I’m delighted to include this expert and informative post by Steven Robb. Steven is Deputy Head of Casework for Historic Environment Scotland. With qualifications in building surveying and urban conservation, he has a particular interest in early and interwar social housing in Edinburgh, and how new housing was incorporated within the historic city.
Throughout the latter nineteenth century Edinburgh’s population expanded greatly. Although some new working-class housing was provided within the inner suburbs (1), many of the poorest still occupied badly converted tenements in the overcrowded medieval Old Town and Southside.
Although historically uncommon in England, most working-class urban Scots (and many of the middle classes) lived in tenements. Unlike the numerous small rooms of the terraced house, tenements often had large rooms, but for the poor there were fewer of them, including many one-room houses or ‘single-ends’.
1890 Act housing
In the early 1890s council housing for the poor was promoted by a Liberal City Councillor, John MacPherson, a churchgoer and temperance hotel owner. At a time when a hundred families in the city actually lived underground (in vaults), MacPherson railed against the ‘thirty or forty thousand people’ living in one-room houses.
In 1893 the city instituted a major Sanitary Improvement (or slum clearance) scheme under the provisions of the 1890 Housing Act. It involved both sensitive ‘conservative surgery’ of historic buildings in the Old Town by proto-town planner Sir Patrick Geddes (2) and small reconstruction and new-build schemes by the Burgh Engineer, John Cooper.
Cooper’s new housing was often a sanitised version of the traditional tenement, utilising deck-access balconies for light and ventilation. He designed a new street layout in Stockbridge and several projects around the Old Town, one of the earliest being High School Yards (1896-7). Here, two sandstone (3) tenements containing thirty-two small flats, costing £200 each were built, unusually with shops underneath.
The Council’s housing developments were, at least partly, responsible for significant improvements in health. In the High School Yards area alone, infant mortality figures fell from a horrific 247 to 39 per 1000 in only a decade and, between 1892 and 1910, death rates fell from 53.7 to 12.4 per 1000.
1919 Act housing
Despite compensation payments costing almost as much as the new housing itself, the Council provided around 750 houses before the War.
Output increased significantly following the 1919 Housing Act with its generous State subsidies. In the following decades there would be reconstruction and infill schemes in the historic city, and new housing on peripheral greenfield sites or underused suburban land. (4) Initially, housing was either ‘general needs’, or improvement (slum clearance) housing at lower rents.
The Council were quick of the mark, with City Architect James A Williamson’s Chesser scheme prepared before the Act had passed. He primarily used the flatted block, a peculiarly Scottish hybrid between cottage and tenement consisting of four flats under a hipped roof. Two ground floor flats were entered from front gardens with upper flats accessed from the sides or central close. Their relative scale allowed them to address the lower density layouts advocated by the garden city movement.
Besides Chesser, in April 1919, the Council had held a competition for private architects for four housing sites, two of which progressed in 1920.
The Wardie scheme, planned by architects AK Robertson & TA Swan, was carried out according to garden city principles. It largely contained cottages and flatted blocks within geometric tree-lined streets with grass verges and cul-de-sacs. Rendered concrete blocks were used instead of bricks to save costs.
The second development was Willowbrae /Abercorn, by Fairlie, Reid & Forbes. It successfully mixed tenements, flatted blocks and cottages together in a meandering characterful plan using brick, roughcast and solid stone walling.
The housing was high-quality and well-designed but had been both expensive to build and to rent. It also didn’t cater for the poorest in society, this not being an intention of the Act.
Post-1919 Act Housing
Edinburgh built around thirteen hundred 1919 Act houses, but high costs resulted in the State withdrawing its provisions and building ceased until after the 1923 and 1924 Acts.
However, the new Acts encouraged standardisation and prefabrication to lower costs, with design or material extravagances met by Councils not the State. In Edinburgh, this immediately resulted in cottages being phased out, less bedrooms and plainer, cheaper finishes.
