s, and describes the Community Design Workshop's efforts to encourage user participation in the Pointe. The chapter is divided into four sections. The fm gives an introduction of Pointe St. Charles and its situation in the late 1960's. The second describes the housing rehabilitation process in the Pointe in the early 1970's and analyses how the CDW involved tenants in the rehabilitation process. The third reviews the CDWs projects related to the youngsters in Pointe St. Charles. The fourth introduces some relevant events afier the rehabilitation. 4.1. Pointe St. Charles 4.1.1. General Description Pointe St. Charles is fifieen minutes' drive fiom the central business district of Montreal. Defined by the Lachine Canal, the Bonaventure Expressway and the St. Lawrence River. it covers a land area of 1.5 square miles (Fig. 4.1). The elevated railway track, which links Halifax with Vancouver. cuts the Pointe into two roughly equal sections. Although there are several English neighborhoods. French predominates in Pointe St. Charles. Due to its well-defined geographical boundaries, Pointe St. Charles is an urban village rather than an extension of the city life found in Montreal. Its uniqueness is also expressed in an architectural way. Populated mainly by low-income, working-class people, the Pointe is a museum of high density. low cost housing. Structural forms of these houses include solid masonry. cavity masonry, balloon and Quebec plank frame with exterior brick or stone veneer a walls. Also. different forms of ownership are found among these houses, such as low-rent Fig. 4.1. Axonometric view of Pointe St. Charles in 197 1. (Courtesy of Joe Carter and Pieter Sijpkes.) private houses, housing co-ops, non-profit housing and govemment housing. The most characteristic dwelling types in the Pointe are two- and three-story walk-ups with accommodation for four, six, or eight families. 4.1.2. Situation in the Late 1960s In the late 1960s, Pointe St. Charles had a population of around 23,000, and over 60% of the residents were engaged in transportation. communication, crafts, production or labor. The Montreal Council of Social Agencies' report (1 968) of sixty socioeconomic profiles of areas in metropolitan Montreal included a statistical picture of the Point that highlighted its impoverished condition. Each of the sixty cornrnunities was charted on a graph to illustrate community area ranking . The study 's criteria included such factors as crowded housing, date of construction, home ownership, value of housing, state of repair of housing, rents, income of farnilies, education, population density, fertility rate and unemployment. The Pointe came out entirely on the un favorable side of the chart, dong with only six other so-called "gray areas". The statisticai portrait of Pointe St. Charles revealed that 10.8% of al1 families had no member of the famiIy in the labor force. Only 10% of dl farnilies had a total income of over $7.000, 5 1% had an income of less than $4.000 and 15% had to Iive on S2.000 annually. which was considerably below the poverty line. The area was overcrowded, with more than 3 7% of 6.1 55 households containing more than five persons. Other unfavorable factors were the fact that 26% of the homes had neither bathtub nor shower, 42% had cold water only, 75% were heated by space heaters and 85% were built prior to 1920. Monthly rents in the Pointe ranged between $30 and 550 for more than half of the homes and hardly anyone paid more $80 a month (Montreal Council of Social Agencies, 1968). The citizens of Pointe St. Charles tended to identifjr with the ares- They were neighborly and in the poorest tenernents, they expected to help each other (Bieler, 1969). In îhe late 19607s, the Pointe became the most organkd cornmunity in Montreai. Also, it was in the forefiont when the first experiments were carried out with community medicai, legal and architectural clinics (Sijpkes. 1989). 4.2. Housing Rehabilitation in Pointe St. Charles in the Early 1970s The housing rehabilitation project in Pointe St. Charies in the eariy 70's was an attempt by a non- profit organization to prepare residents to organize themselves into a cooperative hoilsing organization. During the rehabilitation, tenants were involved in the decision-making proçess regarding their housing (Fig. 4.2). 4.2.1. Initiation of the Rehabilitation Project In 1970, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC), the governent agency that administers Canada's national housing policy, set up an Innovative Housing Program to produce low-income housing. Since there was little information about renovation of older housing, Parallel Institute. a non-profit corporation founded by a group of professionals and academics in 1970 for community and regional developrnent, applied to CMHC for a grant to do research on the possibilities of buying and renovating older housing in working-class areas. The purpose of the research was to gain information about renovating older housing, and preserving and improving existing neighborhoods. CMHC would not assist with this research, but instead with the Innovative Housing Program it would loan 1 /200th of the special two-hundred-million-dollar fund for a Demonstration Project whereby older housing would be purchased and renovated in Pointe St. Charles. The one-million-dollar loan was in the form of guaranteed mortgages, to be a paid back over a thirty-year penod at a preferential interest rate (7.875%). Parallel did not want Uoiising da ta bank. Meeting Detailed Prelim. Pnrallel and screening. choice Estimating pprove repairs. \ units. prelim. Ecorioniu choice. s tu du. Cri teriri r'hoice. v - CMHC Improvemen t CMIIC approval of schedule k releases purchasc pricc - to ncccssnry costs. Prcscntation funds. Application K 10 CMHC. w I Application Parnllel to CdeM for Institutri drawings. rchab.su bsid~ Tenarit hu~sunits. CdcM participa tloci. inupocliori. L 1 t b v CdcM subsidy Rennvntion is approvcd. Rrrioviiliori schcdiilc. œ - -, Furids arc takcs Tcncint releascd. j>lit~:t:. participation. L Fig. 4.2. The rehabilitation process in Pointe St. Charles in the early 1970's. to miss the chance for Pointe St. Charles to improve housing conditions, so it agreed to be the administrator of the one-milliondollar loan. In 1970, more than half of the housing stock in Pointe St. Chartes was owned by absentee interests. While the property of resident owners was geneklly well maintained, that of the trusts inheritances and the professional slum investors suffered hmwillhil negle.ct (Baker, 1973). Parallel Instinite worked with people of the Pointe to organize projects through which they could have more control over their community. Groups of tenants fiom different neighborhoods began to meet to discuss their housing, and some residents even designed back yards to suit eveyone's needs. In April 1971, Parallel Institute set up a xparate Company called Loge-Peuple de Pointe St. Charles Lfee. (Loge-Peuple) to be the legal owner of al1 the properties to be bought and renovated. Parallel held al1 the shares "in trust" and appointed the directors. The first directors were Joseph Baker (architect), Anshel Melamed (city planner) and Peter Katadotis (community organizer). The objectives of Loge-Peuple were as follows: (1 ) To upgrade residential properties in a lowtost housing area without increasing rental levels. (2) To protect the lowest-cost housing stock from the depredations of unscrupulous landlords who seek to squeeze out a profit at the expense of the residents' living conditions. (3) To assess the feasibility of future similar housing programs in similar urban areas. (4) To improve techniques for rehabilitating older housing, while encouraging the greatest extent of local involvement of skilled craftsmen in the building trades. self-help labor, etc. from the Pointe. The most important objective of Loge-Peuple was to organize the tenants into a collective, decision-making group so that they would take over the administration of their housing (Loge- a Peuple, 1973). In June 1971, Loge-Peuple hired a manager, who was ~sponsiblefor tenant relations (meeting tenants and explainhg Loge-Peuple to them). rent collection, maintenance, and purchasing properties. 4.2.2. The Community Design Workshop in the Rehabilitation In order to provide architectural services to Loge-Peuple and citizens' groups in Pointe St, Charles, Joseph Baker and four fiflh and sixth year students at McGill's School of Architecture established the Pointe St. Charles site office of the community Design Workshop in October 1970. It was iocated in a housing unit renovated by the CDW members and fûnded by McGill University. The CDW looked for and inspected al1 properties that were for sale in the Pointe and prepared plans for the renovation. 4.2.2.1. Technical Phases Before the Acquisition and Renovation of Older Housing Proceeding to the purchase and renovation of existing rental housing in Pointe St. Charles, the CDW compiled a complete inventory of residential buildings for sale in the cornrnunity fiom realtors' listings (Multiple Listing Service) and fiom sidewalk surveys of properties oflered directly for sale. The housing data bank included such information as a sumrnary form locating, describing. and evaluating the property; an exterior inspection form compiled from a check list used by the City of Montreal Housing Department inspectors; a realtor's listing; a color slide and a bIack and white photograph of the property and its irnrnediate environment; and interior plans and evaluation of units. In addition. the CDW, together with members of Parallel Institute, determined the criteria for a select ion of properties for detailed inspection and possible acquisition. Because the CDW did not want to introduce a pressure factor into the market, only properties for sale were considereâ. High priority was given to groups of units which could have the greatest impact. Low priority was assigned to buildings near undesirable sites. Properties with major structural damage or with mixed use, single farnily houses, and al1 buildings in a totaily bad block were elirninated. Afier establishing these criteria, the CDW organized meetings with citizen groups to get feedback. Based on the criteria, 29 buildings in the housing data bank were defined as prioriùes for purchase and renewal. Within this group, two concentrations of units were target areas for intense investigation. The intense investigation included an inside inspection to assess the condition of housing units in the target areas. and to estimate the repairs necessary to bring these units up to the standards of the City of Montreai Housing Code. The CDW did not wish to disturb tenants more than necessary, and floor plans and other information were obtained whenever it was possible to enter a house with the tenant's permission. ParaHel Institute and its professional resource groups made the final decisions about which properties would be included in the initial demonstration and learning project. The selection was presented to the Montreal office of CMHC. Afier CMHC approved the purchase price and improvernent costs of the selected properties and released necesçary funds, a demonstration project to acquire. improve and manage existing rental housing available on the market in Pointe St. Charles began to be implemented. 4.2.2.2. Renovation Design i. Procedures of the Renovation Design In general, the CDW took four steps to complete a renovation design in Pointe St. Charles- First, the units to be renovated were measured and checked to ascertain what repairs were essential. The work usually required two one-hour visits to each house. A report prepared by the CDW in 1973 gave a detailed analysis of the structural problems common in the buildings to be renovated. Most of the buildings were one hundred years oId, built as working class housing of relatively poor quality. Most of the buildings purchased by Loge-Peuple had been poorly maintained or not maintained at al1 (Fig. 4.3). Although plagued by inadequate and obsolete plumbing. heating and electricity installations, the most serious problems could be fond on the exterior of the building. Lack of proper maintenance had caused most surfaces that were exposed to the weather to decay. Balconies suffered the most, dong with rear stairways, followed by roofs and the trim around window and door openings. The building suffered fiom structural deterioration as well. The f'reere and thaw of countless winten had caused bricks to crack and mortar to detenorate. Structural timbers had decayed and deteriorated. causing loads to shifi. walls to crack and bulge. outside walls to lean and crack, floors to slope. and window and door fiames to deform. Furthemore, there were many unused and dilapidated accessory structures that constituted a fire hazard. The wooden rear baiconies and stairs. which served as fire exits. were dilapidated to such an extent that they were Iikely to disintegrate when used. Second. one or more of the CDW members met with each farnily to discuss renovation plans in detail so that they could decide together what to do in each flat. Before the discussion. the CDW members prepared the necessary information, including such items as the names, occupations and residential history of the tenants, the monthly rent of the flat, the number of rooms in the flat and their layout, the existing household equipment, and the initial impressions fiom previous a surveys. Since the project hoped to get a rehabilitation subsidy fiom the City of Montreal, the Fig. 4.3. Rental housing in Pointe St. Charles before the rehabilitation. (Courtesy of Robert Stanley.) preparation work also included a list of al1 the defects to be comteci for the city renovation subsidy, and one or more proposed designs made according to the City of Montreal Housing Code, Bylaw 3122 (Fig. 4.4). The discussion usually took place in the kitchen of the tenants' house, and the tirne needed for each meeting varied hm one flat to amther. The designers explained the proposed designs to the tenants and got their fedback. The tenants might disapprove of the proposed plans. In these cases, the CDW would mode their designs according to the tenants' suggestions. Third, afier the CDW redesigned the renovation plans according to the tenants' requirements. an application was made to the City of Montreal for a renovation subsidy. The City would inspect the housing units to be renovated, and present a list of deficiencies to be corrected. The CDW might make some modifications to the designs according to the list of deficiencies. Afier the City approved the designs, the renovation subsidy might pay up to 25% of the renovation costs. Finally. the CDW would prepare construction plans for the renovation. In the kitchen meetings. al1 the families. especially those with very old or sick farnily members, expressed their concem about the relocation problem during the renovation. Therefore, an important aspect of the CDW's work during and after the preparation for the construction plans was to consult the tenants to arrange the renovation construction to suit everyone's convenience as much as possible. For those families who had to move temporarily from their homes during the renovation. Loge-Peuple provided financial aid so that each fmily would move with the least possible problems. ii. Residents' Reaction to the Participatory Design The CDW made every effort to encourage the inhabitants to participate in rehabilitation. a Pamphlets were made to show people how to go about getting the necessary permits. subsidies, -* ------..-- - Existing unit. Possible Fig. 4.4. Sample renovation proposais by the CDW in Pointe St. Charles. (Courtesy of the CDW.) and inspections which they migbt need to cany out construction. Student members of the a Workshop were introduced to the tenants to determine their wishes and preferences with regard to the renovation of their homes. Presentations were held to infonn the inhabitants as to how the renovation work would be carried out. However, the CDW members encountered a very mixed reaction. From the diary of a student who worked in the site office of the CDW, we get impressions of the inhabitants' reaction when the idea of wrparticipation was fim introduced to them: From initial contact with the tenants, it appears that they accept the conditions in which they live and would want to see only minor but usefd changes. The reality of this problem and what makes it sornewhat fnghtening is the fact that we are not only faced with an architectural problem to be solved on the Ming boards but 1 think we are faced primarily with a social problem. When we went to measure the apartrnent of Mme. Proulx who lives with her 83-year-old mother, the latter began to cry when she saw us for she thought we were actually going to do the renovating then and there...... The most important thoughts in their minds are: (a) Will they have to move? (b) i-iow much is the rent going up? (c) What do we have to do in their apartments? They think their homes are fine (Fischer. 1971 ). 1 am under the impression that, though the tenants are very friendly and receptive towards us. there seems to be some worry on their part. and they seem to express it implicitly: (a) No landlord has ever corne to measure their homes with the intention of renovating them. (b) When have they ever ken consulted about changes they would like to make in their homes? (c) They are going to receive a new bathroom with a bath shower and hot water, old walls are going to be repaire& At no cost to them. Oh yeah? 1 think this would seem unteal to anybody. I'in sure they are wondering who this mysterious landlord really is and what he wmts fiom them. 1 feel that though they might comprehend the idea of the project they can not believe it possible or they cm not believe it would happen to them. I'm sure that in their minds they are wondering when the landlord is going to raise the rent or when he is going to evict them so that tenants who could afTord to pay more can move in. Today we had to assure Mme. Lazure at least five times that she wil1 not be forced to move. -..S.* Aside fiom the few obvious spatial use and arrangement problems. like the sink or refigerator in a room other than the kitchen, 1 believe that the people like and enjoy their homes. Maybe it's because they have never ken exposed to anything better. or maybe this is their style of life and this is the way they know how to live. Mme. Tessier preferred that we left things the way they were, but she wouldn't mind having a bath. But in my opinion hers was the worst unit of the batch (Fischer, 1 97 f ). Are we upgrading these units to satisfy ourselves? Perhaps the changes we are suggesting for these people, which we seem to feel have value. are things they dont really want (Fischer, 1971). Some of the CDW members took notes when they had a kitchen meeting with the inhabitants These notes may also give us some ideas of how the residents participated in the renovation design. For exampie. 