ctbuh.org/papers Title: Understanding the Demise and Transformation of Chicago’s High-Rise Social Housing Authors: Bradford Hunt, Associate Professor, Roosevelt University Robert Lau, Architect, Roosevelt University Subjects: Social Issues Urban Design Keywords: Community Economics Residential Publication Date: 2008 Original Publication: CTBUH 2008 8th World Congress, Dubai Paper Type: 1. Book chapter/Part chapter 2. Journal paper 3. Conference proceeding 4. Unpublished conference paper 5. Magazine article 6. Unpublished © Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat / Bradford Hunt; Robert Lau Understanding the Demise and Transformation of Chicago’s High-Rise Social Housing D. Bradford Hunt, Ph.D.1, Robert Lau, M.B.A.2 1/2Roosevelt University, Evelyn T. Stone College of Professional Studies, 430 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60605-1394, USA Email: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract This paper explains the rise and fall of Chicago’s high-rise public housing projects and explores the Chicago Housing Authority’s ten-year “Plan for Transformation” to tear down those projects. While high-rises were embraced as the urban future in the 1950s, their downward spiral in the 1970s resulted in the near total rejection of the high-rise form for social housing. The source of the downward spiral has not been adequately explained. Extraordinary youth densities created by planning choices were a fundamental – and overlooked – source of social disorder, maintenance difficulties, and project decay. The Plan for Transformation has replaced high-rises with mixed-income and “New Urbanist” communities, but a handful of renovated high-rises speak to the possibility of such forms for future public housing. The Plan has been [email protected] [email protected] contested by advocates for the poor, who challenge the “mix” of incomes in future developments and the loss of D. Bradford Hunt affordable housing. Senior buildings, which make up one-third of the publicly-available housing stock, remain viable D. Bradford Hunt is an associate professor of social science at Roosevelt University in Chicago. He received his Ph.D. in Historyeven though from mostthe University are high-rise of California, in form – aBerkeley, reflection in of 2000. the absence He is currently of youth. working They have on abeen book-length largely saved. history The of publicpaper housingconcludes in thatChicago, the high-rise and is the approach Chair ofshould the Programming not be abandoned Committee for social of housing.the new Public Housing Museum (www.publi- chousingmuseum.org). He assisted in compiling an oral history collection of former members and staff of the Chicago HousingKeywords Authority: Chicago entitledPublic Housing, When PublicTransformation, Housing Youths, Was Paradise: Sustaining Building Mixed-Income Community Community in Chicago (University of Illinois Press, 2004). He is the author of “Understanding Chicago’s High-Rise Public Housing Disaster,” in Chicago Architecture: Histories,Introduction Revisions, Alternatives (University of Chicago Press,midst 2004). of a massive “Plan for Transformation,” perhaps Chicago’s low-income public housing projects the boldest re-thinking and re-invention of social housing Robert(known M. in Lau the rest of the world as “social housing in the world. Only a handful of high-rises survive, and in Robertdevelopments”) M. Lau received were among his Bachelor the most of Architecture notorious in degree the fromtheir the place Illinois Chicago Institute isof Technologybuilding vernacular (host institution low-rise for theworld CTBUH) for their and concentrated his Master of poverty, Business bleak Administration designs, and at the Chicagobuildings School following of Real the Estate design at Roosevelt tenets ofUniversity. the “New Heoften has hellish worked living with Myronconditions. Goldsmith Between and 1948 Lucien and Lagrange 1966, atUrbanist” Skidmore, school Owings, in theand U.S. Merrill Physical (Chicago rebuilding office) has and also with Helmutthe Chicago Jahn Housingand Jim GoettschAuthority at (CHA), Murphy/Jahn a state-chartered in Chicago. Hebeen is anaccompanied advocate of by the revised Chicago rental School and of managementArchitecture, beginninghousing agency,with William built LeBaron vast numbers Jenny, John of Root,multi-story and Louis policies Sullivan intended and continuing to restore through the socialFazlur contractKhan and between Myron Goldsmith.projects like the Robert Taylor Homes (4,400 flats or landlord and renter, though these new restrictions have He“units”), has written Cabrini-Green several articles (3,600 for theunits), online and journal the Henry CTBUH Reviewtheir critics.. He presented the paper ‘A Platonistic Program for BlockHorner 37 Homes