In June 1919 the Burgh Engineer, Adam Horsburgh Campbell (1862-1947), was hurriedly appointed Director of Housing to take forward the city’s programme. This prompted criticism from Scotland’s premier architect Sir R. Rowand Anderson who considered the role should have gone to an architect.(5) However, his concerns were misplaced as Campbell was a skilled designer with previous experience building social housing in London.(6)
Rather than wait for new housing to be built, Campbell immediately began to subdivide vacant townhouses in the New Town and recondition Old Town tenements, at half the price of new-build. Sadly, later subsidies prioritised demolition and new-build, rather than reconstruction. (7)
Campbell quickly realised Edinburgh’s housing problems would only be served by higher densities and returned to tenements, officially discouraged but not forbidden. In October 1923, he designed a new three-storey example for Leith, followed by a cheaper standard tenement which could (almost) be built to garden city layouts or linked into terraces. He also designed two standard patterns of ‘four in a block’ housing for peripheral estates.
Campbell focussed on cost-cutting and delivery by whatever means, including, in 1925, the experimental use of Dutch Korrelbeton (no-fine-aggregate) concrete which was cheaper than brick and required only semi-skilled labour. He also sanctioned outsourcing, approving 1000 Duo-Slab concrete and brick houses from the private contractor, WM Airey of Leeds. With his engineering eye, he also trialled flat-roofs, timber and steel construction and reintroduced deck-access balconies to some tenements.
Campbell provided around 4500 houses (built or planned) but worked himself ill with his two jobs, and 16 hour days. On medical advice he refused a two-year extension as Housing Director alone and retired early in June 1926. Anderson finally got his way when Edinburgh’s recently-appointed City Architect, Ebenezer James MacRae (1881-1951), absorbed the additional housing role.
Politically, the same year MacRae took charge, Labour first emerged as a force in the city, and to counter this, Edinburgh developed a loose anti-socialist coalition of Tories and Liberals termed the ‘Moderates’ then ‘Progressives’. Although proficient at slum clearance housing, they would be lukewarm in supporting general-needs housing, considering this was the role of the private sector. Despite railing against public spending they were content to directly loan or subsidise private builders who constructed over 11,000 houses for rent or owner-occupation between the wars, continuing support even after beneficial subsidies were removed.(8) This position was vindicated by central Government who withdrew general needs subsidies between 1933 and 1935, the focus moving solely to slum clearance and overcrowding, addressing the very poorest in society.
In post, MacRae immediately cancelled Campbell’s experimentation, returning to traditional masonry construction with pitched slate roofs. His direct control of housing was music to the ears of Edinburgh’s trade unions who had opposed Campbell’s involvement of the private sector, semi-skilled labour and moves away from separate-trades tendering.
Like Councillor MacPherson, MacRae was a religious man, the son and grandson of Free Church of Scotland ministers. He had a charitable view of humanity and a strong desire to provide the best housing possible to help tenants better themselves. His horror of overcrowding gave him a healthy zeal for daylighting.
Although subsidies favoured brick, covered in roughcast for Scotland’s climate,(9) in the historic city MacRae made a special effort to build ‘in keeping with surrounding buildings’ and, where possible, built solid stone walls for frontages and visible gables.
Where Campbell and MacRae may have differed on their rehousing methods; Campbell favouring quick fixes against MacRae’s concentration on quality, both shared a desire to see tenants housed near their workplaces. MacRae also saw tenements as the answer but his use of denser developments, even on peripheral sites, sometimes failed. At Niddrie Mains, a slum clearance estate on the very edge of Edinburgh, 2000 houses were built, entirely with three-storey tenements together with (literally) a handful of shops and other amenities.(10) It never really prospered, but Prestonfield, built at the same time, did, perhaps because it had a careful mix of tenements and flatted blocks, and was nearer workplaces and established communities?
The Department of Health were still wary of subsidising tenements, especially those over three storeys, and several schemes were delayed or had to be redesigned. However, MacRae persevered, and in the year ending 1936 had delivered over 1100 houses, 88 percent of which were within tenements.
MacRae’s team first used Campbell’s standard pattern housing for peripheral work, including his flatted blocks, which MacRae saw as a compromised ‘English’ solution.
However, in the early 1930s he expanded his repertoire, introducing new designs and layouts with some influence from Europe, the fruits of his numerous continental trips. These culminated in his influential role in the Highton delegation, which led to the Report on Working Class Housing on the Continent in 1935.
However much MacRae may have admired the planning and ambition of contemporary European housing, he disliked the austerity of international modernism and found fault with their flat roofs and cantilevered balconies. He considered four-storeys high enough and found the ‘Germanic’ communalisation of services and amenities unsuitable for Edinburgh.