2474-2496 Chateauguay had twelve units which were renovated during the rehabilitation. Excluding two vacant units, the CDW members inquired of ten families about their requirements for the renovation. Among them, three did not want to participate at dl, three did not want any changes to their houses and only four families discussed the renovation plans with the CDW members. Among these four families, three agreed with the CDW on the proposed designs made according to the Bylaw. These three families also expressed that they just wanted to have rninor changes, such as remangement of kitchen appliances, installation of new windows and addition or removal of interior-doors. Only one farnily disapproved of the proposed design and gave their own suggestions about the layout of their unit. Poverty had left the majority of tenants with feelings of powerlessness and of constraint. They had learnt to expect very little fiom the landlord and were unaccustomed to improvements king made in their domestic environment. The concept of user participation was a product of the conscience of liberal architects and concemed administrators. For the low-income inhabitants in the early 701s, it was a totally new idea and its full rneaning could only be understood through experience. A caricature used as the cover of one of CDWs information pamphlets might tell us something about the user's role in the rehabilitation (Fig. 4.5). It was the figure of a poor resident with a patch on his trousers. Though he had been given the tools for improving his house. a shmg showed he was not ready to use thern. The user. still wonying about the ownership or rent, could only play a supporting role in the process of housing rehabilitation. iii. Analysis of the CDW's Working Drawings The CDW's working drawings showed that most of the renovation work during the rehabilitation concentrated on making the houses meet the requirements of the City of Montreal Housing Code, Bylaw 3 122. i-e.. each house after the renovation shouid have a secure structure; a proper bathroom with a toilet, sink. and bathtub andor shower; two safe fire exits; good electrical wiring; and a suitable heating system. In addition to these repairs, roofs, doors, windows and a balconies were repaired as required. Houses were painted, and walls, ceilings and floors Fig. 4.5. Cover of one of the CDW's information pamphlets. (Courtesy of the CDW.) recovered if necessary. Al1 kitchens were renewed and cupboards wm provided. Unused accessory structures that constituted a fire bdwere demolished. The space created by the dernolition of these structures was used for playgrounds or backyards. The CDW thought that al1 flats fier renovation should be equally clean, safe and heaiffil places to live. with al1 having the same minimum level of renovation (Loge-Peuple, 1973). . However, some of the houses Loge-Peuple bought were in much worse condition than others. For example. 1730-40 Grand Trunk had very few repairable walls, no tubs/showers or hot water and dangerous 1 10v wiring. But 826-848 Charon had many walls and ceilings in good repair. hardwood floors, baths or showers, hot water and 220v wiring in rnost houses. Therefore, at Grand Trunk the CDW proposed to tear down the old plaster, then to install wiring and plumbing and finally to cover with new gypsurn and paint. At Charon, many things were repaired rather than replaced. 4.2.3. Construction Work After some of the renovation plans had been prepared. Loge-Peuple gave the contract to renovate the houses to Les Industries des Travailleurs de Pointe SI. Charles Ltee (The Workers Factory of Pointe St. Charles Ltd.). Les Industries was one of the projects that Parailel Institute had helped to organize. It was sponsored by the government through the Local Initiative Program (LIP). whose purpose was to provide local work for unemployed people in the neighborhood. Almost al1 of the workers in Les Industries were from the Pointe. and they ran the factory thernselves. The renovation construction started in 1971 and ended in 1974. In the early stages of the project. the construction outfit was large and inexperienced. There were up to 65 workers on the job and supervision of their work was difficult, due to the shortage of qualified supervisors. This caused many problems in the renovation work. 0 Since July 1972, Loge-Peuple decided to proceed more slowly with the renovation, and a mal1 construction crew consisting of six workers under the supervision of an architect were hired. Work such as plumbing and electrical installations was connacted to qualified tradesmen. Renovation work executed by the small crew and qualified tradesmen was the best experience of the project (Vaudry. 1998). 'Zhis method also limited the number of people requiring relocation during the renovation. 4.2.4. Financial Problems The rehabilitation project in Pointe St. Charles finished in 1975. Altogether Loge-Peuple bought 17 buildings consisting of 122 units. Two buildings with a total of 14 units were demolished. The remaining 108 unis were reduced to 101 unis as several were combined during the rehabilitation. Financial aid for the purchase and rehabilitation of the dwelling units came from three sources: the loan fiom CMHC, the LIP grants from the federal government and the renovation subsidies from the City of Montreal. The average pice paid by Loge-Peuple for each dwelling unit was $2,500. The average cost of renovation per dwelling unit was $7,500. Thus. the total amount for both acquisition and renovation is about $10,000 per unit. This arnount was twice as much as the market value of a similar unit although it was much less than the cost of rebuilding a public housing unit, which was $35.000 per unit on the average. The high cost of the rehabilitated housing made it impossible to pay back the CMHC loan over a thirty-year penod without raising rents. However, raising rents was against the objectives of Loge-Peuple since residents in Pointe St. Charles a couid not afford the required amounts. a In 1978, CMHC took back the ownership of the rehabilitated housing and raised the rents. The rehabilitation project in Pointe St. Charles achieved a result which was not economic in the senx of covenng al1 cons with rent, but the solution might be an amaaive alternative to other uneconomic housing such as new public subsidized units (Jury of Vincent Massey Awards. 1976). 4.2.5. Formation of Housing Coops The most important objective of Loge-Peuple was to organize the tenants into a collective, decision-making group so that they would take over the administration of their housing (Loge- Peuple, 1973). With the renovation work going on, Loge-Peuple was trying to convert the project to non-profit cooperative housing. By June 1974. a group called the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles had taken over full administration of most of the rehabiiitated housing. In September 1974, the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles received its charter. It was the first housing CO-op in Montreal. The tenant organization was responsible for collection of rents, maintenance of buildings, selection of tenants, and budget management. All tenants worked on a voluntary basis. It was expected that al1 the CO-op members would contribute time and labor for the management and maintenance of the housing units. ALI work was coordinated by the executive cornmittee, which was elected by the general assembly of co- op members. 4.3. CDW's Projech Related to the Youngsters in Pointe St. Charles In the summer of 1972, two projects related to the youngsters in the Pointe were canied out by the CDW under the sponsorship of the federally-hded Opportunities for Youth Prograrn. The a initial ideas for these two projects came from two student members of the Workshop, Joe Carter and Pieter Sijpkes. They conducted a study of desirable wsfor vacant laad in Pointe St. Charles during the acadernic term. The two projects were among the rnany proposais brought forward in the study. One project was called "Green ïhumbs and Sore Thurnbs" and it had seventeen participants. The other involved eighteen youngsters in building adventure playgrounds for kids in the Pointe. Thirty of the thirty-five participants lived in the area. Their ages ranged fiom 15 to 28 years (Carter & Sijpkes. 1972). 4.3.1. Green Thumbs and Sore Thumbs The project had two aims. Sore Thurnbs was to help people to improve their yards. Green Thumbs was to tm fertile unused land into vegetable gardens and to demonstrate a pleasurable use of vacant land. Sore Thumbs began by sending a letter to every household in Pointe St. Ch~les,describing the free services the project could provide to improve backyards. Many people responded and most of them were too old. too sick or too busy to do anything with their yards. The project participants helped them plant gras and flowers in the yards and repaired and painted the fences. In some places they also put in brick or Stone pathways fiom the back porch stairs to the gate in the alIey. By the end of the summer. they had worked on nearly 50 yards. Green Thumbs began with an inventory of vacant sites in the Pointe. From them the project bmoup chose two lots bordering the railway tracks. These two lots belonged to the City of Montreal and the Canadian National Railway respectively. With the help of these two corporations. the project participants prepared the soi1 and planted vegetables on the lots. a Weeding and watering was carried out by local teenagers. The produce, several hundred pounds of vegetables, was given to the Pointe Equal Rights Movement, who operated an Emergency Food Depot for needy Pointe St. Charles residents. 4.3.2. Adventure Playgrounds The piayground project was an attempt to use two vacant lots in the Pointe-for summer play activities, such as building and demolishing structures, painting, playing games, making and showing movies, and having parties. From an inventory of fi@ vacant lots in the Pointe, the CDW selected three lots which were not only close to housing where a large number of children lived but also fiee fiom heavy trafic. Two of them, located about one kilometer apart. were finally operational. Most participants were teenagers and they were encouraged to buiid the playgrounds with their own tools. There were seven to eight staff members per site. In addition one staff member looked afier administration. one was in charge of the supply of materials and one was responsible for the overall coordination. The project also received support from 21 companies, who donated most of the rnaterials. One month after the project participants began their work on the playground sites. parties were held to attract local kids to join in the activities in the playgrounds. The CDW also made movies about the playground activities. Parents, as well as the children. became participants in the production of the rnovies. At night. these movies were shown on the wdls of houses neighboring the sites. Endless re-runs in slow motion and backwards brought roars of laughter and cries of "look at me" (Caiter & Sijpkes. 1972). The playground project also involved play equipment production. Using the workshops of Les Industries. the project participants spent their time, on rainy days. on the construction of a number of large modular play structures, which were prohibitively expensive when custom built. The products were delivered to the Day Care Center of St. Columba House, the Miriam Home a for the Disadvantaged, and the Douglas Hospital. Joseph Baker (1973) believed that genuine pleasure and fulfillment was generated during the surnrner of 1972. It not only indicated that such projects should be adopted on a permanent and wider scale by civic recreation departments but also showed that the most fniitfùl way to change the urban environment could be through the participation of the very Young. 4.4. Relevant Events after the Rehabilitation 4.4.1. End of the Housing Cooperative Formed in 1974 When the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles was set up in 1974, the administration of the housing rehabilitated by the CDW was transferred fiom Loge-Peuple to the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles. During the rehabilitation the total amount for both acquisition and renovation was about $10.000 per unit. which was twice as much as the market value of a similar unit in Pointe St. Charles. so the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles experienced financial dificulties, which affected the repayment of the loan from CMHC. Several factors contributed to the high costs of the renovation. First. involving tenants in the housing rehabilitation was an exploration process $or the CDW members. It was inevitable that. during the rehabilitation. mistakes were made. and the renovation was not done in the most cost- effective way. The project was carried out on a very large scale, and both relocation and management became very difficult. Also. the CDW kgan by investigating buildings rather than their inhabitants. Consequently, the focus of the project was the buildings instead of the people living in them. This led to limited participation in some parts of the project. and the input of resources did not produce the expected results. Second, the expenses allorted for organization and training of the inhabitants were also included in the renovation costs. Third. the poor management of the local self-managed factory, which was responsible for the constniction work in the early stages of the rehabilitation, was mponsible for much of the waste of resources when the renovation began. These factors would not be accepted by CMHC as reasons for the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles to pay back the loan according to the market price of the renovated buildings, which was proposed by the CDW. Therefore, after many months of negotiations between CMHC and the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles, in 1976 CMHC petitioned to repossess the buildings renovated by the CDW. In 1977. legal action was brought against the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles for failure to keep the tenns of the deal with CMHC. The court action resulted in a shenff sale in 1978. CMHC regained ownership of the buildings. and evicted the Housing Cooperative fiom its office, Rents were raised and the tenants were inforrned to pay rents only to CMHC. The Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles lost both its office and al1 the rights to the buildings. The attempts of the CDW to form the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles did not succeed. However, seeds were sown and they led to later efforts made by the tenants to form housing CO-ops. The result was that Pointe St. Charles becarne a center of action. Because of the setbacks in the negotiations between CMHC and the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles. many tenants lost interest in forming CO-ops. However. some members of the former Housing Cooperative continued to negotiate with CMHC. in 1979. a new prograrn was adopted by CMHC. Under this program, in 1980. three smaller CO-opswith a total of 40 units were formed in the buildings renovated by the CDW in the early 1970's. They were the Charon Co-op. the HBL Co-op and the Progress Co-op. Each CO-opwas independent and had its own board. Some of these CO-opsunderwent a second renovation when they were set up in 1980. 4.4.2. Second Renovation to tbe Co-op Buildings Rehabititated by the CDW Most of the buildings renovated by the CDW received only minimal renovations during the rehabilitation in the early 1970's. Many building components were repaired rather than replaced, and they did not last long. Furthemore, the construction work was done by the local self- managed factory at the beginning of the rehabilitation. The workers were inexperienced. and the organizing and supervision was poor. Therefore, the physical conditions of the buildings renovated in the eady stages of the rehabilitation were not satisfactory in the late 1970's and a second renovation was needed. Among the three CO-opsformed in 1980, the Charon Co-op and the HBL Co-op underwent a second renovation when they were set up. For example, when the Charon Co-op started, it obtained a mortgage of $500.000 fiom CMHC for a second renovation. The design for the second renovation was drawn up by the Conseil du Developpement du Logement Communauraire. also with user participation. The interior layout was changed according to the inhabitants' requirements. New insulation materials were employed to make the buildings more energy-swing. Gas heating was replaced by electrïcal heating. New kitchen appliances were also introduced. The Progress Co-op did not need a second renovation when it was set up in 1980. Its physical conditions were relatively good in the late 1970's because its renovation by the CDW was done in the later stages of the rehabilitation and the construction work was contracted to qualified tradesmen. whose work was of much higher quaiity than that of the local self-managed factory. The inhabitants of the Progress Co-op did not initiate a second renovation until 1998. CHAPTER 5: CURRENT STATUS OF THE CDW'S PROJECTS IN POINTE ST. CHARLES This chapter describes the current status of the CDW's projects in Pointe St. Charles. The chapter is divided into four sections. The fm shows the present ownership of the CDW's projects. The second gives a general description of the current housing situation in the Pointe. The third describes the results of the inspection of five buildings renovated by the CDW. The fourth is a case study of how and why one family who were involved in the CDW's efforts changed their house after the rehabilitation. 5.1. Present Ownership of the CDW9sProjects Arnong the 108 uni& in 15 buildings renovated by the CDW in the early 1970's. 12 units at Manufacturers Street did not form a co-op fiom the beginning. The other 96 units fonned the Houring Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles in 1974. However. in 1978 when CMHC reposseswd the buildings. the Housing Cooperative came to an end. In 1980. 40 out of the 96 units formed three srnalier, more manageable CO-ops. They are now the Charon Co-op, the HBL Co-op and the Progress Co-op. The Charon Co-op with 20 units at Charon and the HBL Co-op with 3 units at Hibernia. 6 units at Bourgeoys and 6 units at Liverpool remain the sarne size as they were in 1980. The Progress Co-op grew from 5 units at Mullins to 15 units, including 3 more buildings. The other 56 units of the former Housing Cooperative. which did not form CO-ops in 1980. remain as rental housing. They include 1 1 units at Chateauguay. 18 uni& in 3 buildings at Grand Tmnk. 9 units at Reading and 18 units at St. Charles. The building at St. Charles was later bought by a non-profit organization. 5.2. General Description of Current Housing Situation in Pointe St. Charles With industry moving out and the railway activity &lining, the population of Pointe St. Charles has been reduced to about 13,110 people (Census Canada, 199 1). However, Pointe St. Charles appears to be much more stable than its two neighboring districts, Goose Village and Griffintown. These two districts, once thriving communities like the Pointe. became victims of zoning practices by the municipal administration, and now their habitation rate is almost zero. Pointe St. Charles rernains a low-income comrnunity. Most of its labor force is engaged in manufacturing, trade, transportation and storage industries. The average household income in the Pointe is around $25,592 per year, far below the Montreal average, which is $43.405 (Census Canada 199 1 ). According to Census Canada (1991), there are about 5,745 occupied dwelling uni& in Pointe St. Charles. Barely one fifi of the dwellings are owned by their inhabitants The others are CO-op housing. non-profit housing and pnvate rental housing. Although Pointe St. Charles has a much higher proportion of dwellings built before 1946, and the average value of dwelling in the Pointe is less than two thirds of that in Metroplitan Montreal (Table 5.1). the percentage of dwellings requiring repairs in Pointe St. Charles is even somewhat lower than that of the Montreal Area (Table 5.2). Table 5.1 Characteristics of Dweliings in Pointe St. Charles and in Metropolitan Montreal l 1 CCIARACTERISTICS ! MONTREAL ! PONTE ST. CHARLES 1 TOTrIL NUMBER OF OCCUPlED PRIVATE DWELLINGS 1.235.725 5.715 AVERIGE NL'iMBER OF ROOMS PER DWELLING 5.3 4.5 I 1 AVERAGE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS PER DWELLtNG 1 2.3 I 2.0 i AVERAGE VALUE OF DWELLMG (I) l 144.459 1 93.490 1 1 I -- - PERCENTAGE OF DWELLMGS BUlLT BEFORE 1946 1 16.2% 1 48.3% 1 i I a Source: Census Canada. 199 1. Table 5.2 Need of Repair of Dweilings in Pointe St. Charles and in Metroplitan Montreal ~ l MON lREAL PO- ST. CHARLES NEED OF REPAIR ! 1 - -- -- I NUMBER OF PERCENTAGE NUMBER OF ( PERCENTAGE DWELLMGS / DWELLMGB REGULAR MAINTENANCE ONLY 1 863.750 MMOR REPAIRS 1 211.400 MAJOR REPAIRS 1 90.575 TOTAL i 1135*725 Source: Census Canada, 1991. 5.2.1. Co-op Housing According to a survey done by Batir son quartier and the author in the surnmer of 1998. in Pointe St. Charles there are 46 CO-ops. which occupy altogether 719 dwelling units. Most CO-ops have around 20 units. Eight CO-opshave 10 units or less, the smallest of which consists of 6 households. There is only one CO-opwith more than 30 units. This CO-ophas 39 units over 5 different places. The CO-opswere set up in different periods. The first five CO-ops started in the late 1970's. There was great progress in CO-opdevelopment in the 1980's. when altogether 28 CO-opswere founded. Since 1990 there has ken a decline in the formation of housing CO-ops. No new co- ops came into being duhg the last four years (Fig. 5.1 ). Coep Housing INon-Profit Housing In the IWO'S In the 1980's In the 1990's Fig . 