in Chicago’s (1,800 Loop’ units). at Most the December buildings 2001ranged conference from Building for the 21st Century in London and the paper ‘Fi- nancial6 to 22 Aspects stories, That with Drive taller Design buildings Decisions’ among at thethe Octobermore 2005 conferenceExactly whatin New went York wrong City. withHe was Chicago’s also a member high-rise of theproblematic. NY conference’s To many, committee these thatmassive reviewed complexes the papers were to be presented.public housing has never been fully explicated. Inevidence addition toof practicingthe flawed architecture nature inof Chicago, social hehousing is a Construction Numerous Committee scholars member have pointed with the to Windyracism City(Hirsch Habitat 1983), for Humanityprovisions (local in the affiliate). U.S., one driven by racial considerations poor design (Newman, 1972), bad management and by blind adherence to modernism’s ‘Le Corbusier’ (Kotlowitz, 1991), and crime (Popkin et al., 1998), but a ideas from the 1930s. Like tower blocks in the United systematic explanation of why they were built and what Kingdom, these designs – especially when filled with caused them to descend into a unique form of urban hell children – proved resistant to social order and difficult to has not been offered. What happened to Chicago’s maintain. Once tenants no longer desired high-rise public high-rise projects? And how has their demise influenced housing, a predictable spiral of excessive vacancies, the “Plan for Transformation” as well as the prospects for revenue shortfall, deferred maintenance and physical future social housing, whether high-rise or not? And, decay took hold. In 1991, Wall Street Journal reporter most importantly, will the Plan succeed at building Alex Kotlowitz published There Are No Children Here, a sustainable housing? damning expose of the damaged lives of children living in such environments. To the historical question, this paper points away from high-rise design by itself – which is the usual Beginning in the mid-1990s, Chicago began tearing criticism among commentators for social housing failure down its most troubled projects, and the city is in the – and instead points to the age demographics of public CTBUH 8th World Congress 2008 1 Understanding the Demise and Transformation of Chicago’s High-Rise Social Housing D. Bradford Hunt, Ph.D.1, Robert Lau, M.B.A.2 1/2Roosevelt University, Evelyn T. Stone College of Professional Studies, 430 S. Michigan Avenue, Chicago, IL 60605-1394, USA Email: [email protected], [email protected] Abstract This paper explains the rise and fall of Chicago’s high-rise public housing projects and explores the Chicago Housing Authority’s ten-year “Plan for Transformation” to tear down those projects. While high-rises were embraced as the urban future in the 1950s, their downward spiral in the 1970s resulted in the near total rejection of the high-rise form for social housing. The source of the downward spiral has not been adequately explained. Extraordinary youth densities created by planning choices were a fundamental – and overlooked – source of social disorder, maintenance difficulties, and project decay. The Plan for Transformation has replaced high-rises with mixed-income and “New Urbanist” communities, but a handful of renovated high-rises speak to the possibility of such forms for future public housing. The Plan has been contested by advocates for the poor, who challenge the “mix” of incomes in future developments and the loss of affordable housing. Senior buildings, which make up one-third of the publicly-available housing stock, remain viable even though most are high-rise in form – a reflection of the absence of youth. They have been largely saved. The paper concludes that the high-rise approach should not be abandoned for social housing. Keywords: Chicago Public Housing, Transformation, Youths, Sustaining Mixed-Income Community Introduction midst of a massive “Plan for Transformation,” perhaps Chicago’s low-income public housing projects the boldest re-thinking and re-invention of social housing (known in the rest of the world as “social housing in the world. Only a handful of high-rises survive, and in developments”) were among the most notorious in the their place Chicago is building vernacular low-rise world for their concentrated poverty, bleak designs, and buildings following the design tenets of the “New often hellish living conditions. Between 1948 and 1966, Urbanist” school in the U.S. Physical rebuilding has also the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA), a state-chartered been accompanied by revised rental and management housing agency, built vast numbers of multi-story policies intended to restore the social contract between projects like the Robert Taylor Homes (4,400 flats or landlord