The Report on Continental Housing, together with the 1935 Scottish Architectural Advisory Committee Report, did, however, lead to change. MacRae shared the Report’s desire for less-drab layouts and better architecture, together with enhanced community facilities.
He designed several higher-density perimeter blocks set around communal courts at the Pleasance (1934) and Craigmillar (1936). Where space didn’t permit such layouts he planned linear street-facing blocks. Architecturally, they were enhanced by changing storey heights, building planes, and canted corners, bays and staircase-towers. As centrepieces to new estates, he introduced feature crescents at Saughton (1932), Granton (1935), Craigmillar (1936) and Warriston (1936). A subtle touch was the introduction of horizontal stone banding at first floor level, likely sourced from Vienna or Berlin. (11)
MacRae’s last major developments include Piershill (1938) and West Pilton (1938). Piershill, arguably his masterpiece, used a near-continuous snake of three and four storey, largely stone, tenements angled to address its south-facing site. It was European in plan but unashamedly Scottish in design.
On the city’s periphery, the plans for West Pilton comprised 2000 houses and proper community facilities, with a giant circus ringed with stone tenements as a centrepiece. Sadly, war intervened, with timber unattainable and bricklayers lost to defence work. Work recommenced in 1942 to a greatly diminished specification and much increased cost, but space for promised community facilities was seized for temporary housing.
By the time of his retirement, in 1946, MacRae had delivered around 12,000 houses, as well as important studies on Edinburgh’s historic buildings, a precursor to the listing system. His departure came just as subsidies for private housing were discontinued and council housing gained the ascendancy (12), but it also saw the end of the authority and power of the City Architect, with the first major post-war housing estate being offered to open competition.
Title: ‘Health is greater than history’; this 1923 quote from Adam H Campbell represents the conflict between providing new housing and the loss of historic buildings in the city during slum clearance.
(1) Including the wonderful ‘colony’ developments of the 1860s onwards by the Edinburgh Co-operative Building Company throughout the city.
(2) Steven Robb, ‘Conservative Surgery in Edinburgh’, CONTEXT Magazine (IHBC), July 2017
(3) Many of the developments, in less visible positions were built in brick covered in roughcast, or harling in Scots. It was a wet-dash render finish normally, and unfortunately, coloured grey to cope with air pollution.
(4) Often old aristocratic estates, hutment ground or, with consequent disquiet, golf courses.
(5) Anderson’s mood likely darkened further when Glasgow appointed a Sanitary Engineer as their Director shortly afterwards. The City Architect would also have been upset, especially as his Chesser scheme was seen as an exemplar.
(6) Brooks Avenue (1902) in East Ham. He designed two magnificent Carnegie libraries now both listed.
(7) Over 100 tenement flats were reconditioned under the 1919 Act, with the full costs of works being met. Although Campbell’s intention was to provide quick cheap housing, many of the tenements were of great historic interest and he essentially saved them by his intervention.
(8) These houses often differed very little from their Council counterparts.
(9) Bare brick wasn’t seen as able to cope with the Scottish climate, and in any case there wasn’t a stock of good bricklayers for facing brick – which was expensive and hard to get hold off.
(10) Niddrie Mains, often referred to as Craigmillar, was demolished in the early 2000s – It is now being rebuilt, ironically, in tenement form.
(11) But possibly closer to home. An C18th Edinburgh mansion has horizontal banding at first floor.
(12) Two thirds of houses built between 1946 and 1960 were social housing, reversing the inter-war ratio.
Jim Johnson and Lou Rosenburg, Renewing Old Edinburgh; The enduring legacy of Patrick Geddes (2010)
Lou Rosenburg, Scotland’s Homes Fit for Heroes (2016)
John Frew, ‘Concrete, Cosmopolitanism and Low-cost House Design: The Short Architectural Career of AH Campbell, 1923-1926’, Architectural Heritage V (1995), p29-38.