5.1. Number of Co-op Housing and Non-Profit Housing Projects Set up in Pointe St. Charles since 1970 CMHC, on behalf of the Federai Govemment, provided mortgages for 28 housing CO-ops in the Pointe. The other CO-ops obtained subsidies from Societe d'habitation du Quebec, which represented the Provincial Govemment. Thirty-five CO-ops were formed within renovated residential buildings or converted non-residential buildings while the other 1 1 CO-ops were established in new housing projects, among which seven were completed in the 1990's. Since most mortgages have a reimbursernent penod of about 30 years, most CO-opshave not paid off their loans. Each CO-opin Pointe St. Charles has its own president. secretary and executive cornmittees to carry out decisions made by the general assembly of CO-opmembers. Members participating in the running of the CO-opusually receive a rental discount of one hundred dollars. Furthermore, certain low-income households who are unable to pay their rents may be entitled to governrnent subsidies. These subsidies allow eligible households to make rent payments without spending more than 25% of family income. Although some inhabitants have to pay market level rents, the W* stable rental pnce in housing CO-opsand the advantage of assured occupation of the housing still attract a lot of people. Since the tems of govemment programs for housing cwps are making it a harder to set up new CO-ops,many co-ops in the Pointe have long waiting lists. Although housing CO-ops in Pointe St. Charles are not active members of co-op housing federations at the municipal, provincial or feded level, they cooperate with each other in the Pointe and many CO-ops have "sweat equity" programs with other co-ops. Also, Batir son quarrier, the local technical resource group, acts as a source of information and services for most CO-ops. 5.2.2. Housing of the City and Non-Profit Organizations City housing occupies a large part of social housing in Pointe St. Charles. Altogether there are 860 HLM uni ts and 194 SHDM (Societe d 'habitation et de developpement de Montreal) units in the Pointe. In addition, non-profit organizations play an important role in providing housing to low-income people. Thirteen non-profit housing projects include 301 dwelling units in Pointe St. Charles. A survey of these projects shows that most of them were carried-out in the 1990's. which is contrary to the declining trend to fonn CO-opsin the recent years (Fig. 5.1). Also, unlike CO-ophousing, non-profit housing projects in Pointe St. Charles show a great disparity in size. with the largest one having up to 75 units, and the smallest one occupying only 6 dweliings. These projects are either newly constructed buildings or renovated or recycled units. Some of them are designed exclusivel y for handicapped or senior people. 5.2.3. Private Rental Housing Although social housing is widespread in the Pointe, its total nurnber of units still does not exceed that of private rental housing. which is about 2,561 units (Fig. 5.2). The conditions of private rend houses differ greatly fiom one another. The situation in the houses with absentee * landlords is generdly the worst in the private sector. 88 Cocop Housing Housing of the City & Non-Profit Organizations O Private Rental Housing O Privately Owned Houses Fig. 5.2. Housing Sectors of Different Tenures in Pointe St. Charles (Source: Census Canada, 199 1 ) 5.3. Inspection of the CDW's Projects In order to obtain an objective assessrnent of the current physical conditions of the CDW's projects in Pointe St. Charles, all the 15 buildings renovated by the CDW and the community gardens and playgrounds built by the CDW were visited. Photographs were taken both as data collection and for illustration of the results (Figures 5.3 & 5.4). Mile site observations might give an overall picture of the CDW's projects. 5 out of the 15 buildings were selected for detailed inspection. There are two reasons why these 5 buildings were chosen. First. they are still CO-op buildings. which can be regarded as a result of the CDW's efforts to involve users in housing @ rehabilitation. For those units which did not form CO-opsafier 1980, the CDW's strategies were Fig. 5.3. View from the Street in 1973: 2488-2524 St. Charles. (Courtesy of Joseph Baker.) Fip. 5.4. View from the Street in 1997: 2488-2524 St. Charles. not fuily irnplemented, and their current situation may not answer the question of whether user a participation is an effective way to maintain the buildings and the neighborhoods. Second the first-stage site observations have provided sorne initial assessments of the CDW's projects. These 5 buildings include both well-maintained units and units with some problems identified in the initial assessments. 5.3.1. Residential Buildings The inspection was carried out together with Bafir son quartier, the technicai resource group (GRT) in Pointe St- Charles. The 5 buildings selected for inspection are at 294-304 Bourgeoys, 636-640 Hibemia, 83 1-841 Liverpool, 826-848 Charon and 850-864 Charon (Fig. 5.5). The first 3 buildings belong to the HBL Co-op and the other two are of the Charon Co-op. AI1 of them are plex buildings and were ail built before 1 946. The buildings are made of wood and brick except the one at Liverpool, which is a concrete structure. The buildings at Charon, Hibernia and Liverpool are heated by electricity while the Bourgeoys building is heated by gas. A second renovation was made to al1 the buildings afier the CDW's work. Both CO-ops perfonn routine maintenance to their units. For example, according to the CO-oprecord, the Charon Co-op has its Maintenance Cornmittee inspect the buildings every year. If there are sorne minor repairs needed. they will be done irnmediately. Every two years. al1 the units are painted and an extra fee of $200 is col lected fiom every household in the CO-opto pay the upkeep expenses. 5.3.1.1. Si te Inspection AIL the 5 buildings have their front facades facing the streets with small lanes leading to back yards. The lane at Hibemia is not paved but the paved lanes at Charon. Bourgeoys and Liverpool are in good condition. Buildings at Charon and Bourgeoys dso have small front yards. Al1 the a front and back yards are covered with grass and trees are planted. Grass is cut at Charon but View frorn the Street: 826-848 & 850-864 Charon. Fig. 5.5. The five inspected buildings. yards at the other places are wt well lwked afk Yards are mclosed with fences of wood or mesh. Al1 fences are painted, except for those in fhnt of the Charon buildings. which have paint peeling off and nails protruding. The Charon Co-op said they would be replaced soon. None of the 5 buildings has any parking areas. Al1 the cars are parked dong the streets. Sidewalks are paved with concrete and are al1 in very good conditions. Buildings at Charon have some outdoor space paved with asphalt but the pavement has shown some signs of deterioration. The Hibernia building has a wooden patio in the backyard and the fiuniture there shows that people are still using it for outdoor activities. A small municipal park is located next to the building at Liverpool and it provides various kinds of recreational facilities for the children there. Al1 the other four buildings have their own equipments for children to play with in the backyards. Buildings at Charon and Hibernia have swirnming pools. which were set up by some of the CO-opmembers. Chairs and tables are put around the swimming pools during the summer. and children as well as some adult inhabitants have a lot of fun there. The building at Bourgeoys has a basketball hoop and some swings in the backyard, but the swings are deteriorating and should be demolished to prevent accidents. The overall impression of the sites of the 5 buildings is that the facilities are minimal and some of them are begi~ingto show signs of age. However, the CO-opsare trying to improve the situation as much as possible with their limited budgets. The platforms and swimming pools at Hibemia and Charon show that low-income people, when working together. have power to change their outdoor living environment. Also, the CO-opsare reacting quickly to the problems they encounter. The Charon Co-op was told about the problems with their fiontyard fences in April and when the author visited the site ten days late. the fences had already been dernolished. 5.3.l.t. Envelope of the Buildings The appearance of the building at Bourgeoys is shabbier than that of the other buildings. There are cracks in the exterior brick veneer walls. However, according the inspectors fiom the GRT in the Pointe, the foundation and the wooden and masonry structures of the building are still sound, and will be serviceable for at least 15 more years. The roof is still functioning well but it should be replaced in 2 years. No problems have been identified concerning the exterior doors, windows and hardware, but they need reguiar maintenance such as painting and caulking. The cornice of the building also needs to be painted, The most serious problem with the building at Bourgeoys concems the hivo exterior steel stairs. Both stairs are seriously damaged by mtand they should be painted within a year. The railing of the stair at 294-300 Bourgeoys has to be welded, and the steps must be replaced. The balconies of the building are still solid, but some painting is needed. Buildings at Charon have a solid foundation and structure. No brick cracks can be seen fiom the outside. The roof works well, and no leakage has been reported in recent years. The exterior doon. windows and hardware are al1 in good condition. Since the buildings are checked every year and painted every two years, the extenor painting is fine and there is no problem with caulking or sealant. The exterior steel stairs are in good shape too. The GRT inspectors' estimation indicates that the structure, railing and steps of the stairs can last at least another 15 years if paint is properly applied. Although the buildings are well maintained, the problems at Charon are that some of the building elements are near the end of their life span and should be replaced in the near future. This is even more obvious in the building at 850-864 Charon. The wooden structures of the balconies and galleries are nearly 20 years old and should be replaced soon. The building at Hibemia is in relatively good condition and no major problerns are identified. a The multiple roof can last for at least two more years. The foundation and the wooden and masonry structures of the building are sound enough to support the building properly for another a 15 years. The structures and raîling of the stairs and balconies are also solid. It is estimated that they will not pose any safety problems for at least 15 years. No detenoration of painting or caulking was seen during the inspection. The structure of the building at Liverpool is solid. So are the foundation and the roof. No signs of deterioration have been fond on exterior doors, windows and hardware. nie structures of the balconies and stairs are still sound but they need to be painted again. There exist some problems concerning the railing of both the baiconies and the stairs. In some parts, the situation is not so serious and it will be sufficient to remove the rust and to apply some paint. However, in some places the detenoration is quite severe and the railing should be welded or replaced. To summarize the results of the inspection of the buildings' envelope. an evaluation of the remaining life spans of the building elements has ken made. The evaiuation combines a mathematical calculation of the rernaining life spans with site observations and analyses of the buildings. The mathematical remaining life span equals the theoretical life span of the building material minus the age of the building material. The age of the building material is acquired with reference to previous renovation working drawings and CO-oprecords. Site observations and analyses of the buildings may identiQ some unforeseen factors which affect the performance of the buildings and may complement the mathematical calculation which neglects the influence between different building elements. Table 5.3 shows the years of the remaining life spans of the building elements. Al1 the components with a remaining life span of over 15 years are marked .-+l Y.. Every building element which should be repaired or replaced imrnediately regardless of its remaining life span has been given a "O". A building component whose age exceeds its theoretical life span will be given a negative number. Table 5.3 Remaining Life Spans of the Components of the Buildings' Envelope COMPONEMS BOURGEOY S CHARON HIBERNIA LIVERPOOL 7 ROOF Z 2 C3 - - FOUNDATION & STRUCïüRE I +I5 +I5 +15 '1 +lS 1 MASONRY OR BRICK VENEER WALLS 1 PAiNTMG OF 'ME CORNICE 5 WINDOWS & HARDWARE +15 +I5 1 + 15 1 i EXTERIOR DOORS & HARDWARE I 7 5 15 j 7 CAULKING 1 SEALANT i 1 2 I Il PAINTING OF DOORS & W~~WS1 2 2 I I I STRUCTURE OF BALCONIES i 5 1 +l5 / cl5 RAILlNG OF BALCONIES +15 + 15 10 1 O PAINTING OF BALCONIES 1 I 1 I 1 1 l I STRUCTURE OF EXTERIOR STARS 5 + 15 +15 i IO -. - - MILING OF EXTERIOR STAIRS i O +IS 10 / O 1 -1 =AINT~GOF EXTERIOR STAIRS 1 I 2 I i I There are no negative numbers in Table 5.3. which means al1 building elements are within their service lives. Table 5.3 also indicates that no structural problems exist with al1 the buildings. Roofs. exterior doors. windows and hardware al1 function well. However, there are some problems conceming safety in the buildings. such as the railings of the balconies and stairs. 5.3.1.3. Interior of the Buildings In order to obtain information about the intenor, one iipartment fiom each of the 5 buildings was a randomly chosen as a sample for detailed inspection. Inhabitants were consulted about previous renovaûons and the performance of their dwellings. At Bourgeoys, the floor is covered with tiles and the wdls and the ceiiing are plastered with gypsum. Although the wails and the ceiling are in good conditions, the floor needs some repairs. The tiles are more than 10 years old and in some places the floor look uneven. The interior doors and hardware are well maintained. The apartment is heated by a fimace using local gas and the inhabitants said it was quite warm during the winter. The plumbing apparatus has not been changed since the renovation in 1980 but the inhabitants said they hadn't found any problems with it. Hot water is provided by a water-heater using electricity and the heater is still functioning well. There are a range, a hood for ventilation, a refngerator, a cupboard. a sink and a counter in the kitchen. The counter-top is begiming to show age, as is the cabinet in the bathroom. However, the cupboard in the kitchen and the vanity in the bathroom are still in good condition. According to the GRT inspectors. the electrical systern in the building has to be veri fied and the heating system has to be updated. Inhabitants at 826-848 Charon are very satisfied with their dwellings. The floor. ceiling and walls are al1 in good condition. The floor finishes are carpet for the living rcom and bedrooms. tiles for the kitchen and ceramics for the bathroom. The ceiling and walls are plastered with gypsum. In some places. the finishes look almost new. The doors and hardware are well maintained. So are the interior stairs and the other woodwork. The heating and electrical systems in the building fimction well and the GRT inspecton estirnated that they could keep on working for at least another 15 years. The kitchen appliances. including a refrigerator, a cupboard. a range, a hood for ventilation, a sink and a counter, are al1 in good shape. The counter-top and the cupboard are new. The cabinet in the bathroom is also newly installed. A a water-heater in the storeroom provides hot water for the apartment. The building at 850-864 Charon has the same interior finishes and kitchen appliances as the building at 826-848 Charon. However, the floor condition at 850-864 is not so good. It is uneven in some places, and the color of the tiles is nearly womsut. The woodwork is beginning to show age as well. The heating system is old, and since the building has a basement and there is no insulation installed in the basement, apartments on the ground floor are not very warm during the winter. Another problem with the building is that the appliances in the kitchen and bathroom are getting old and need to be replaced in the near fiiture. Both buildings- at Charon have fire alarrns and detectors instailed. The physical condition of the building at Hibemia is the best of the 5 buildings inspected. The floor is covered with cerarnics in the bathroom and tiles in the other rooms. Both the cerarnics and the tiles are in good shape. The ceiling and walls have gypsum finishes and are clean and neat. The interior doors and hardware are in very good condition. The interior stairs axe solid and well-rnaintained. The heating, plumbing and electrical systerns in the building al1 have a remaining life-span of over f 5 years and the inhabitants are very satisfied with these systems. The apartment gets hot water fiom a water-heater and it works very well. The cooking appliances in the kitchen are complete and in good condition. The built-in fùmiture in the kitchen and the bathroom is in very good shape. The apartment at Liverpool is also in good condition. The floor is solid, and is covered with either carpet or tiles. The gypsum plastering on the ceiling and walls is in very good shape, and there was no visible damage to the interior doors and hardware. The interior stairs and other woodwork are solid and well maintained. The apartrnent is heated by electricity, and the inhabitants said it was very warm during the winter. According to the GRT inspectors, the electrical and plumbing systems will be adequate to serve the building for another 15 years. Constant hot water is supplied to the building through electrical water-heaters. Kitchen appliances are complete in the apartment and the bat-in furniture in the kitchen is new. Similar to the envelope of the buildings, the interior building elements are evaluated according to their remaining life spans. Table 5.4 shows the results of the evaluation. The meanings of the numbers in Table 5.4 are the sarne as those in Table 5.3. Again there are no negative nuinbers in Table 5.4, which shows that the interior components of the buildings are maintained and updated by the inhabitants. However, there are some buildings whose physical conditions are not so optimistic and the coiips intend to repair them in the next year. Table 5.4 Remaining Life Spans of the Interior Components of the Buildings COMPONENTS 294-304 826-848 850-864 636-640 831-841 BOURGEOYS CHARON CHARON HIBERNIA LlVERPOOL FLOOR F~NISHES 1 1 13 I I 1 +IS 1 5 ! INTERIOR STAIRS l - 10 I HEATING SYSTEM ! I +15 1 +l5 1 +15 l PLUMBiNG SYSTEM 7 10 7 +I5 1, +15 I ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 5 +I5 5 + +15 I 15 WATER-HEATER @ 5 10 10 5 1 3 l KITCHEN COUNTER-TOP I 1 1 O 1 3 10 CUPBOARDS I 1O +15 2 10 / 1 O HOOD &: VENTILATOR 1 1 1 I 1 I ! - 5.3.2. Community Gardens and Playgrounds The results of the CDW's efforts to help pople improve their yards in the early 1970's were much more sustainable than its efforts to build community gardens and playgrounds. Nowadays, many inhabitants in Pointe St. Charles have lawns and flowers in their yards. Very few yards are as neglected as those in the early 1970's. which were no more than hard-packed rocky earth before ifie CDW worked on them. However, it's dificult to find any evidence of participation by local people at those places where the CDW started the community gardens and children's playgrounds in the fointe. The author's first visit to the sites of the CDW's cornrnwiity gardens and playgrounds was in the winter of 1997. The playgrounds were empty and the community gardens were enclosed by mesh fences. Both the fences and the locks on the gates to the gardens were heavily rusted. Since everything was covered by snow at that time, it was too early to draw any conclusions about the condition. Mer that, every time the author went to Pointe St. Charles, the sites were visited. There were seldorn any children in the playgrounds. and the community gardens were full of weeds. It is evident that these places are just wastelands now. However, there are a community garden and ctiildren's playgrounds in the Pointe now. They were built in the 1980's. and are nui by the City of Montreal. The playgrounds have many recreational facilities for children but they are not well looked afier; the swing is broken and potentially dangerous for children to play on. Sometimes cats and dogs are seen in the sandboxes and they make a mess. The community garden, however, has been taken good care of. Many inhabitants participate, each paying a membership fee of $10 for a piece of land, on which they plant fiowers and vegetables. Since there are many ethnic groups in the Pointe. various kinds of flowers and vegetables can be seen in the garden, and people often work on them during the evenings. There is a cornmittee in charge of organizing meetings for the members to discuss, arnong other things the problem of vanddism and theft of the vegetables. 