In the sixties, London was swinging and Harold Wilson had promised a new Britain forged in the ‘white heat’ of a technological revolution. That may have been hype but something of it resonates when you look at Camden’s Alexandra and Ainsworth Estate – Alexandra Road or even Rowley Way to its friends. There was hope in the air and Camden was well placed to capture it.
The Metropolitan Borough of Camden was formed in 1964 and comprised the former boroughs of Hampstead, Holborn and St Pancras – respectively intellectual, wealthy and radical. It was also the third richest borough in London in terms of rateable value.(1) Add the politics of a young and ambitious Labour council, for whom ‘the main aim was more housing – beginning and end’ and conscious of its flagship role, and that made for some of the most exciting council housing of modern times.(2)
The Council found in Sydney Cook, Borough Architect, and the team he recruited people with the vision and ideological drive to match its ambitions. Cook rejected the system-building then in vogue as the means to build as much as cheaply as possible – ‘I’ll use standardised plans if you can find me a standardised site,’ he said.(3) And he rejected high-rise, particularly the tower blocks set in open landscape popular at the time.
In Neave Brown, the architect of Alexandra Road, he found an ally. Brown wanted to: (4)
build low, to fill the site, to geometrically define open space, to integrate. And to return to housing the traditional quality of continuous background stuff, anonymous, cellular, repetitive, that has always been its virtue.
For non-architects, this was a call to return to the traditional values of terraced housing – not necessarily working-class housing, the Royal Crescent in Bath was another role model – in which each dwelling had a front door to the street and its own open space with a view of the sky.
Before the development, Alexandra Road was an area of some 600 decaying Victorian villas, scheduled for demolition. Residents mounted fierce opposition to a commercial redevelopment plan which projected three fourteen-storey high tower blocks. The developer withdrew and the Council purchased the 13.5 acres for social housing purposes in 1966.
The basic design of the finished estate was determined in 1968 but met resolute opposition from Camden’s Planning Department which believed a low-rise development could not achieve the population density required. The policy brief stipulated 136 persons per acre, Planning asked for 150, Brown won the day by promising 210 – a figure higher than most high-rise schemes achieve.
The Council (under Conservative control from 1968 to 1971) approved the scheme in April 1969 and planning permission was granted the following year. One last hurdle was overcome when a 1972 public enquiry approved the pedestrianisation of the road against objections from Westminster residents.
A final budget was set at £7.15m. Building began in 1972, the first residents moved in in 1978 and the estate as a whole was completed in 1979. But not before myriad difficulties involving the 175 contractors, a layer of soft clay causing huge problems with foundations and a massive burst water main. Construction costs were also raised by the shortages of materials and labour. The overall price of the scheme ballooned to £20.9m – though this did include significant additional works in the provision of a youth club and play centre, for example.
Not surprisingly, the eventual expense of the development and its high maintenance costs were widely criticised. Ken Livingstone, who became chair of Camden’s Housing Committee in 1978 and no friend to those now regarded as Camden Labour’s old guard, set up a public enquiry to investigate. It criticised the Council’s project management procedures. Others blamed excessive architects’ fees. A less blameworthy factor is simply the quality and ambition of the estate’s design.
There are excellent architectural descriptions of the estate which I won’t attempt to match here but in brief it comprises two parallel pedestrianised streets and three, 300 metre-long, terraces. The largest of these, seven storeys high, backs on to the West Coast mainline, and is built ziggurat-style, high at the rear, to block the noise of passing trains.
Two other four-storey blocks, run parallel, and between them is a four acre park.
The estate as a whole is constructed of site-cast board-marked white, unpainted reinforced concrete with black-stained timber joinery. But any starkness here was to be offset by profuse greenery and the estate has managed this pretty well, leading one critic to describe Alexandra Road – he argued the vegetation was being used to hide the architects’ mistakes – as the ‘hanging gardens of Camden’.(5)
Internally, the two-storey dwellings have bedrooms on the lower floor and living rooms on the upper. Each living room has an external balcony with fully glazed sliding doors. Sliding walls allow the interior space to be subdivided.
In all, 520 dwellings were provided, housing some 1660 people. Now the key question. Beyond the architectural hype, what has been the experience of the estate’s residents?