Steven Robb, ‘Ebenezer MacRae and Interwar Housing in Edinburgh’, Book of the Old Edinburgh Club, Volume 13 (2017)
Linda King said:
Dear Municipal Dreams Some time ago I read with great interest your article about the Stone and brick houses built by Henry Boot for returning soldiers and their families after the First world War, in the villages in Oxfordshire, in response to the government’s call for ’Homes fit for heroes’, I live in one of these cottages in the village of Bloxham, and note that they are arriving this year and next at their 100th birthday J They have certainly stood the test of time, to the credit of Henry Boot and Co, and to my knowledge, all still survive J It would seem a great shame not to celebrate this in some way, and I was wondering if you have had any ideas? Best wishes Linda King
Municipal Dreams said:
Thanks for your comment. (By the way, if you want to make a comment not related to this post, you can use the Contact Me button at the top.) There are various celebrations of the centenary of the 1919 Housing Act across the country – in Bristol, Hull, etc, and there is also an academic conference in July. I’m not aware of anything specifically in Oxfordshire but I will pass on your query to the author of the piece.
Jane Kilsby said:
Thank you very much for your comment and I’m glad that you found the posts on the Oxfordshire Henry Boot houses interesting. Your comment has prompted me to get in touch with Cherwell District Council again about them considering all of the houses like yours to be ‘locally listed’ – some of them are in conservation areas but not all of them – and I think it would be a good 100th birthday present to the houses if they received some protection in that way. It may be worth asking the Bloxham History Club if they are interested in helping with a celebration in the village.
Good to see mention in the footnotes of Edinburgh colony flats. We bought one of these – an upper colony just off Leith Links – in 1998 and were sorry to leave it when work brought us back down south four years later. Such a clever design giving privacy and community.
Steven Robb said:
Joan – yes the Colony flats are great. More recently a few schemes have reinvented the colony design – The Leith Fort redevelopment in North Fort Street (Malcolm Fraser architects) has colony housing – and is very popular.
John Maguire said:
Great article although I must point out one small inaccuracy. The Niddrie Mains demolitions were carried out after extensive and expensive consultation exercises over a 12 month period. Every householder was visited. Monthly public meetings were held locally, informations days were held quarterly, weekly surgeries were held in Richmond Church Cafe and the Craigmillar Housing Partnership (a local body) received significant funding to develop and provide additional consultation from within the community. The choice was rehabilitation or replacement. The people chose replacement. (my own preference was rehabilitation) Local people not only sat on the development boards, they actually chaired them. Local people also chose the winnings designs, drew up plans for green spaces, (compromising with the architects and developers where necessary thankfully) and were front and centre through the whole process. These are important points because to suggest no consultation suggests further victimisation of a community who was, at that point, already very vulnerable. But they were also a very strong and active community and anyone who knows anything about the Craigmillar area at that time knows the strength, dedication and determination of the local community activists, and I for one, was never going to cross them.
Former Senior Development Officer; Niddrie Mains 1999-2002
Many thanks for this – very interesting. That reference was for the Craigmillar Masterplan 2000 and was directly taken from; David Bell (editor) and Dr Mark Jayne, City of Quarters – Urban villages in the contemporary city (2004). They specifically used it as an example of top-down planning without involvement from the community. As you know Niddrie Mains and Craigmillar are often lumped together – despite being two different areas developed at two different dates – and with two very different styles. Craigmillar had, in a sense, tried to address the failings with Niddrie – which was quite harshly attacked in many contemporary reports.
Pingback: An introduction to Edinburgh’s social housing, 1890-1945 | builtedinburgh.co.uk
I think you should mention the work of Cllr Euphemia Somerville who campaigned for the development of social housing for the poor in Edinburgh. https://books.google.ca/books?id=Zs6qBgAAQBAJ&pg=PA332&lpg=PA332&dq=A+Child+Lover,+by+euphemia+somerville&source=bl&ots=FYGQyiCrq3&sig=ACfU3U0w7Ycq9JjatOiZ3KZADt04ca08Rg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwi2jqOS883rAhWhrVkKHfaMA8cQ6AEwAXoECAEQAQ#v=onepage&q=A%20Child%20Lover%2C%20by%20euphemia%20somerville&f=false
Pingback: Edinburgh’s 1919 Act Housing, Part I: ‘Healthy Houses for the People is the Best Public Health Insurance’ | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: Edinburgh’s 1919 Act Housing, Part II: ‘Healthy Houses for the People is the Best Public Health Insurance’ | Municipal Dreams
Pingback: An introduction to Edinburgh’s social housing, 1890-1945 – Place Design Scotland
Pingback: Edinburgh’s social housing, 1890-1945 – Place Design Scotland