5.4. Modifications of the CDW's Projects after the Rehabilitatioii One generation afier the rehabilitation, some dwelling units involved in the CDW's projects are different fiom the way they were right after the renovation in the early 1970's. Modifications were made either by CO-opsor by inhabitants. In order to tell how and why the modifications took place. one low-income workingclass famiiy who changed its house after the rehabilitation were chosen for a case study. Information was gathered through site observation of the how and several persona1 and telephone interviews with the family members in March 1998- The family, comprising Margaret and Fred Smith and their son, live at 832 Charon. niey have been living in Pointe St. Charles ail their lives. Fred was a truck driver and Margaret is a housewife. Now both of them live on welfare. The Smiths' home is on the first floor of a six-plex building (Fig. 5.5). The building is three stories high with its facade on the north side facing Charon Street. A small lane to the east leads ro the backyard. On the West side, the building is separated from another six-plex by a fire wall. Two units are entered fiom the street level and an extenor stair leads to the upper units. Al1 the upper-floor units have their entrantes on the first floor with two, including the Smiths' flat. entered directly fiom the entrance landing and the other two sharing an interior stair leading to the second floor. The structure of the building is Quebec plank hewith exterior brick veneer walls. Though about one hundred years old and built as workingtlass housing of relatively poor quality. today the building looks solid and well-maintained. Before 1971, the building was owned by a slurn landlord and suffered fiom willfûl neglect. In 1971 the CDW made the renovation design for the building and involved the inhabitants in the renovation process. However, as discussed in Chapter 4. at that time the inhabitants were just a becoming familiar with the idea of user participation. Their knowledge and willingness Since the Smiths did not suggest any changes to the interior partitionhg during the rehabilitation, - the layout of their flat remained the same as it was when they fmt rented it (Fig. 5.6). The flat was entered through a small vestibule, followed by a long and staggered comdor. On one side of the corridor were the storeroom, the bathroom and the toilet. On the other side were the living room and the dining room. The comdor ended with the kitchen facing south. From the kitchen one could go to both the rear balcony and the master bedroom. There was a small light well on the east side of the flat, which gave light and ventilation to the toilet and the bathroom. During the rehabilitation, the rear balcony was repaired and a spiral stair was added as a second fire exit. Since the balcony was also connected to the neighboring six-plex and most inhabitants preferred to use it as a second entrance to their kitchens, the Srniths began to notice visual disturbance to their bedroom. They had to draw the curtains during the day Jthough they liked to have sunshine. After their son was born in 1975, they converted the dining room into a bedroom for themselves and gave the original bedroom to their son. Although they no longer had to worry about visual disturbance, they found their new bedroom too small; in addition. there was only a cumin separating it from the living room. When Fred was watching TV in the living room. Margaret was unable to sleep. Although the Smiths realized the inconvenience shonly afier the rehabilitation. they began to plan for changes only afier the CO-opwas formed. The Smith family became a coop member when the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles was formed in 1974. After the Housing Cooperative of Pointe St. Charles came to an end in 1978. the Smiths and their neighbours formed the Charon Co-op in 1980. nie Charon Co-op consists of twenty units, including the six-plex the Smiths live in, their neighboring six-plex and four duplex houses. As a preparation for setting up the Charon Co-op, the Smiths and their neighbours made an application to CMHC for a subsidy for a second renovation. In 1979 the application was approved and CMHC ofTered a mortgage of $SOO,Oûû. which would be paid offover a thirty-year period. With the help of the Conseil du Developpement du Logement Communautaire (C.D.L.C.), a technical resource group with the similas objectives as the CDW, renovation soon took place. This time there was a real cooperation between the designer and the user. When the C.D.L.C. architect came to visit the Smiths, the couple described al1 the inconveniences that existed in the house. First. their bedroom was too small, and they hoped to separate it fiom the living room; second, there was not enough storage space; third, the toilet was too small. Finally. Margaret expressed her wish for a more modem kitchen. Based on their requirements, the architect made some suggestions. The Srniths thought most of them were very good ideas. For example. pari of the entrance landing was extended and enclosed to make a vestibule with a closet. In this way, with some of the interior walls tom down. the living room could be enlarged to include the former vestibule and part of the corridor. Also. the storage could extend a small amount into the comdor. The Smiths also liked the idea of combining the toilet and the bathroom into a larger bathroom and to use mechanical ventilation instead of the light well. However, they did not agree with the architect's suggestion that the position of the kitchen and the couple's bedroorn be reserved. since they had suffered from visual disturbance fiom the rear balcony before. Instead, they suggested moving the closet into their son's bedroom and placing a partition between their bedroom and the living rmm. The architect agreed to move the closet but he refùsed to build the partition between the bedroom and the living rwm. There is a bylaw which prohibits having a bedroom without naturai light and ventilation. The renovations of 1979 reflected the Smiths' original wishes (Fig. 5.7). Their bedroom and the toilet were made larger. New insulation materials were employed to render the house more energy-saving. Since the washing machine was moved into the enlarged bathrwm and the heater was reptaced by electnc heating, a new counter was introduced in the kitchen. The counter begins with the refrigerator, and ends with the electric stove. They occupy two sides of the kitchen and define one corner of the room as a food processing area. The other two sides of the kitchen. with their son's bedroom door removed, form a corner amfor dining. Perhaps what Margaret imagined to be the exact image of a more modem kitchen had not been expressed completely in the design, but this layout was certainly the architect's interpretation of the word "modern": a more reasonable food processing axis and a clearer demarcation of hction. Also, reminded by the inhabitants of the visual disturbance fiom the rear balcony. the architect added a small storage room on the balcony both to increase storage space and to decrease the usage frequency of the rear balcony by passersby. The intenor space of the Smiths' flat afier the second renovation became more integrated and open than the former plan (Fig. 5.8). This resulted from the residents' choice to use the space in a less formal but more efficient way. Before 1979. the space sequence formed by the layout of the vestibule. the corridor and the living room reflected the idea that it was obligatory to have a formal entryway leading to a forma1 hall in which guests were greeted. and then entertained in a living room. Each space was well defined, and was assigned a specific funetion. The layout also required that a large proportion of the intenor area be used merely for circuIation. The C.D.L.C. architect tned to organize the intenor space in a different way, and proposed to use an extension as a vestibule. and to open the living roorn directly to the vestibule. His suggestions were based a on the assumption that the former plan did not coincide with the informa1 way that low-income Fig. 5.7. Renovation plan of the Smiths' flat in 1979. (Courtesy of the C.D.L.C.) Before 1979 After 1979 Fig. 5.8. Cornparison between the interior spaces of the Smiths' flat before and after 1979. working-class people used the space. Whether this assurnption was tenable or not depended on the judgment of the residents. The participatory design of the second renovation was a process during which the architect made inquiries through design. In this process, the users decided for themselves how they would use the space after the renovation. The decision was based on their everyday experiences, and it finally led to an increase in the openness of space in the house. Having experienced the whole process of two renovations, the Smiths wanted to cany out some self-help transformations. Had it not ken for the -c accident in 1986, during which Fred lost not oniy one of his eyes but his job as well, the transformation of their house in the 1990's would have taken place earlier. Since they depend on govermnent subsidies after the accident, they have no choice but to make changes to their home step by step. The fùrniture in the Smiths' home was bought at different times and is of various colors and styIes. For example, the oldest set is dark brown and presents a variety of details. The newest pieces. including a bed and a chair. have the texture and color of shiny brass. Because of space constraints. it is not unusual in the Smiths' house to find furniture of diflerent colors and styles in one room (Fig. 5.9). However. when they bought three cabinets to house Margaret's favorite collections six years ago, they thought they should change the interior space slightly. Margaret likes to show off her collections when her friends visit. so she insisted that the cabinets be put in the living room. However. with most of the space taken up by the TV. the hi-fi and the sofa. there was limited wall space remaining. The on1y solution was to take down the door between the living room and the vestibule, and they soon decided to do so (Fig. 5.10). "This even makes our living room brighter." Margaret seems very satisfied with their first attempt- NOW,standing before the cabinets and experiencing the collections visually, "you would join the homemaker in one dimension of her delight" (Glassie, 1982). This delight is very similar to Mrs. Fig. 5.9. Photograph of the Smiths' bedroom. This photo shows the juxtaposition of furniture of different colors and styles. Fig. 5.10. Photograph of the living room of the Smiths' flat looking toward the vestibule. Cutler's deepest pleasure that Henry Glassie describeci in Pmsing the Time in Ballynenone. 1 It cornes not only fiom the beauty of the exhibits but also hmthe involvement of the hostess. Just as the mutation of Mrs. Cutler's dresser through constant intervention reflects the kitchen's dynamic, Le., the continuities of thought and action in the kitchen of Mrs. Cutler's home, the alteration of the SmiW living room space is an evidence of a dynamic home building process. Neighbours and fiends assisted the transformation process in the Smiths' house. One of Fred's friends is an electrician, which may be one of the reasons why the lighting installations in the Smiths' house are so varied in style (Fig. 5.1 1). Some fixtures are for decorative purposes, and others have a practical pupose. The two downlights in the ceiling above the cabinets were the choice of Margaret, who thought they would make her glassware collections more attractive. The recessed fixture above the bathtub was installed afier a ground glass door was added between the bathtub and the toilet. It was necessary to lower the ceiling slightly for the recessed fixture. Because of the installation work, the couple could not use the bathroom properly for almost a week. This was considered a minor inconvenience by the couple. however. and they expressed pleasure in the work process and the resulting effect. The kitchen is the place where the hostess spends most of her time. and here Margaret can always find something to be improved (Fig. 5.12). Besides changing the material of the floor to vinyl, she found that the gray color of the counter top made cleaning very difficult. In 1994, at a cost of about $300, they replaced the counter top with a much darker one. Also. Margaret believed it would look more modem if a dark stnp was added to the bottom of the hanging cupboard. Fred cornmented, "It really works. My wife often has very good ideas." The Smiths Mrs. Cutler is one of those included in Henry Glassie's study in Ballymenone. The kitchen is the center of Mrs. Cutlefs home and an open dresser displaying crockery is arranged across from the hearth in the kitchen. In Parsing the Time in Ballymenone. Glassie describes Mrs. Cutler's great happiness in disassembling and rebuilding the dresser of delph in her kitchen (36465). (b) The reces;sed fixture above the bathtub. in the living room. in the living room. Fig. 5.1 1. Photographs of different lighting installations in the Smiths' flat, Fig. 5.12. Photograph of the Smiths' kitchen. seem to take pnde in every change they have made to their house, but what they talk about most ofien is the glas dwr between their bedroom and the living room. Since the architect did not agree to the addition of a partition during the second renovation. the couple continued to experience disturbance between their bedroam and the living room. In 1994. they decided to solve the probIem themselves. They thought a transparent partition would be nice, and would alleviate some of the darkness in the bedroom. They found a glas double door in a do-it-yourself shop, but because the size of the door was much smaller than the dimension of the opening. Fred decided to make the door fiame himself. He bought the tools he needed and finished the work in a week. Margaret picked some of the ornaments she liked the best and glued them ont0 the glass panes. "It cost us over $450 but it's worth it Even some of our neighbors emuIated us," they said with obvious pride. The work not only resulted in physicai irnprovements but also gave them a great deal of pleasure, and a feeling of accomplishment. Now it has become Margaret's favorite place for posing for photograph (Fig. 5.13). SeIf-help transformations are seldom confined to the interior. In 1996, together with some neighbors, the Smiths extended their rear balcony (Fig. 5.14). Before the extension, the rear baicony was no more than an exterior corridor. Now a small table and a few chairs clearly define it as an outdoor parlor. In summer?with the door and window of the kitchen open. it becomes an extension of the interior dining area to the outside. The neighbours cm also corne from the other side of the balcony and join them for a cup of coffee. More noteworthy is the way in which the Smiths solved the problem which arose as a result of building the extension. Before making the alterations, the Smiths didn't obtain the Repair and Alteration Permit. which was required for their extension work. ïherefore, when the City of Montreal Pemits and Inspections Department asked for it, they had to ask an architect to make a plan of the construction they had done (Fig. 5.15). Although the plan was approved by the 0 Fig. 5.1 3. Photograph of the glas door between the living room and the bedroom of the Smiths' flat. Fig. 5.14. Photograph of the extended rear balcony of the Srniths' flat. authonty and the permit was granted, the wholé process was a total reversal of the regular procedure to get a permit and then to start a construction. In fact, the process is more than just a reversai of procedure; it presents an active us& who has put the designer into a passive position. Compared with the situation in the rehabilitation of 1971, the user and the designer have completely reversed the roles they play in the home- building process. The user has grown fiom a supporting actor into a protagonist in his domestic environment. Whether this exchange is beneficial or not needs merresearch. However, it is certain that the low-income user will become more and more active in his home building process, as we can see from this case study. One place in the Smiths' house, which is significant in the study of user participation in housing, is the closet in the vestibule (Fig. 5.16). It now contains a variety of tools for household transformation. The Smiths know exactly how to use each of these tools and it is certain that they will not allow them to become exhibits like Margaret's collections in the cabinets. Their son has moved out recently, and the empty bedroom foreshadows another transformation (Fig. 5.17). In fact, the couple have expressed their wishes to combine the two bedrooms into one. The experience of the Smith family is not unique in the CO-opbuildings. Many people in the co- ops have stories of how they modified their dwellings according to their own needs. Factors such as demographic alterations, di fferent requirements throughout the li fe course. economic incentives and needs for expression stimulate changes in the requirements of low-income inhabitants. These factors are so active that they will never reach a fixed stage. Furthemore, the more experienced the users, the more quickly and directly these factors will be reflected in user transformations of their houses. Therefore. involving low-income users in housing rehabilitation e is a continuous and dynamic course. Fig. 5.16. Photograph of the closet in the vestibule of the Smiths' flat. Fig. 5.17. Photograph of the empty bedroom after the Smiths' son moved out. 5.5. Summary and Discussion One generation afier the CDW's efforts in Pointe St. Charles, CO-op housing has become an important part of the social housing sector in the ares ' AIthough the Pointe remains a low- income district, the housing situation of the poor people in the cwps has enimproved. The structural problems which were common in low-income housing in the Pointe are seldom present in the CO-ophousing. Table 5.5 lists the stnictural problems identified during a housing survey in the Pointe in the early 1970's (Stanley, 1973); it shows that very few still exist in the 5 buildings inspected. The inspection of the interior of the CO-op buildings indicates that the inhabitants not only acquire facilities which they did not have before the rehabilitation, but also are maintaining and updating these facilities. The updating process is an indication of the way in which inhabitants play a more active role in their domestic environments. Physically, the CDW's efforts have resulted in better and more suitable housing conditions for the low-income people. Table 5.5 Percentage of the Five Inspected Buildings with Structural Problems -- - STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS REPORTED IN A PERCENTAGE OF THE BUILDPJGS WITH SURVEY IN POINTE ST. CHARLES lN 1973 THE STRUCTURAL PROBLEMS FOUSDATIONS WlTH STONES CRACKING AND CRUMBLING 0% ROTTED COLUMNS CARRYlNG NO LOAD 0% .-.