To begin with, it was positive. The Council feared the estate would be unpopular but 137 of the first 278 prospective tenants accepted tenancies and they were said to be impressed by the ceramic-tiled kitchens, huge picture windows and sliding wall partitions – and by the central heating hidden inside the walls. Some dubbed it the Costa del Alexandra and one early resident at least didn’t begrudge her £23.50 a week rent – ‘It’s just like being on the Riviera’, she said.(6)
As severe teething problems developed, chiefly with the heating system, that comment came to seem ironic. Each heated wall served two flats and residents complained about extremes of heat. One particularly vituperative article in the Camden Tenant was headlined ‘How to rent a sauna bath and a freezer at the same time’. It went on to complain about crumbling concrete, railway noise and insect infestation and concluded ‘all in all, this estate represents a disaster of the first magnitude and I for one will be moving.'(7)
The heating problems were admitted and hard to fix with the Council eventually agreeing to pay half the affected tenants’ heating bills till the matter was resolved. The difficulties with concrete in the British climate are more intractable and were exacerbated in the 1980s by the Council’s poor maintenance of what was always understood as a construction that would need some looking after. Current views of the concrete are mixed, ranging from ‘I think it’s quite brave and brutal’ to ‘it just looks dull’.(8)
By the late eighties, the estate had also come to be viewed as unsafe – the incidence of both reported and unreported crime said to be significantly higher than in surrounding streets and estates. A contemporary survey placed blame on the ‘complex design and layout of the estate’. But, in hindsight, it seems as realistic to look at wider social problems as any particular issues with the estate itself.(9)
In 1989 tenant disgruntlement with Camden’s management led to their vote to place the day-to-day management of the estate in the hands of the South Hampstead Housing Cooperative. An £8m refurbishment project was awarded to a firm of private architects. In the event, the contract was taken over by the Council and completed by in-house architects and the estate as a whole returned to Council management in 2005.
In 1994, well before the thirty years normally required before a building may be listed, the estate was listed Grade II* to ensure any refurbishment matched original specifications. It was described by Peter Brooke, then Heritage Secretary, as ‘one of the most distinguished groups of buildings in England since the Second World War’.
Architecturally, despite the weathering, the estate remains impressive – a worthy site of pilgrimage for students of modern architecture, some of whom wax lyrical. For the modernist architect John Winter:(9)
Between the system building spree of the sixties and the late seventies slide into folksiness there was a magical moment for English housing when eminently habitable places of clarity and calm were designed and built…Camden has contributed richly to this scene.
Residents’ views remain mixed. Some liken it to Alcatraz. One resident describes it more imaginatively as ‘an enormous concrete crocodile that has been in an accident’. On the other hand, there’s the resident who claims, with a little poetic licence, that they ‘live in a penthouse apartment in a Grade II-listed building in St Johns Wood’.(10) For others, it is simply home and it is described overwhelmingly as a friendly, neighbourly estate.
Keeping our feet on the ground, it’s hard not to admire the enterprise and idealism of those responsible for Alexandra Road. It couldn’t happen now and according to Neave Brown it only happened then because of:(11)
the youthfulness and energy of the people involved, and also because the various figures of authority in the Council were relatively young and inexperienced.
There’s a pleasure in remembering that this vision was committed to public sector housing, so often underfunded, so often marginalised, that makes it easy to forgive some of the missteps and extravagance along the way. As of 2012, only 18 per cent of the estate’s flats were leasehold so the estate remains social housing in the truest sense.
Martin Pawley, writing with prescience in 1990, compared Alexandra Road to:
an epic silent film. It suffers from having been released into a different world to that in which it was conceived…set on the very cusp of the change from socialism to the me-generation.
(1) David Kohn, Quality and Quantity, BDOnline, November 5 2010
(2) Cllr Enid Wistrich quoted in Mark Swenarton, ‘Reforming the Welfare State: Camden 1965-73’, Footprint Journal (Delft Architecture Theory Journal), 9, Autumn 2011
(3) Cook quoted in Fabian Watkinson, The Most Expensive Council Housing in the World, Twentieth Century Society (June 2001)
(4) Andrew Freer, ’Alexandra Road: the last great social housing project’, AA Files, 30, Autumn 1995
(4a) Reyner Banham, quoted in the above.
(5) Hampstead and Highgate Express, 20 January 1978
(6) Camden Tenant, Summer 1982
(7) Residents’ quotes taken from the film One Below The Queen: Rowley Way Speaks for Itself
(8) Unit for Architectural Studies, University College London, April, 1992 ‘A High Quality and Secure Environment? – An appraisal of the pattern of public space in the Ainsworth and Alexandra Road Housing Estate’, cited in Alexandra Road Park Conservation Management Plan, July 2012
(9) Quoted in Fabian Watkinson, The Most Expensive Council Housing in the World, Twentieth Century Society (June 2001)
(10) Quoted in Camden New Journal, ‘Film…a candid look at Neave Brown’s iconic Swiss Cottage housing estate’, 27 May 2010
(11) Quoted in Andrew Freer,’ Alexandra Road: the last great social housing project’, AA Files, 30, Autumn 1995
(12) Martin Pawley, ‘Living on the Edge of Time’, The Guardian, 2 April 1990
Check out Single Aspect’s blog entry on Alexandra Road too for additional references.
Thanks too to the Camden Local Studies and Archives Centre, the home of much of the material cited above, and its helpful staff.
sequins and cherry blossom said:
Fascinating! I must go down to Rowley Way and take a look.
