Inter-War Housing as Architectural Heritage? 

 Author: Laura Brain, Research Associate, Cardiff University 

Inter-war social housing is rarely credited as Architectural Heritage. Whilst a few monumental housing estates of subsequent decades – Park Hill, The Barbican, The Trellick Tower – have been written into the architectural history books, the ubiquitous suburban housing estates of the inter-war period are conspicuously absent. Yet the homes constructed across England and Wales in the 1920s and 1930s represent a turning point in the history of UK housing. 

The first of these homes, built under the 1919 Addison Act, are in many ways an architecture like none before. They are distinct both from pre-war urban housing in their prioritisation of light, space and comfort for the welfare of their inhabitants; and from arts-and-crafts inspired ‘Garden Cities’ and earlier cottage architecture in their utilitarian construction and standardisation. At a socio-political level, these homes – and the policies that underpinned their construction – heralded a revolution in how the state related to the domestic life of its citizens. 

The government’s decision to fund social housing at scale for the working classes cannot be attributed to a single cause. The First World War undoubtedly shifted attitudes towards the working classes, as evidenced by the ‘Homes for Heroes’ campaign. Additionally, the 1918 ‘Representation of the People Act’ extended voting rights to almost all men and some women over the age of 30. Policies appealing to this new voting population quickly gained traction. 

Furthermore, the political impetus to stimulate house building responded to an acute shortage of adequate housing in the wake of the First World War, and the perceived threat of a revolution led by trained military men returning home to unemployment and slum-like living conditions. The government recognised not only that more housing was needed, but that standards had to be improved. 

In 1918 the Local Government Board penned a report to offer a solution. Also referred to as the ‘Tudor Walters Report’, it proposed a state-aided housing programme, providing both funding and detailed guidance on what should be built. The report contained a standardised set of house plans applicable to different contexts and encompassed not only the design of individual homes, but the layout of whole estates. It was written into law in the Housing Act of 1919, known as the ‘Addison Act’. This act was proceeded by a series of housing acts introduced by consecutive inter-war governments, which to varying degrees subsidised local authorities and private housebuilders to construct housing at scale and to defined standards. Whilst the standards appear to have reduced throughout the period, the underlying principles remained close to those set out in the Tudor Walters Report. 

The Tudor Walters designs drew on the Garden City Movement, with details influenced by the arts and crafts houses of the late 19th and early 20th century. Rather than the long rows of identical terraces typical of the pre-war era, these homes were designed as semi-detached or short rows of wide-fronted, square or rectangular houses, orientated to maximise views and light, and surrounded by generous gardens. The palette of forms and materials was limited but provided subtle variation across the estates, complimented by a layout of curving streets and green spaces. Whilst the designs emphasised the wellbeing of occupants, the programme was driven by the need for construction at scale, by a largely unskilled workforce, using a war-depleted supply of materials. 

Today we can see the results of this programme in almost every town and city across England and Wales. We now view many of the revolutionary features of this housing as commonplace – their low density, indoor bathrooms and generous private gardens – yet previously such luxuries had been confined to the villas of the wealthy than the housing of the masses. 

Historic England attributes the term ‘Heritage’ to places with historical, evidential, communal and aesthetic values; those which tell us about past people and societies (Drury, 2008). Can we deny that these estates are a part of the nation’s built heritage? Whether we can claim them as ‘Architectural Heritage’ – and where we draw lines between ‘Housing’ and ‘Architecture’ – is a discussion for another time. 

Image credits: Joel Cady

References:  

DRURY, P., MCPHERSON, ANNA 2008. Conservation Principles, Policies and Guidance. English Heritage. 

Further reading: 

– Municipal Dreams Blog by John Boughton https://municipaldreams.wordpress.com (and associated book ‘Municipal Dreams – The Rise and Fall of Council Housing’, 2018) 

– Swenarton, Mark (1981) ‘Homes for Heroes – The Politics and Architecture of Early State Housing in Britain’