- . - - -. , CRACKING GIRDERS OYo l SAGGING FLOORS (2 buildings) 1 CRACKING BRICK WALLS 20% ( l building) -- - BULGWG BRICK WALLS I W/o RICKETY STAIRS & BALCONiES 1 OO/o The experience of the community gardens and playgrounds uidicates that leadership and organizing are important in a participation pmcess. A stable participatory system must be provided for local inhabitants, dong with clear definition of rights and responsibilities. The CDW expected that local people would automatically take over the community gardens and children's playgrounds and would look afier them fier the CDW lefi. The current statutusof the gardens and playgrounds shows that the CDW's expectations are not reflected in reality. CHAPTER 6: INHABITANTS ATTITUDES AND 0 EVALUATION This chapter presents the inhabitants' attitudes towards the rehabilitation and user participation one generation afler the CDW's efforts. The chapter is divided into four sections. The first gives a description of the respondents. The following sections examine the respondents' attitudes towards the rehabilitation, towards their dweliing and neighborhood and towards user participation respectively. 6.1. Description of Respondents The primary source of data for this chapter consists of personal interviews with inhabitants and a social worker in Pointe St. Charles. and a telephone interview with an attorney who was involved in the rehabilitation process. Before the interviews. a questionnaire survey was carried out a arnong al1 the original inhabitants, who have been living in the houses renovated by the CDW since the early 1970's. Although the questionnaire swey is an effective way to coIlect demographic information about the inhabitants and to inquire their residentiai history. a stmctured fom is less effective in obtaining insights into people's attitudes towards the rehabilitation and user participation. The results of the interviews show that most respondents prefer to answer questions in reference to specific incidents they have experienced. These incidents are very helpful for this study but they are usually missing in a systematic questionnaire. Only open-ended discussions can enable the respondents to talk fieely and at length. and a lot of useful information was obtained in this way. 6.1.1. Selection of Respondents In an initial ampt to locate the original irihabiuiau, the inhabitants living ui the buildings a renovated by the CDW were asked about their residential history. Although this seemed to be the most direct method, there was a lot of resistance during this period. The inhabitants were very suspicious of inquiries hmstrangers, whether the inquiries were by mail, by phone. or at their doomep. Some help from mediators or third party personnel had to be sought to introduce the investigator to the inhabitants. These mediators included lawyers and architects in the Pointe. Since they were only able to give lirnited time to the investigator, it was not feasible to investigate a large sample at the initial stage. The original inhabitants had to be identified before questionnaires were delivered. Some of the inhabitants' narnes were found in the CDW's working drawings. Also, Lovell's Montreal City Directory provided names and addresses of some of the inhabitants. However, both of these sources were incomplete, and more information had to be gathered. Several other sources were consulted, including St. Columba House (the local comrnunity center). Clinique Communautaire Pointe Sr. Charles, Share the Warmth (the local food bank) and a lawyer's office in the Pointe. The local lawyer provided a list of al1 the CO-opmembers in the Pointe in 1974. A cross-tabulation of the above-mentioned sources shows that there are 3 original families at Charon. 1 at Chateauguay, 1 at Hibernia 2 at Liverpool and 1 at Mullins. Also, a one-way tabulation of the inhabitants who lived in the buildings renovated by the CDW from 1969 to 1978 was made according to Lovell's Montreal City Directory. The tabulation indicates little difference in the mobility of the inhabitants before and afier the rehabilitation. When the author had verified the names and addresses of the original families in the phone book, a questionnaire was sent to each of the 8 original fmilies to obtain some demographic information. and to inquire about their willingness to participate. At this stage, third-party personnel were involved to introduce the author to the inhabitants. Finally, one farnily at Charon and one at Mullins were chosen for the detailed open-ended interview. The family at Mullins stayed in the same building rehabilitated by the CDW while the family at Charon moved within buildings renovated by the CDW. The remaining six original families were either reluctant. or too busy, to accept the interview. Besides the original families, an inhabitant who had ken involved in the rehabilitation but later moved out of the building renovated by the CDW was interviewed. The intention of this was to obtain a different point of view. Also, since the CDW's efforts rnight influence the inhabitants outside the buildings they renovated, an old inhabitant who lived next to one of the CDW's renovation projects at the the of the rehabilitation was included in the respondents. Furthermore, interviews were extended to include an attorney who worked in the Legal Clinic in the Pointe in the early 19709s,and a social worker in Pointe St. Charles. 6.1.2. Interview Process The interviews were carried out by the author between May and July 1998. Every effort was made to try not to surprise the respondent at his doorstep to avoid any hostility and embarrassrnent for both the subject and the investigator. In addition to the mediators' introduction. al1 respondents were contacted by phone before the interview. They were briefed about the study. and a time and place was set for the meeting. If a personal interview was not convenient. a telephone interview was arranged. Prior to each interview, an outline of questions to be asked was drawn up. based on the information gathered from previous contact with the respondent. The outline began with some warm-up questions, about factuai data regarding the respondent's experience during the rehabilitation. The next step focused on the gathering of perceptual data. including the respondent's attitudes and evaluation of the rehabilitation, his dwelling and the neighborhood. e The final stage was concemed with data about the respondent and his farnily members' attitudes towards user participation and thek CO-op at present. The outline was designed so that the questions directed to the respondent were arranged in a sequential order of events, to help the respondent remember Somation that would be signifiant as the interview proceeded. However, the interviewee would ofien talk about something unexpected but very helpful to the study. On these occasions, extemporaneous adjustments to the questions had to be made to. encourage the respondent to provide as much usehi information as possible. Interviews usually took place at the respondents' homes. It was considered important to provide the respondent enough time to answer the open-ended questions, so as not to rush him during the interview. so interview time ranged from half an hour to two hours. The CDW's drawings of each respondent's house were shown during the interview to remind the inhabitant of the rehabilitation process. Technical phrases were explained to avoid any ambiguities, and to reduce bias. Sensitive and personal questions were asked at the end of the intentiew. Although in some interviews it was almost impossible to avoid several interruptions because the respondents were 0 looking afier their grandchildren while king interviewed, nearly al1 interviews went smoothly and respondents seemed very fnendly and cooperative. With the approval of the respondent, every interview was recorded and was later transcribed. In some cases? the inhabitants allowed photographs to be taken in their homes. 6.1.3. Respondents' Situation in the Early 1970's and at Present Altogether six respondents were interviewed, including 4 inhabitants in Pointe St. Charles and 2 outsiders. For convenience of study, al1 the respondents are numbered. The resident respondents are numbered respectively according to gender, with M standing for male inhabitants and F for female inhabitants (Table 6.1 ). The outsiders, an attorney and a social worker, are numbered L1 and S 1 respectively . Table 6.1 Resident Respondents in Pointe St. Charles 6 NiERvIEw No. NAME PLACE OF BIRM i i3l-iNicBACKGROUND 1 AGE I I Ml Bill Chapman 5 7 London. ON I Irish Canadian I I I M2 JeanGuy DutiI 66 Quebcc City - I Fmch Canadian 1 F 1 1 Virginia WyLins 65 Ouaide Monml Irish Canadian i ! FZ 1 J- Aube %O Pointe St Charla I French Canadian i AI! of the resident respondents lived in rental housing before the rehabilitation. However, they belong to different categories regarding their relationships with the buildings rehabilitated by the CDW. Ml has ken staying in the same CO-op building renovated by the CDW since the rehabilitation. In 1997, when most of his children moved out, he changed to a smaller apartment within the same building. M2 has been living in the Pointe since 1945. Although he has not lived in the buildings renovated by the CDW, he was influenced by the CDW's efforts in the 1970's and together with other inhabitants in his building, he formed a housing CO-opin 1980. O FI lived in a CO-opbuilding renovated by the CDW before 1985. When her family becarne smalier in 1985, she moved to another CO-opbuilding. which was also rehabilitated by the CDW. F2 is an inhabitant who rnoved fiom the building rehabilitated by the CDW to a rental house in 1975. Now she lives in a privately owned house. Tables 6.2-6.9 give a general description of the situation of the respondents and their dwellings in the early 1970's and at present. Pierre Sylvestre (LI ) cornes fiom a small city outside Montreal. He is an attorney with his office in Little Burgundy now. He worked for the Legal Clinic in Pointe St. Charles in the early 1970's. This interview was carried out by phone. July Stevens, numbered SI. lives outside Pointe St. Charles. She is the director of Share the Warmth, a food bank for Pointe St. Charles, Little Burgundy, Verdun and St. Henri. The office of Share the Warmth was rnoved into Pointe St. Charles in 1994, and it was renovated with participation of local inhabitants in May 1998. Table 6.2 M 1 's Situation in the Eariy 1970's and at the Tune of lntemew . ! l INmE EARLY 70's i AT THE TlME OF MTERVlEW I 1 EDUCATION 1 ff igh school 1 High school l ! OCCUPATION i Secudty guard for CdianPacifÏc Wlway !I Sccurity guard l MARITAL Married Mamicd STATUS i I I 1 1 FAMILY SlZE : 10 ! 3 2 dul~:the icspondent and his wife 2 adults: the respondent and his wife FAMILY I1 STRUCTURE ! 8 childrm: 4 boys & 4 girls 1 child: the mpondent's youngcst daughter i HOUSEHOLD ' N.A. It N.A. iNCOME 1 ! l PARTICIPA- ' TION IN Co-op presidcnt Coach of basebail and hockey teams for rnenirilly CO-OPS OR disabled people COMMUXITY ORGANIZA- Member of the Pointe Equal Rights Movcment TIONS I i =O-Op t-ur=r 1 I Table 6.3 Situation of M 1 's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview IN THE EARLY 70's 1 AT THE TlME OF INTERVIEW I 2398 Mullins LOCATION : 2394 Mullins TYPE OF HOUSING l I SUITE SIZE i 5 bedrooms (8 roorns. 2-story) i 2 bedrooms (5 rooms) I 1 YEARSOF ! OCCUPATION i Table 6.4 M2's Situation in the Eariy t 970's and at the Time of Interview 1 i IN ïHE EARtY 70's AT THE TIME OF iNTERViEW li i EDUCATION 1 l - OCCUPATION i Blacksmith for Canadian National Railway l MAR1T.U Manicd STATUS 1 1 2 adults: the respondent and his wifc 2 adults: the rtspondent and his wife FAiMILY STRUCTURE i 4 children: 2 boys & 2 girls 1 l ! l HOUSEHOLD N.A. INCOME PARTICIPA- , I TION M i CO-OPS OR ' Director of CLSC in the Pointc I Member of thc cosp COMMUNITY ! (gctting mails for the cosp) ORGANIW- TlONS I ! Table 6.5 Situation of M2's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview iN THE EARtY 70's AT THE TIME OF INTERVIEW LOCATION , 852 Hibernia 852 Hibernia ! TYPE OF HOUSING 1 1 SUITE SlZE 3 bedrooms (5 rooms) ? 1 bedroorn (5 rooms) TENURE Rented from a landlord 1 CMP I RENT l $320 YEARSOF OCCUPATION 1 Table 6.6 F 1 's Situation in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview 1 I M THE EARLY 70's I AT ïHE TlME OF iNTERVIEW - i I 7 OCCUPATION f Houewife -Community woiker i - MARITAL Widowed STATUS 7 FAMILY SIZE - 2 adule: the rcspondent and hcr husband I adult FAMILY STRUCTURE 9 children: 6 boys & 3 girls - i HOUSEHOLD 1 N.A. On w el fare INCOME I l - PARTICIPA- Cwpmember 1 Cosp member TION IN I CO-OPS OR Local initiatives member 1 Member of the Cosp Selection Committee till COMMUNITY / 1997 ORGANIZA- Member of the Pointe Equal Rights Movement [ TIONS 1 Table 6.7 Situation of F 1 's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview iN THE EARLY 70's 1 AT THE TIME OF INTERVIEW I i I LOCATION 636 Hibernia 846 Charon TYPE OF 1 Triplex 1 Sis-plex HOUSING ! I SUITE SIZE 7 bedrooms ( 10 rooms. 3-storey) 1 bedroom (4 rooms) TENURE \ CMP 1 c0-0~ i 1 RENT j 1 1 I YEARSOF i OCCUPATION Table 6.8 F2's Situation in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview CN THE EARLY 70's AT THE TIME OF iNTERVIEW EDUCATION High school Hi& school i i OCCUPATION Administrative sccrctary i Rctired MARITAL 1 Marricd Divorccd STATUS fl I j I I FAMILY SlZE i 1 2 adults: the mpondcnt and her husband 3 adults: the rrspondent her daughtcr & her son- FAMILY in-law STRUCTURE 1 2 childm: I boy & 1 girl 3 childrcn: the rrspondcnt's grandchildrcn I 1 1 HOUSEHOLD : N.A. ! N.A. 1 PARTICIPA- 1 TION IN I C-p member CO-OPS OR 1 Community hcalth worker Member of the Community Center COlMMUNlTY j Secrem of the self-rnanaged boat factor'. ORGANIZA- : Member of the iood bank Table 6.9 Situation of F2's Residence in the Early 1970's and at the Time of Interview THE IN EARLY 70's 1 AT THE TIME OF INTERVIEW LOCATION ! 2501 Sc. Charles ( 1972-1975) 684 Liverpool (since 1979) I l TYPE OF I Duplex l Single anached houx HOUSMG I - --- 3 bedrooms 4 bedroorns (7 rooms. 2-stop) Owned YEARSOF OCCUPATION 1 I I 6.2. Respoadeats' Attitudes and Evaluntioa of the Rehabilitation 6.2.1. Respondents' Description of the Rehabilitation With reference to the CDW's working drawings, al1 the resident respondents could describe their experience during the rehabilitation in detail. although it twk place about 25 years ago, and most of the respondents were over 60 years old. Ml and FI could still remember the narnes of the architects who involved them in the renovation. This indicates that the rehabilitation has been a very important matter in their lives. When asked about the rehabilitation process, most of the resident respondents spontaneously began by talking about the housing conditions before the rehabilitation: In those days, the area needed a lot of organizing. People had temble housing conditions, very bad housing conditions. Some had no baths, no showers. Ceilings falling down, walls and floors, really, really tembie. Nobody was living in this block. This was an empty block ready to be destroyed. The City was tearing it down. The stairway was just hanging on. You couidn't live in the condition of the house when we took it over. These descriptions are in contrast with those about the housing conditions afier the rehabilitation: When we moved in in 1973, it was a brand-new house. Everything was done according to my requirements. Everything stayed like that for 24 years and we didn't make any changes at all. We had the stove on the second floor beside the stairway going up to the third floor. We needed no heat on the third floor. The only thing we found someday is that upstairs was too hot because al1 the heat went right up. We had a funiace on the third floor but we removed it. The way we set up the house, it was efficient enough to save money out of fuel. Although M 1, FI and F2 ail had their houses renovated in the early 1970's, their participation in the renovation differed in degree. F2 was the least involved among the three. When Loge- Peuple was renovating empty houses, she was told that she could appiy if she wanted one. She made the application and the only requirement she gave was that her family needed a 3-bedroom 0 apartment. She didn't know what a housing coop was and what was expected of a co-op resident before she moved into the renovated houses. F1 had a large family of 11 people at the Ume of the rehabilitation. She asked for a larger apartment when the CDW designer came to discuss the renovation with her. She also suggested that a second bathroom be added on the ground floor: There was one batbrwm on the 2nd floor and 1 asked them if they could put a bathrmm downstairs on the 1st floor. Because they had the space. Because they were going to build a cupboard there. 1 said I would rather have a bathroom, you know, the toilet and the sink. They did that, Most of her requirements were met in the design. When the renovation was taking place, she chose the tiles for the bathrwms and the paint for the bedrooms. MI participated in the rehabilitation fiom the very begi~ing. He attended the presentations made by the CDW and became familiar with the concept of a housing CO-op. With the help of the CDW and some social workers. he and 14 other inhabitants had meetings and decided to set - up a housing CO-optogether. They joined the CDW to look for empty houses in the Pointe and picked one. The CDW checked the structure of the building and made renovation designs. Ml and his wife had four boys and four girls in the early 1970's. so he told the designer that his family needed 5 bedrooms. Looking at the CDW's final renovation plans, Ml told the author about the design process: When we first took the house, these were two different houses. The stairway going fiom the second to the third was outside. We removed it and brought it inside. This was the bedroorn and the kitchen was here. We took down the walls here and made it one big room. 1 gave the requirements to the designers. 1 can't draw plans but 1 told them what 1 wanted. 1 said 1 wanted the wall removed. 1 wanted the kitchen to be one piece and I wanted al1 the bedrooms put upstairs. Another thing that Ml described in detail was the change in the exterior walls during the rehabilitation. Because there were railway tracks behind the building, Ml wanted the architect to make a soundproof bamer. The designer came up with an idea of installing two layers of insulation with a 2-inch gap between thern. The noise coming through the first layer of insulation would decrease in the gap and it wouldn't go through the second layer of insulation. The exterior wails were rebuilt during the rehabilitation afcording to the architect's suggestion. The result is very satisfactory: We pull these windows in the wintertime, you can watch a train go by but you can't hear it. At the same time. this house, it costs me less than $100 a month to heat it up because al1 four walls have the same thing. During the interview, Ml also mentioned the inexperience of both the inhabitants and the students of the CDW: At first. we had no idea about what we were doing. We knew nothing about CO-ops. We knew nothing about renovating, where to get money for loans, what permit we had to get and everything else. Every time we started, we found out we had to get another city permit. They went al1 the way step by step, with their errors and with our errors. Because they were just students at the time, they were learning just like us. Two of them were in the second year at the University. They didn't know al1 the rules in Montreal. They were hmout of town. A housing CO-opwas a new idea not only to the inhabitants at the time of the rehabilitation. but aIso to the government officiais: We knew the basic idea how to get started but nobody in Canada had actually done it. We went to the govemment and said, "We would like to start a co-op." They looked at us and said, "What?" They sent their lawyers going everywhere, trying to find out what we were talking about. They said, "We can't ded with five people. We used to deal with one." When we first went to the City of Montreal for a permit, he didn't know what to put on the permit. The important role that the CDW played in the rehabilitation was confirmed by most of the respondents: That was a good thing. Most of our participation was started by students fiom McGilI. Joe was a big help to us. He was in every meeting where we met. He was in every part of the construction. every part of the changes. He was here nearly every day. If there were not the CDW, the CO-opwould never have started. Maybe it would start later on. But at the time with the money we had, we had no money at al1 to hire an architect- For the next ten years, we would have still been talking about it. It was Joe Baker and Peter Katadotis who gave us a big push. 1 would say that it has been very usefûl that young architects came in the field at the time frorn University of Montreal and McGilI. Afier that we had a lot of problems to bring back architects on the field. 