Pingback: The Branch Hill Estate, Camden: ‘the most expensive council housing in the world’ | Municipal Dreams
ITV London did a newsfart on the estate a few days ago – they interviewed a little girl who said that “everyone plays together when the weather’s not horrible, you make all sorts of friends. I love it”
Pingback: Local government…the first-line defence thrown up by the community against our common enemies’ | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: The best response to gentrification is better council housing | Owen Hatherley « Political Blok
Pingback: The best response to gentrification is better council housing | Owen Hatherley | UKnews24
Pingback: The best response to gentrification is better council housing | Owen Hatherley | Short Term Housing
Pingback: The best response to gentrification is better council housing [Via: The Guardian] | DEMOCRACITIES
Nigel Boldero said:
Great article,well researched and written 😊
Floyd R Turbo (American) said:
Architecturally this thing was probably cutting edge at the time – but then so were a lot of the other council estates. My Grandmother lived on the Rockingham Estate in the Elephant and Castle and it was obvious to me, even as a little boy, that somebody had spent a lot of time and effort designing those buildings to be “customer friendly” – but they WEREN’T. The Elephant and castle shopping Center was a miracle of subtle lighting and reinforced concrete – in 1968. When I visited forty years later it was scruffy and nasty and ripe for demolition. What makes all the difference is the people. Decent people can make a community constructed of tar-paper and plywood desirable. Conversely, if you stuffed Chelsea with Riff-Raff it wouldn’t be very long before it looked like Grozny in 1999.
Karl Diskin said:
Reblogged this on Karl Diskin and commented:
Further to my previous post on Rowley Way, here’s an excellent post from Municipal Dreams which gives a bit of background to the development.
Pingback: Jonathan Meades - Page 3 - London Fixed-gear and Single-speed
wood floor sanding said:
I couldn’t refrain from commenting. Perfectly written!
floor sanding services said:
Hi superb website! Does running a blog such as this
take a lot of work? I have virtually no knowledge of computer programming but I was hoping to start my own blog in the
near future. Anyhow, if you have any recommendations or tips for new blog owners please share.
I understand this is off topic however I simply wanted to
Very interesting article, well researched and written, thanks you so much for sharing!
Best regards, Dina
Pingback: The Whittington Estate, Camden: ‘a form of housing…more closely related to the existing urban fabric’ | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Brutalisme in Londen; Alexandra Road Estate (1) | MARTIJN GIEBELS
Pingback: Open House London: A Tour of the Capital’s Council Housing, Part Two | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Beauté Brut: The Alexandra Road, London | Urban Issues
Pingback: Open House London 2016: A Tour of the Capital’s Council Housing, Part Two | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Brutal London by Simon Phipps | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Inside Peru’s modern-day Machu Picchu – is this the best new building in the world? | Naija Upgrade
Pingback: Inside Peru's modern-day Machu Picchu – is this the best new building in the world? | Art and design - Alex Poucher
Pingback: Inside Peru’s modern-day Machu Picchu is this the best new building in the world? | Viral Hot Topics
Pingback: Council Estate chic – Fashion Promotion
Pingback: Social Housing in Vienna & London: Two Traditions | Modern British Artists
Pingback: Open House London, 2017: A Tour of the Capital’s Council Housing | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Mark Swenarton, ‘Cook’s Camden’ Book Review: ‘to take forward the project of the welfare state – but to do it better’ | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: 'I'm dumbfounded!' … Neave Brown on bagging a RIBA award for the building that killed his career | Art and design
Pingback: Alexandra road estate: the British heritage of an American architect Neave Brown | Alphabet soup for students
Pingback: It really is time for a Green Belt rethink | Colin Wiles
Reblogged this on Urban Issues and commented:
The Alexandra Road Estate: An Interesting Experiment
Pingback: Colin Wiles: it really is time for a Green Belt rethink - OnLondon
Pingback: Open House London, 2018: A Tour of the Capital’s Council Housing | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: A Home for All: Six Experiments in Social Housing - Urban Design
An excellent read, like all the articles on this brilliant blog! I’m always astounded by the amount of research that goes into each piece.
Just one (very minor) correction regarding local-government terminology: you said that “[t]he metropolitan borough of Camden was formed in 1964 and comprised the former boroughs of Hampstead, Holborn and St Pancras”; in fact, the *London* borough of Camden was created from the former *metropolitan* boroughs of Hampstead, Holborn, and St Pancras.
(Also, with respect to the date, I was going to say that it should have been 1965, when the old metropolitan boroughs were formally abolished and the new London borough councils came into operation in their own right, on 1 April, but it is true that shadow authorities were set up in 1964 alongside the old boroughs.)
Anyway, apologies for the nitpicking, and thank you for all your hard work to produce such captivating articles!
The estate is in South Hampstead not St John’s Wood. Boundary Road is a clear border line. I can understand why residents would prefer to be in St John’s Wood though!
Just an addition – Your blog is wonderful, have been browsing it, so much to catch up on. I live in a housing Co-op in South Hampstead that was the first fully mutual co-operative in London, it’s doing amazingly well now. I’ve been researching it’s history, seems the 70’s were certainly the last gasp of social air before Thatcher came and polluted everything. Camden are now buying back old council stock sold needlessly under right to buy.
Municipal Dreams said:
Thanks, Cara – that’s appreciated. I take your earlier point regarding St John’s Wood too. Good luck with the co-op. It’s an interesting model and I wish it well. John
Pingback: Open House London, 2019: A Tour of the Capital’s Council Housing | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: London’s Modernist Maisonettes: ‘Going Upstairs to Bed’ | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Open House London, 2022: Some Significant Housing Schemes | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Ten Years of Municipal Dreams | Municipal Dreams