1 know that there were reactions within the universities that it was not a good program. But I would tell you that in these years, 70's and go's, it has ken very productive that the faculties were open to the ordinary people. 6.2.2. Success and Failure of the Rehabilitation Mon respondents thought that the urban renewal program in the late 1960's and the early 1WO's, which demolished blocks and blocks of old residential districts, was a disaster. One of the most important contributions that the CDW had made was that it saved the cornmunity in Pointe St. Charles fiom the tragedy: In our district in the 70's, they needed a lot of renovations. Some were done in the next district. What the City had done over there, they destroyed the whole district and rebuiit new. We didn't want that. Al1 together we started to think. We wanted renovations but we wanted people to stay in the place. It was a case that we had taken an injunction against the City because the City wanted the high way to cross Pointe St. Charles at that tirne. This would have entirely destroyed many houses and especially the old Fire Station. So we made an injunction to make sure that they would stop the project. And the project was stopped and there is no autoroute through Pointe St. Charles. The old Fire Station is now the library. 1 remember Joe Baker came to court to testifL how important the old monument was in the area. Today Pointe St. Charles remains as an urban village within the City; the Street pattern is not very much different fiom that in the late 1960's. Most old buildings were renovated or recycled. Residential buildings are usually low- or medium-rise and of small scale. Management is cheap in these buildings. The physical conditions of the buildings renovated by the CDW were greatiy improved during the rehabilitation. This is a conclusion that could be drawn from the discussion in the previous chapter. and it was confirmed by al1 the respondents. LI, as a participatory observer. described the physical improvement: If you walk in Pointe St. Charles. what you would see today, it's quite different fiom what you would have seen 20 years ago. The quality of the houses is better. They are well maintained. There are not as many abandoned houses as there were. When the co- ops started, we were buying vacant houses. There were plenty of vacant houses. And you don't see that any more. There are trees right now. ft's clean, you know. Ask a very old resident of Pointe St. Charles, he would tell you that, physically speaking, there have ken a lot of changes. Just walk around and imagine that there were a large proportion of these houses that were abandoned with glasses broken and things like that. 1 would show you some CO-opsright now which are very cute and very well renovated where within 15 flats there were only 2 or 3 which were occupied because the others were totally a mess. However. the resident respndents' attitudes towards the rehabilitation do not necessarily depend on the physical improvement of their houses. For example, Ml and F2 had different opinions about the rehabilitation although they both acknowledged that physical conditions of their houses were much better afier the rehabilitation. Ml was well infonned about housing CO-ops before he was involved in the rehabilitation. To live in a CO-op was his own choice, rather than the result of arrangements of outsiders. He thought the rehabilitation was "very success~l." He emphasized that to forrn a housing CO-op was a success that should be mentioned specifically: 1 don7tthink there is a city in Canada today where nobody knows what a CO-op is. We started with a housing CO-op. We now have a food CO-op. 1 mean, it's just tripled in sizes. Everybody's working together. Now it's the only way to go. 0 F2 had a different experience during the rehabilitation. She thought people were not prepared to make a decision democratically and to take responsibilities. At that time user participation was .-very new" for her and "it was for a lot of people too." There were mistakes during the rehabilitation. especially when it started: They didn't organize a group of people who wanted to live in a CO-op. They bought houses where people had already lived and then they convinced people to make it a co- op. But some of them didn't want to join the co-op. F2 remembered that in her CO-opthere was a lot of fighting and backbiting in between. She was *.pretty burnt out," so she lefi the CO-opafier living there for 3 years. She thought the CDW should "get people orgmized first." F2's negative attitudes towards the rehabilitation also derived fiom her experience as an administrative secretary for a self-managed factory during the rehabilitation. Establishment of a the self-managed factory was one of the strategies to involve the inhabitants in the rehabilitation. Most of the workers were hmPointe St. Charles and some were very good at woodworking. They were employed in construction work and boat-building at the beginning of the renovation. niey were also going to fom CO-opsin the renovated buildings. However, there was a lack of organizing, and people did not understand that they were working for themselves. "They used to steal the material. . . . And al1 of a sudden, these people decided that they wanted a ten-cent-an- hour raise. So they went on strike." F2 thought it was very Mythat the first decision made by the factory workers was to requin al1 the secretaries to Wear a dress in the office. She believed that there were a lot of problems in the factory, and that people leamt by their mistakes. If there had been some people who really wanted the co-op and were ready to embark on the project, there would have been a lot of problems eliminated. During the interview, F2 also taiked about an experience which made a very deep impression on her. One moming when she went to work, she found al1 the workers sitting in the sofas with big cigars in their hands. They said. Tome and join us. We are bosses. We don? work, Bosses don't work." This experience prompted F2 to make the following comments: They wanted someone to tell them what to do. They weren't at the level that everybody would like them to be. 1 think in order to organize something like a self-managed factory, you have to have a bunch of people who know a little bit more about life than just a little corner of the world. You have to have a group of people, get together. organize and decide what they are going to do in that factory. 1 mean it's always the best to start the base. get your people together that want to do something and then do it. But what they did was that they got this factory. It was like organizing afier the fact instead of before. Respondents' views about the success and failure of the rehabilitation show that user participation in housing rehabilitation is an effective way to maintain the community. and to improve physical housing conditions of the low-income people. However, a satisfactory result depends largely on good organization. Furthermore. the better informed aqd educated the inhabitants are. the more privileges they have, and the easier it is to organize them. This is a conclusion which is also proved by the reason why the CDW's community gardens and playgrounds came to an end in the Pointe. Most respondents described the great happiness that the CDW's gardens and playgrounds brought into Pointe St. Charles: There was lots of fh over there. People loved it. They had a book on al1 the activities, especially the playground and the gardens. 1 had the book somewhere but 1 h-e to start to dig in the boxes. Lots of photographs. That was just wondefil for the kids. They built a small castle. They made films. It was lots of h. My youngest child was probably five. They had lots of fun in those gardens and the parks. We had the parks right across the Street fiom us. They had. brought new things into the Pointe. They probably had parks in West Mount or somewhere else but we didn't have the things that they brought in. At that time, we had very few green spaces for the kids. 1 rememkr that. That was very good. When asked about why the comrnunity gardens and children's playgrounds have now become wastelands, the resident respondents provided two reasons. One reason is that the CDW did not provide a system that would organize the local inhabitants to look afier the gardens and playgrounds: To maintain it, you have to get a srnall group. 1 think the students didn't have inhabitants take care of their places when they ran away. They didn't have a leader for the gardens. A leader. you know, somebody strong enough to say, "We will do things." Then people are going to participate. You would have to have somebody to organize it every year if you wanted to have something continuously. When the McGill students lefi, everything left. The other reason is that there was a lack of education. Some inhabitants still thought the gardens and playgrounds belonged to the City or someone else rather than themselves. The community did not try to protect the gardens from thefi and vandalism: The problem is that they built their gardens and a lot of them got stolen before you could taks them to the group. Even now today on Knox Street there is still a community garden. 1 know a woman who has a garden there for years. She said it's no point that you work and work and before you have a chance to cultivate it, it's stolen. A lot of them are stolen for vandalism. There needs to be a big education. There is a lack of education in organizing any of those things. Without education. forget it. It just doesn't work. You need a very basic and, as a matter of fact, a very profound educational process to the peopIe you want to organize. And not only them, the cornmunity has to be educated- The rehabilitation in the early 1970's was a project involving more than 100 dwelling units. and many people from outside the community. It was so large and radical that organizing and @ educating inhabitants became very dificult. Moreover, it started from the top, and cornbined people with diffmnt levels of expertise and education. It was inevitable that at the beginning there would be some conflicts in the co-ops and it would take time for the ordinary inhabitants to take the responsibility for their buildings. However. the rehabilitation opened doors to the later participation experiences that took advantage of the previous problems. Afler the rehabilitation. the local GRT was set up. It was a small autonomous group which was very rnuch involved in the area. Small co-ops were fonned, and allowing people fkom the outside ta take control was purposely avoided. The inhabitants took their CO-ops into their own hands. As they became more experienced, the management and maintenance of the CO-opbuildings was gradually put on the right track. 6.2.3. Inhabitants' Learning from the Rehabilitation User participation in the renovation in the 1970's enabled many inhabitants to work with architects and contractors. For these inhabitants, everyday life became a learning process during 0 the rehabilitation. They gained a better understanding about the structure of their buildings. and began to discover how the electrical, plumbing and heating systems worked in their buildings. Spontaneously, they used the knowledge in the later maintenance and renovation of their houses: I've been going through and trying to follow something because working with the architects and king there. the planning and watching the wiring. watching the plumbing going in. you know how to use this place. You know where shut-off valves are. You know where the main lines are. You know. you learn al1 this stuff as you go home. We were working with the architects. and now from the planning. 1 know where everything is- 1 know how the wiring runs in the houses. 1 know how the plumbing comes up. When a plumber comes up. 1 can tell him this pipe goes hmhere over to there. down to there to the basement here. The inhabitants would also tell what they knew about the buildings to other inhabitants. In some CO-ops. it became a nile to pass on the knowledge to the person who was in charge of maintenance: We make sure that we have people in each block who are in charge of maintenance for the block. When you get voted in, you are in charge of maintenance. The person that lefi before tells them how the wiring in that block is, how the plumbing goes and how everything else. The rehabilitation also provided opportunities for the inhabitants to acquire some management skills: 1 lemt a lot. The financial report, 20 years ago, 1 didn't know how to read that. 1 lemt that by participation. I'm talking about a four-million-dollar organization. 1 read it. 1 don't know everything but 1 can read and find out what could be the trouble. I've seen women on welfare, for instance, learning how to keep books. When she was told, she was an old lady but she kept the books for the CO-opfor many, many years. It was well done. There are hundreds and hundreds of persons who learned so much within the process. What the inhabitants lemt fiom the rehabilitation is far beyond the knowledge about the building and the management. As M2 said. it was a long experience and it was hard to define: We got a lot fiom them. But we can't specim that we've done that since we were there. It could be anything, you know. When we are doing it, they've got some effects. The rehabilitation as a learning process had a special impact on women inhabitants. FI was a housewife before the rehabilitation. In the early 1970's she became an active participant in the community. She vividly described her feelings about her first experience of involvement in the renovation. and indicated how important the experience was in her life: Oh. myself, 1 learnt a lot. Oh, my god. 1 iearnt a lot. From the very begiming. the women stayed in the kitchen and didn't say anything. They just yessed per people or to their families. to their husbands. You didn't have much to Say unless you had a very good education. You didn't have to face those problems. . . . When 1 first startedz when they asked me if 1 wanted to work, iike for pay. you know, my heart started purnping. "Oh, I'm going to ask my husband if 1 can go to work." 1 had nine children. And 1 had to ask him. . . . Today 1 wouldn't Say anything and I'm just going out to work and 1 wouldn't even ask him. It sort of takes you out of your shelf and you are worth something. And you should be able to do whatever you want as long as it's within reason. You are able to talk to other people and you have ideas. You have discussions. Oh, 1 tell you. it was wonderfûl for me. F2 had a different story but the influence of her experience during the rehabilitation upon her whole Iife was no less important: I've learnt a lot. I've learnt that you could change things together. There is power in numbers. 1 learnt that 1 am not the only one with troubles. Just a lot more people with a lot more trouble than 1 have. . . . When the group started and when the group was very, very active hem, there were a lot of divorces. Before that they were isolateci. Very, very few people got divorced. When the group started and people were able to get out of their home, get involved with other people, and find out that they didn't have to put up with their husbands who beat them. We used to get mhed and you just took whatever coming to you. 1 had had a husband who gambled and drank. 1 had to support the family anyway, Through being involved in the groups, 1 knew 1 didn't have to put up with that sort of thing. Participation could become a leamhg process not only in housing groups but in other community organizations as well. L1 told fiom his experience that in the Legal Clinic arnong seven secretaries fiom the area, five became lawyers during the rehabilitation. The other two worked as a psychologist and an accountant respectively. This was partly due to the fiee education at that time. However, "it just shows you that when you have a structure which is open to participation, it has a very, very important effect on social promotion." 6.3. Respondents' Attitudes and Evaluation of Their hvellings and Neighborhood 6.3.1. Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction with the Dwelling and the Co-op Inhabitants' satisfaction and dissatisfaction with the dwelling may be largely influenced by their attitudes towards the CO-op,so these two aspects should be studies at the same time. M 1. M2 and F 1. who were still living in CO-ophousing at the time of the interview. were al1 satisfied with their houses. However, the inhabitants' satisfaction was not necessarily based on very satisfactory physical conditions of their houses. When M2 was asked about his attitudes towards his house, he said: I'm satisfied. Maybe I'm not asking for much. But 1 know it's hard to have much. If 1 want a new floor, everybody is going to pay for it. During the interview with Ml, it was noticed that his bathmm was not in good shape. The a water pipes were rusting. The bathtub needed pair and the tiles on the walls were starting to fa11 off. However, the defects in his house didn't make him complain but gave a stimulus to a renovation in his CO-op. It's also worth noticing that when tallcing about the next renovation, Ml said that he didn't like the way the architect and the contractor were picked because the CO-op. had very little choice in it: As a CO-op.you don't have a choice of architects that you get. Ottawa tells you. "These are four architects. Pick one of them." The same thing with the contractors. It's not like that we have a choice of going to you or to somebody else- You can't do that. When we first started, you could go to a student, you could go to whoever you want. The rules have changed. It can be inferred that inhabitants' satisfaction with their dwelling is closely related to the extent of their controi over it. They can bear the imperfections to a certain extent. and even try to improve their houses with their own efforts as long as their dwelling is under their control. When their initiative is deflated, the possibility of cornplaint increases. Another point that should be rnentioned is the relationship between the imposition of standards and inhabitants' satisfaction. M2 talked about it during the interview: We used to have 6 people in this house. We have 2 girls and 2 boys. We had 3 bedrooms. Two boys lived on one bedroom and two girls lived in another one. But in a social prograrn. the person could come in and say, "That's not right. Those kids. each one should have his own room." Low-income people have their own pt-iotities when dealing with housing problems. In some cases. the imposition of standards is either not feasible. or against their own choice. so it may reduce the level of satisfaction. When the respondents were questioned about their attitudes towards tiieir dwellings. they usually included the performance of the CO-opas one aspect. For example, when FI was asked whether she was satisfied with her dwelling, she said: 0 Yeah, pretty much. Of course as the goes on, you like more modem stuff' Like, you know, they could probably put new cupboards here. But when something has to be done, if it's a major thing, they usually do it. 1 mean the CO-op. F 1 lived in the Charon Co-op. Her satisfaction with her dwelling was partly derived fiom the good management of her CO-op. A self-evaiuation was done by the Charon Co-op in June 1998. Twenty-five inhabitants answered a questionnaire in their own homes. They were unanimous in their opinion that, in general, the CO-op hinctioned well. The inhabitants were especially satisfied with the CO-opon the following aspects: (1 ) Co-op members are inforrned about important decisions as soon as possible. (2) The tasks and responsibilities of the Board of Directors are known. (3) Members are aware of their responsibilities towards the CO-op. (4) The CO-opis set up so that expenses are well controlled. (5) The CO-oprespects its selection policy and selection rules. (6) Emergency problems are dealt with promptly. 0 (7) The CO-op's by-laws are often consulted to help solve problems. The problem with the Charon Co-op was that it was always the sarne people who did everything. Some inhabitants even thought that there were family clans in the CO-op. 6.3.2. Sense of Comrnunity A strong attachent to the community was felt in almost every interview with the resident respondent. Although most of the inhabitants were still poor, and their living conditions needed more improvements. they were proud of living in the area: We are the best district in the City of Montreal. We are near the Champlain Bridge to go to the South Shore. We are right beside the center of the City. We are the best. It's like a village. a small village of Pointe St. Charles. That's the way we'd like to live. We are iike a famiiy together. You talk to me and you go to the next street to talk to somebody else. Youfindout weareinthesamegroup. Well, it was a close knit communîty. You knew your neighbors down the street. You waik on the street, you say hello to people. Oh. 1'11 miss it because I love it. It might be arbitrary to conclude that the feeling of community encouraged people to participate. However. many inhabitants indicated that participation strengthened the sense of community and they were afraid of losing it because some newcomers did not participate any more: Al1 the changes. al1 the things, every street I walk down brings something that happened when it grew. It seems that I'm part of it. Every time 1 walk down the street, ifs not only something that happened to me, but something with my family, my group as well. We start to have many condos. ThatTll make a problem. Those people who buy the condos live in the dihct but don? participate in the district. They use it only as a place to sleep. Most of the services, they go and get them fiom outside. The community spirit was felt not only by the irhabitants, but by some outsiders like L1 and SI as well. L1 compared Pointe St. Charles to other parts of the City of Montreal, especially to Little Burgundy where he was working at the time of the interview: Compared to other low-income sectors of the City of Montreal, Pointe St. Charles has remained a quite stable place. And even though it's a low-income area, itgsquite secure. it's for farnilies. You can walk any time during the day or the night and you feel secure. And for those who live there. there is still a lot of attachment. It's still like a village in Pointe St. Charies. 1 was talking to a psychiatrist. He said that in Pointe St. Charles you still have a culture. People are poor. many of them. It's a low-income area but socially still sound. You know. at the time also there was the social urbanistic experience made in Little Burgundy. where they destroyed everything. And they said they would rebuild it within a few years but they never realized it. People were moved out and never corne back. So in Little Burgundy right now you may Say it's a pleasant place to live but 25 years ago when they destroyed everything and it has remained like that for maybe 15 years. It was quite a failure because they destroyed a city within a city at that time. It was like Pointe St. Charles. but this has totally disappeared. So to a certain extent. if you compare Little Burgundy and Pointe St. Charles. you would Say that Pointe St. Charles has remained a village within the City. The social fabric has not ken destroyed whereas in Little Burgundy that has been destroyed. It's only now, 20 to 25 years afier. that there is something new coming in Little Burgundy. SI organized the renovation for the office of Share the Warrnth in the Pointe in May 1998. More than 100 inhabitants fiom Pointe St. Charles participated in the renovation. The project eventually cost about $6,000, considerably less than the $25,000 that it would have cost without participation. She was deeply impressed by the spirit of the people in the Pointe: 1 think the people are very community onented. They are very helpful to one another. You know, if somebody has a fire or something is wrong, they'll jump in and really help out. 1 think the people are very proud of the area It's a kind of unique area with the respect that it's very segregated. There are good points about that. The people feel very cornfortable hem, in this environment. Sometimes 1 wonder, you know, they have a hard time very ofien going out, stepping out into other areas. But it's a very unique area. 6.4. In habitants' Attitudes towards User Participation 6.4.1. Current Participation Practice of the Inhabitants During the interviews, the resident respondents were asked about their curent participation in CO-opsor community organizations. The results show that al1 of them were still participating. although the extent of involvement differed fiom one resident to another. F1 thought she was too old to be on the Selection Cornmittee of her CO-op,so she resigned in 1997. Before that she was responsible for interviewing inhabitants who wanted to join the CO-op, as well as participating in the annual building inspection with other members of the CO-op. At the tirne of the interview. F1 attended the general meeting of her CO-opfour times a year. M2 also resigned fiom the Board of Directors of his CO-opbecause of his age. At present. as a CO-opmember. he collects the mail from a local post office for his CO-op. It is interesting to notice that besides attending general assemblies of his CO-op.M2 was also attending lectures by some professors and students fiom University of Montreal on how to be a president or secretary of a committee. He thought that although he had been participating for nearly 20 years. there were still so many things he would lem that would help hirn to be a good participant. It is noteworthy that although F2 was no longer living in CO-ophousing any more, she did not a stop participating in housing issues in the area. She was an active member in St. Columba House, the community center in the Pointe. Every year St. Columba House organized a simulated tribunal to confiont the govemment on various issues including housing. F2 thought participation was the only way that low-income people could solve their problems: -You have to get out, get involved. And the only time the government is going to listen is if people are screaming, like 'rhe squeaky wheel gets the oil," you know. During the interview, F2 also mentioned that she was going to move to a CO-op building. At present she was living in a private house with her daughter's family. She was on the ground floor and her daughter's family occupied the upper floor. She felt very unsafe when her daughter's family went on vacation in the summer: When they go away in summer, I'm here al1 by myself. There is nobody upstairs. 1 don't keep my windows open more than that. I'm always womed about somebody breaking in. Besides housing issues. F2 and her group were fighting for better lighting and more stop signs in the area. They also organized Action Watchdog, which helped to protect small children in the neighborhood. Ml was relatively young among the resident respondents. and he was still very busy with the co- op. His co-op was going to undergo another renovation in July and August 1998 and al1 the plumbing and the wiring were to be changed. The renovation would cost $l2S,OOO. which would be covered by a loan from CMHC with 25 years being allowed to pay it back. As the Treasurer of his CO-op. Ml was on the phone nearly every day with other members of the Executive Cornmittee of the CO-op,preparing for the renovation. He had to go to the bank very ofien. "It's just like a full-time job." Talking about the necessity of the renovation. Ml showed that he and other CO-opmembers were concemed about the future of their building: We had surplus money. We'd rather do it without any damage being done than wait until we have a big leak and we have water filling up in a room and the ceilings falling down. It-s too late. The renovation would not increase rents because M 1 's codp had paid off the previous mortgages a fiom CMHC. With the curent rent structure, the CO-opcould use its revenue to pay back the second loan and its interests within the designated tirne period. Not al1 the members of Ml's CO-opdevoted as rnuch time to the renovation as Ml. Some had very little time after work. They codd work on the Phone Cornmittee to cal1 people when there was a meeting or on the Repair Cornmittee to do small repairs. Also, M 1's co-op had a sweat- equity program with a neighboring co-op. A plumber fiom the neighboring CO-opwould come to help with the renovation whiie some people fiom Ml's co-op were going to repair walls for the neighboring CO-op. No matter how much time each member could spend on the CO-op,members of Ml 's co-op were always ready to help each other. There was an old lady in her seventies living in the CO-op. She felt it safe and convenient to live there. When help was needed. she usually got it although it 0 might not always come fiom the sarne person. When Ml was asked why he and other CO-op members couId always offer help to the old lady. he said: You're not a single person any more. You're a family. We consider ourselves a family of 19 now. If somebody gets hurt in your family, you're there to help her. That's what happens in a CO-op. It's not your ordinary family. 1t.s the person next door. your neighbor who is your family. So if something happens in her house, something happens personally. you are there to help. You're a backup force. The CO-op as a backup force showed its power in a disaster like the Ice Storm. which hit Montreal in 1998. M 1's CO-ophad no electricity for 8 days. Some members were lucky because they had gas heating in their homes. In the moming when power went out in the CO-op. a meeting was immediately called and decisions were made quickly. In the aftemoon a house was set up for people mithout gas heating to move into. The other families with gas heating also invited their neighbors to sleep at their homes. Barbecues were held in the backyard and the inhabitants had a great party during the disastrous time. Also. the building was checked and the 0 ice on the roof was removed. There were no banking machines working in the area, so people with money lent it to othen. Ml thought that the &perience in the Ice Storm showed the efiects of user participation: The buildings came through OK because we had people who knew the block and knew the structure. As soon as they spotted a crack, they made the right phone calls to get the ice off. Being done at their house for a long time, people can become emotiondly drained. But. together with other people, they forgot their troubles and everything else. During the interview. Ml also compared the experience of his CO-opin the Ice Storm with the way that the inhabitants in City Housing dealt with the disaster: We survived pretty good, compared to a lot of people that were roaming the Street and had to spend money in hotels. Those people in social housing, they were lefi on their own by the City. We had a block right here. Nobody came down. They had the same thing for 8 days. They had to move out to the City Hall and places like that. 1 think it was two months later before anybody came by, came up on the roof to check the structure. By that time the ice had already melted. It was tw late. M 1 's CO-opwas not the only one that helped its members to survive the Storm: The CO-opshere survived pretty good. And it wasn't just our CO-op. Al1 the other CO-ops did the same thing in their blocks. They al1 made sure that they got together and said. "OK. this is what we need." It didn't take us long to put a plan into process because we al1 knew each other, we knew what had to be done. 6.4.2. Original In habitants' Attitudes towards User Participation One generation afier the CDW's efforts in Pointe St. Charles. the inhabitants involved in the rehabilitation had a much broader understanding about user participation. Not only did they realize the necessity and effectiveness of user participation in improving their housing status, but also from their own experiences. they could tell the difficulties and problems that low-incorne people had to face in the process of participation. AI1 the resident respondents acknowledged that user participation was an effective way to improve housing conditions at low cost. However, when king asked to talk about the effectiveness in detail, the respondents emphasized different aspects. The upcoming renovation would be the third tirne that Ml was involved in a renovation design since the rehabilitation. His experience made him believe that a design process with user participation would enable a design to lx more suitable to the inhabitants' real needs and thus would increase residents' satisfaction: The architect is building a house for himself. It's not for a family that is moving in. He is not going to move in. The family that is moving in can say what they want. how they want it, how big the room they want and how much floor space they need. The architect. he just builds for himself. He is not building for the farnily that is going to move in. Because in most places if you buy a brand-new house and you just move into it. you usually make changes dong the way. You will find out this is not what you what. the closet space is not big enough. the room is not big enough. This one here right from the start you worked with an architect. Then you don? have any renovations to make at the end. Everything is still that way today. That was the plan in 1973 and today in 1998 it's still sitting that way. F2 also talked about the relationship between the design process and inhabitants' satisfaction. However, while Ml regarded the participatory design as a way to bridge the gap between the architect and the user, F2 focused on the exchange of information in a design process with user participation. The information exchange was not only between designers and users. but among the inhabitants as well. In her opinion. a participatory design meant a more effective information-gathering method, which would lead to a more reliable decision-making process. Furthemore. information-gathering and problem-solving might take place at the sarne time. The information-gathering process itself was no longer a mere data collection period but becarne an organic part of the design, which would also provide solutions: You bring a whole lot of different types of people together. You bring people with al1 different ideas. 1 think together you can do a lot of goods because. as 1 Say. you get people from every walk of life. different kinds of people together and they can argue and debate a point because you don't have the same point of view. But usually in the end, you corne up with a solution. Another advantage of a participatory design mentioned by the respondents was that it provided more opportunities for the creation of individuality. especially when it was compared to the production process of public housing: You know, the City of Montreal, they are building social housing. They are dl the same. They 've got no design, as 1 might say. Every year they build the same thing. They don? put enough money to have a better design. What the respondents emphasized most regarding the benefits of user participation was empowerment. For low-income people, this seemed to be more important than the improvement of the building. The formation of housing CO-ops enabled low-income tenants to own their dwellings cooperatively. The resident respondents regarded the co-op as an empowerment tool which gave them opportunities to participate in the management and maintenance of their When you live in an apartment owned by the landlord. you have no say at all. how much increase in the rents is going to be. everything, what time the garbage is going to be picked up. When people get into their thirties. that is when they reaiize that it's not the kind of house they want. When they start a farnily, they say, "1 don't like people telling me what to do. I have no rights. 1 have no Say. 1 don? have a vote on how much the increase or shall we get a decrease in rent." If you are living with a landlord, you have no Say. What he wants is just money. When they're in a CO-op,they have a right to say. If you live with a private landlord, if you have cornplaints or something has happened. you don't know when the repair is going to be done. If he said, "I'm not going to repair it." you're at his mercy. But here with the CO-ops, you can deal with it very fast because when you call the person you voted for in your block to look afier your problems and he is not doing it, you can call a meeting within 24 hours and find out why it's not king done. F 1 compared the inhabitants' control in CO-ophousing with that in public housing: The CO-ops make a big difference. compared to. say, city housing. 1 mean you might have them looking over your shoulder al1 the time but the city housing. you know. they are almost sieeping with you- There are always busy bodies looking to see what's going on and stuffs like that. As long as you have people who like to participate and cooperate. you don't have a dictator who tells you. "You do this. you do that." During the interview, Ml tried to explain the relationship between the ownership of a building and its maintenance. He believed that user participation, especially when the inhabitants were entitled to the ownership of their dwelling. would encourage better maintenance of the building: If you buy a property. 1 wouldn't see why you wouldn't want your tenants to buy shares, to buy the block with you because repairs are becoming cheaper and everybody in the block feels part of it. You look at the block differently when you have something to do with that. You don't make darnages to the house because you don't Say. "1 don? care." It is yours. So you Iook afier it better. You take care of it better, And you become part of the community also. You are part of the City. M 1 also talked about the situation in public housing to prove his argument: The way the building is kept is so dirty. If you walk in, you look at the stairways, there is garbage. Once every 3 weeks, somehiy cornes by and sweeps and washes the stairs. There is garbage piled up in the front yard. The grass is usually cut twice a year. M 1's point of view was confirmed by F2 when she compared the maintenance of CO-ophousing with that of public housing: 1 don't like the govement-subsidized housing. The regular govemment-subsidized houses, they are real ghettos. The CO-opsare very well looked afier. The CO-opsare surveyed. They are kept in good condition. And the people iiving in them have to keep them in good condition whereas the government-subsidized housing, the places are terrible. a terrible mess, awful. According to Ml, co-op housing also had an advantage over public housing regarding the way it found solutions to problems: The City is a big structure, you know. If something should happen. say if you have a toilet break, you have to cal1 somebody in the City. It has to go ùirough dl the processes in the City to get a plumber IO come down and repair your house. So it could be a week without plurnbing whereas in a CO-opit's done within an hour. In the respondents' opinion, CO-op housing was also an economical form of housing for low- income people because inhabitants' participation could reduce maintenance costs: The most expensive house we have here is a 9-room house for $500. 1 don3 think you're going to get that in a private house. You are going to spend about $1,000, If you have a little salary, you can still exist and bring up a big farnily in a CO-op. I'd say that if the people within the CO-opwere setting aside the money that they spared every month, they would be ncher after 25 years than if they had purchased the whole house. Al1 the resident respondents expressed their willingness to participate. However. the respondents also mentioned some obstacles to user participation. Some of the problems lay with the inhabitants. Some inhabitants simply saw things only in terms of their own indvidual needs or the needs of their immediate family. When their own problems were solved, they didn't want to participate any more. Both F1 and F2 thought that the success of participation largely depended on people's personalities and social values. They both mentioiied that backbiting existed among housing CO-ops. Also, there were inhabitants who had no experience of participation and did not understand the importance of participation for low-income people to improve their housing situation. F2 thought that for these people, participation was especially necessary: 1 don't think everybody just living in his own Iittle corner is going to do anything for change where change is needed. 1 think if people are just staying in their houses and are not trying to participate or join in things, things will be always the sarne. And if it gets worse, it will just get worse and nobody is going to do anything about it. Just sitting back at home and saying, "Oh, it's temble. It's awfbl," it's not going to change things. The inhabitants' financial situation was another factor mentioned by the respondents which would affect the extent of user participation. Although user participation was a strategy for increasing residents' satisfaction at low cost, its effectiveness was also limited by the real situation that poor people were facing: We had the choice but the choice was so small. It was not because of the architect. It was because of the money we received. It's like anything else. You could do anything to your house if you get the money. Although the respondents mentioned some intemal problems afTecting user participation, they felt that the biggest problem was with the extemal forces. namely the government: Because the government still believes in privatization. Private landlords have much more Say in how the govement is run and what the government does with its money. The government cares who owns the house and who rents the house so that they can get more taxes. They'd rather see a block sitting here with $170,000 than our block sitting here with $1 10.000 because there is more tax money for them. That's how govemments work. Govermnents. unless you redly. really push them. they don't think of ordinary people's need no maner how much they Say because if you are earning their kind of money, you don't know what it's like to eam $25.000 a year. So they don't want to hear about co- ops. Every time we go to Ottawa or write to Ottawa. you can see they are sitting there and say. "Yeah. but this and that." They can't see why everybody can't buy a houe. They said. "Corne on. this is Canada. Everybody can buy a house." Even 25 years later, we are still having the sarne garne with the govemment because the govement keeps changing. The Govemment started to withdraw fiom the prograrn. It could happen that in ten years we'd again have trouble with houses if they don't have any renovations since they don't have money for it. The respondents were also wondering why a program like the CDW did not continue: They've never realized how fivithl it has ken to send their students on the ground, both for the students and for the area where they worked. The students could learn and at the same time they could bring in something. 1s it somebody's job just to help hirnself or to help other people? For you, say in a private business, you just build new houses. 4.43. Attitudes of Children of Original Inhabitants towards User Participation It was the author's initial intention to interview some of the children of the original inhabitants to inquire about their attitudes towards user participation. However, unforhmately, none of the efforts were successfiil because either the children had no interest in the topic or they thought they had very little to say about user participation when they were contacted by phone. Therefore, when interviews were carried out with the original inhabitants, they were also asked about their children's views on participation. The following discussion is based on the information gathered during the interviews with the original inhabitants. M 1's children chose to live in apartrnents owned by landlords when they moved out. They moved not only out of CO-ophousing but out of Pointe St. Charles as well. They regarded it as a degrading district. There were no high schools for children in the Pointe and they did not want to bring up their children in the area. When Ml was asked about his children's attitudes towards CO-ophousing. he said: I don't think it bothers them. Some of them like it. some of them no. Ml gave several reasons why sorne of his children did not like CO-ophousing although they al1 had lived in CO-ophousing for a long time. First. his children did not want to spend time participating in CO-ops. Most of them were in their twenties and they wanted to have more spare time. Second. most CO-opapartrnents in the Pointe were renovated for large families. Since his children were al1 single, they preferred to live in a small flat so that housecleaning was easier. Third. Ml thought that, only afier people started a family would they realize that CO-ophousing was more economical than rental housing. Last but not lem, in Ml 's opinion. the achievements of user participation in the recent years were not obvious enough to encourage the young generation to participate: Every little step we take, it takes 10 or 12 years. 1 don't see the young people who want to go through what we went through. ïhey say, "For al1 the work you've done. there is very little improvement." We have to sit there and admit it. Only one of Fl's children once lived in a CO-op. F1 said that her children knew how to participate but they were also aware of the backbiting in the co-op. This might be the most important factor that kept her children fiom staying in the CO-op: it's probably one of our biggest problems that people don't talk in the meeting. They talk outside the meeting. 1 always feel that you should be able to speak up at the meeting no matter what you Say. And it should not affect your fiiendship with your neighbor afierwards. But 1 know that my own children would not put up with a lot of things that happened. They ask a lot more questions and they want answers. Aiso. F1 thought that the housing situation for poor people in the Pointe had ken improved since the 1970's. People had a good chance to get the minimum. Autonomy in housing has become less important and urgent for the younger generation at present than it had ken in the early 1970-s: Things came easy for that generation. You know. 1 didn't have much but it's much easier than what 1 had. They had it a lot easier. They don't think the same. you know. During the interview. F1 also mentioned that the community gardens and children's playgrounds by the CDW in the 1970's might have had some positive effects on her children. but she could not explain them specifically. 6.5. Summary and Discussion One generation afier the rehabilitation. user participation is no longer a new idea to the inhabitants in Pointe St. Charles. The respondents' reflections on the rehabilitation show that the CDW's efforts in the 1970's not only changed the physical housing conditions of the low-income 0 inhabitants. but had some an important impact on the residents as weiI. The resident respondents' understanding about their buildings, about their co-ops and about their individual and social values increased during and afier the rehabilitation. They believed that organizing and education were important and essential in a paticipatory process, and that the failure of the rehabilitation in the preliminary stage was due to its large scale, radical measures and lack of organization. At present. the original inhe'-i: ..;:- living in the co-ops are satisfied with their dwellings and neighborhood. although the physical conditions of their houses still need to be improved. It is a fact arnong these inhabitants that the increase of control over the dwelling may lead to more satisfaction with the building. The inhabitants' satisfaction with their houses is also influenced by the performance of their CO-ops. A survey of one co-op suggests that, in general. the co-op was functioning well. The resident respondents dl held positive views on participation. and they were each participating in their own way. The CO-opas an empowerment tool showed many advantages both in daily life and during times of disaster. However. the inhabitants could also recount their own experiences of many problems related to participation. They thought these problems were caused by the govenunent policies. the financial situation of the low-income people and the personalities of CO-opmembers. Some of these problems became factors that kept the younger generation from participating in housing. C CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSIONS This chapter presents the conclusions pertaining to the research undertaken. The chapter is divided into three sections. The fmt section presents a simary of the research. The second section addresses the most relevant findings. The third gives some recomrnendations for future researc h. 7.1. Summary of the Research This study was aimed at the long-term results of user participation employed by the Community Design Workshop in housing rehabilitation. The research involved two aspects: the CDW's strategies and expectations to implement user participation, and the results of its efforts after one generation. The CDW rtax-ted when the poor communities in Montreal urban areas were threatened by private investors. The low-income tenants in these communities had no control over their dwellings. and suf5ered fiom poor housing and lack of environmental arnenities. Therefore. the most important objective of the CDW was to enable the urban poor to maintain their communities and to improve their living conditions. The CDW believed that the most effective way of achieving this aim was to involve the low-income inhabitants in housing rehabilitation. User participation would enable the poor people to take control of their dwelling gradually. It was expected that, once the control over the houses was returned to the users. the community would be protected fiom unfavorable decisions made by non-residents. and the living conditions of the inhabitants in these houses would be improved through the residents' own effom. These achievements would increase inhabitants' satisfaction with their dwellings and neighborhood, and would in turn stimulate levels of subsequent participation, and sustain both the physical and social well-being of the community. Various strategies were ernployed by the CDW to implernent user participation. During the rehabilitation in Pointe St. Charles, the CDW worked as a consultant for the comrnunity. Local workshops were set up and low-incorne inhabitants were involved in no< only the renovation design but in the construction work as well. As a result of the rehabilitatios tenants were organized into housing CO-opsto control and sustain their dwellings and neighborhood. In order to examine the results of the CDW's work, a field study was carried out in Pointe St. Charles. A11 of the CDW's projects in the Pointe were visited and sorne of the buildings renovated by the CDW were inspected. Co-op records were consutted to get information about maintenance and management of the buildings. Modifications made by the original inhabitants were studied. and the changing roles of the inhabitants in their domestic environment were identified. Besides the current physical conditions of the CDW's projects. the inhabitans' attitudes towards user participation were investigated. Interviews were carried out with the inhabitants. 'and with some outsiders. Respondents gave their opinions on the rehabilitation, on their dwelling and neighborhood. and on user participation. 7.2. General Findings One generation afier the CDW's efforts, Pointe St. Charles continues to be a low-income comrnunity. It appeared to be more stable than its neighboring districts. Co-op housing became an important housing sector in Pointe St. Charles, and its residents' control was maximal arnong al1 social housing fonns. Cornpared to the situation in the early 1970's' the currmt physicai conditions of the coop buildings renovated by the CDW were greatly improved. The cmp maintained these buildings regularly, and structural problems seldom existed. The inhabitants also updated some of the facilities, and the updating process was enhanced by the more and more active role played by the inhabitank Physically speaking. the CDW's efforts involving users in housing rehabilitation resulted in a stable community and improved housing conditions for the low-income inhabitants. The study of the inhabitants' attitudes reveals that most inhabitants are satisfied with their dweflings and neighborhood. The performance of the CO-op had an important impact on the inhabitants' attitudes towards their dwellings. User participation was a factor that helped to increase housing satisfaction among these inhabitants. The respondents living in and out of the CO-opsbelieved that user participation not only helped to irnprove their living conditions, but provided more opportunities for individual development as well. The residents involved in the rehabilitation were still participating in housing issues and the information they obtained during the participatory process was not confined to knowledge about their buildings. The CDWgs efforts proved to have some positive social influence on the poor inhabitants involved in the rehabilitation. The respondents' reflection on the rehabititation shows that not al1 people wanted to. or were ready to, participate. The paradigm to impose participation from top down instead of encouraging the residents to get organized from the bottom up would decrease people's interests in participation. Information and education were important factors in the initiation of a participatory process. Also, organiùng was essentiai to the achievement of satisfactory results frorn user participation. Since large-scale and radical projects were usually incapable of informing and organizing inhabitants, small-scale and cornrnunity-based projects were preferred in the participatory process- Local residents should be the subjects of development and they should have the possibility of deciding to what extent they wish to become involved. It was also learnt fiom this study that user participation in housing rehabilitation was a long and dynamic process which went far beyond design and renovation construction. The rehabilitation in the early 1970's was not an end state, but a starting point in the process. The CDW worked as a catalyst at the initial stage of the process and its efforts in involving low-income inhabitants in housing rehabilitation produced long-term positive effects on both the inhabitants and their physical environment. 7.3. Recommendations for Future Research This study of the long-term results of user participation in housing rehabilitation is limited to the physical and social impacts of the CDW's efforts in the housing rehabilitation. The research does not study whether user participation employed by the CDW was an economical way through which low-income inhabitants could improve their housing conditions. A future study focusing on the fiscal aspects of the rehabilitation in the early 1970's and the later renovations initiated by the inhabitants will give a more comprehensive understanding about the CDW's efforts in the housing rehabilitation. a REFERENCES Alexander, Chriaopher, et ai. The Or-- New York: Oxford University Press, 1975. Alexander, Christopher, et al. A Pan-. New York: Mord University Press, 1977. Alexander, Christopher, et ai. A Ti- - New York: Mord University Press, 1979. Alexander, Christopher, et al. The Produon ofHouses. New York: Oxford University Press, 1985. Baker, Joseph. "An Expenment in Architecture." me C- Are18 (1 973): 30-4 1. Baker, Joseph. Personal interview. 3 Feb. 1998. Baker, Joseph, and Pieter Sijpkes. "The Community Design Workshop at McGill University." La Revue d'arcweARQ 92 (1996): 14- 15...... Becker, F. D., et al. User Pa-n- Perso-on pnd Envir-1 Meaninp Three Fieu Studies. New York: Comell University Press, 1977. Bieler, Zoe. "Portrait of a Gray Area, Pointe St. Charles-" The Mo- 8 Nov. 1969. . - Brager, George, Harry Specht and James L. Torczyner. WtvOr-. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press, 1987. Buchanan, Peter. "Patterns and Regeneration." Architectural Review 170 (1 98 1): 33 1-340. Carter, Joe, and Pieter Sijpkes. Adventure Playgrou&. Green Thumbs and Sore Thumb~. Montreal : McGill University School of Architecture, 1 972. Chalk, Warren. "Housing as a Consumer Product." Arcm. Eds. P. Cook, et al, London: Studio Vista, 1972. 16-1 7. . . .* . . Cohen, S. Some Factors Citizen Participation in a Commitv Proiw. Unpublished Master7sThesis, Comell University, 1976. Erskine, Ralph. "Soft-Spoken Technology." Architecture 72 (1 983): 122. Fischer, Karl. Diary. 6 Oct. 197 1. Fischer. Karl. Diarv.a 7 0ct. 197 1. O Fischer, Karl. Diary. 1 1 Nov. 1971. . . . - Friedman, Abraham. A Dm- Mode1 for -ors of &m -biligr in Multi- t Housinp. Unpublhhed PhD Dissertation, Universite de Montreal, 1987. Glassie, Henry. Hne:Callvmenone:e &.kbUp of pn uster Commuaiqr- P hiladelphia: University of Pemsylvania Press, 1982. Habraken, N. J., et al. Syp~ons:An -ive to Ho-. London: Architectural Press, 1972. . - Habraken, N. J., et al. Variaripns: The Sv- Daof-- Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1976. Hackney, Rod. "Community Architecture: An Alternative, Self-Help Approach to Housing .. . . Improvement." rn Ho-. Ed. Nabeel Harndi and Bob Greenstreet. Vol. 3. Oxford: Oxford Polytechnic Town Planning Department, 1982. 3 7-7 1. 3 vols. . . Harndi, Nabeel, and Reinhard Goethert. unP- for Ctties: A Guide to Communhy Practicg. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 1997. .- * . .. Hamdi, Nabeel. Housinn Without Houses: Participation. Flexibw En&lema . New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 199 1. Information. Montreal: Loge-Peuple de Pointe St. Charles Ltee., 1973. Jury of Vincent Massey Awards. "Pointe St. Charles Cooperative Montreal." Habitat 19.1-2 (1 976): 48-49. Kroll, Lucien. An Architecture of Complexity. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press, 1987. Le Corbusier. Towards a New Arwecture. New York: Praeger, 1965. . . Marris, Peter, and Martin Rein. of Social Reform: Povenm Community Actton in the United Stm. New York: Atherton Press, 1967. Montreal Council of Social Agencies. Sixtv Maior Studv Areas Their Coarative Socio- Economic Profiles in Metro-. Montreal, 1968. .. . . Petronio, G. Yser Pamonin Hou. Unpublished Master's Thesis, McGill University, 1984. Pinsky, Barry. E-mail to the author. 18 Feb. 1998. 0 Pinsky, Barry, and Pieter Sijpkes. "Housing Renovation and User Control." 17-44 ( 1974): 22-26. S.. . . Roberts, C. J. B. ELpject qOayriLPnd Or-. St. Louis: Washington University Press, 1972. Rudofsky, B. ArcweWwut Arbtec~.New York: Museum of Modem Art, 1964. -. . Santiago, Arturo M. -on -e to W.Unpublished Master's Thesis, McGill University, 1975. Schoenauer, N. 6.000 Years of m.New York: Gariand STPM Press, 198 1. Sijpkes, P. "The Four Lives of Pointe St. Charles." Tower~. Ed. Bryan Demchinsky. Montreal: Vehicule Press, 1989. 176- 188. Statistics Canada. ProW of (lmTrmeal. Part 4. Ottawa: Industry, Science and Technology Canada, 1992. 1991 Census of Canada. Catalogue Number 95-329. Statistics Canada. Profile of Census TdMontreal. Part B. Ottawa: Industry, Science and Technology Canada, 1994. 199 1 Census of Canada. Catalogue Number 95-330. Turner, J. F. C. "Housing as a Verb." Freedom to Bdd: Dweller Comol of the Hou Process. Eds. J. F. C. Turner and Robert Fichter. New York: McMillan, 1972. 148-175. . . Turner, J. F. C. Housiu bv Peo le: Towards Aut~~ornvin B- Enviro-. New York: Pantheon Books, 1976. . . Turner, J. F. C. "Barriers, Channels and Community Control." The Living City. Eds. David Cadman et al. London: Routledge, 1990. 18 1- 19 1. Vaudry, Ernest . Personal interview. 10 Feb. 1998.