Brussels Housing: Atlas of Residential Building Types 9783035625530, 9783035625509

Citation preview

BRUSSELS Housing Atlas of Residential Building Types

This book was made possible with the support of Urban Brussels, Cellule architecture de la Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles, Vlaamse Overheid, Ville de Bruxelles – Stad Brussel, Faculté d’architecture, d’ingénierie ­architecturale, d’urbanisme (LOCI) de l’UCLouvain & ­Louvain research institute for Landscape, Architecture, Built environment (LAB).

We would also like to express our thanks to Philippe Demoulin, Peinture Fraîche, Brussels.

Graphic design, layout and typesetting: Silke Nalbach Copy-editing: Tadzio Koelb, Ria Stein Proofreading: Ian McDonald Project management: Ria Stein Production: Anja Haering Paper: Magno Volume, 150 g/m2 Printing: Grafisches Centrum Cuno GmbH & Co. KG, Calbe Lithography: Repromayer GmbH, Reutlingen Library of Congress Control Number: 2022951078 Bibliographic information published by the German ­National Library The German National Library lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. This work is subject to copyright. All rights are ­reserved, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, re-use of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in other ways, and storage in databases. For any kind of use, permission of the copyright owner must be obtained. ISBN 978-3-0356-2550-9 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-0356-2553-0

© 2023 Birkhäuser Verlag GmbH, Basel P.O. Box 44, 4009 Basel, Switzerland Part of Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printed on acid-free paper produced from ­chlorine-free pulp. TCF ∞

Printed in Germany 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 www.birkhauser.com

Gérald Ledent Alessandro Porotto

BRUSSELS Housing Atlas of Residential Building Types Foreword by Jacques Lucan Photography by Maxime Delvaux

BIRKHÄUSER

Contents

6

8

14

Foreword Jacques Lucan

Introduction Brussels Housing: A Typology Gérald Ledent and Alessandro Porotto

A City of Row Houses: From the Origins to 1914 Gérald Ledent

30

Brussels Cityscapes I Maxime Delvaux

48 50

Housing Atlas I

52 54 56 58 60 62 64 67 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96

Hôtel Clèves-Ravenstein, early 16th century Duivelshuis, 1545–1550 Chapeliers 22–24, 1696 Hôtel Vanderlinden d’Hooghvorst, 1725 Grand Hospice, 1827 Grand Hospice Houses, 1829 Quartier Léopold Ideal Urban Block, 1837 Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert, 1847 Léopoldian House, 1830–1880 Impasse Vanhoeter, 1848 Cité Pauwels, 1850 Hôtel Marnix, 1880 Worker Terraced House, 1899 Le Bon 70, 1901 Maison Strauven, 1902 Solvay 32, 1904 Discailles 9, 1904 Molière 112, 1907 Lambermont 73, 1909 Berkendael 203, 1909 Perdrix 33, 1910 Commerçants 6, 1911 Reyers 213, 1914 Trooz 12, 1914

98

Perpetuating or Opposing the Terraced House

Gérald Ledent 114

Brussels Cityscapes II Maxime Delvaux

132 134 136 138 140 142 144 146 148 150 152 154 156 158 162 164 170 174 176 178 180 182 184 186 188 190 192 194 196 198 200 204 206 208 210 212 214 216 220 222 224

Housing Atlas II

Cité Fontainas, 1867 Cité de Dilbeek, 1870 Cité Louvain, 1875 De Brouckère 33–35, 1876 Familistère Godin, 1888 Hôtel Tassel, 1894 Villa Bloemenwerf, 1895 Marconi 32, 1901 Rodenbach 14–35, 1903 Cité de l’Olivier, 1905 Palais Stoclet, 1911 Cité Reine Astrid, 1915 Le Logis-Floréal, 1922 Saint-Michel 97, 1923 Cité Moderne, 1925 Kapelleveld, 1926 Résidence Palace, 1927 Hôtel Wolfers, 1929 Le Nouveau Bruxelles, 1930 Villa Empain, 1930 Palais de la Folle Chanson, 1931 Cité Melckmans, 1932 Cité Van Hemelrijck, 1932 Broqueville 1–4, 1932 Les Pavillons Français, 1934 Maison de Verre, 1936 Résidence Léopold, 1937 Résidence de la Cambre, 1939 Churchill 126, 1949 De Roovere 14–16, 1957 Cité Modèle 3, 1958 Cité Modèle 6, 1958 Ieder Zijn Huis, 1958 Maison Volckrick, 1958 Maison Verhaegen, 1960 Villas Parc Albert I, 1960 Centre International Rogier, 1961 Van Overbeke 243, 1961 La Magnanerie, 1957 and 1961 Europa II, 1962

226 228 230 232 234 236

Peterbos 6, 1964 Résidence Parc Albert I, 1964 Brusilia, 1970 La Mémé, 1976 Les Venelles, 1977 Laeken 95–121, 1995

238

The Search for Quality Housing: From 2000 Onwards Alessandro Porotto

254

Brussels Cityscapes III Maxime Delvaux

270 272 274 276 278 280 282 284 286 288 290 292 294 296 298 300 302 304 306 308 310 312 314 316 318 320 322 324 326 328 330 332 334

Housing Atlas III

CôtéKanal, 1998 Nimifi, 1999 Helihavenlaan 7, 2005 Maison Krantz-Fontaine, 2006 L’Espoir, 2007 P.NT2, 2007 La Tréfilerie, 2007 Cheval Noir, 2010 Savonnerie Heymans, 2011 Fin 15, 2011 Palais 95, 2012 Claes 36, 2014 Up-Site Tower, 2014 Cygnes Digue, 2014 Brutopia, 2015 Villa Pilifs, 2015 Népomucène 15, 2015 Navez 111, 2015 Portaels 158, 2016 Charme 9, 2016 House William, 2017 Dumont 5, 2018 Akenkaai 36, 2019 Willebroekkaai 22, 2019 The Cosmopolitan, 2019 Mexico 15, 2020 Habitat groupé Tivoli, 2021 Dayton, 2022 Mansion Block, 2025 Rempart des Moines – Southern Block Engelenbergstraat 21 Havenlaan 12 – Southern Tower

336 338 340 342 344 346

Making a/+ Living – Northern Tower Dockside Tilleuls Peterbos 9 Vervloet – Villa Nord Do you see me when we pass?

348 349 350 351

About the Authors Acknowledgements Index Illustration Credits

6

Jacques Lucan

Foreword

With Brussels Housing, we have before us an exceptional work, constructed around two research directions. Brussels Housing is a publication that presents information about a large number of buildings or projects over a very long period of time, in the tradition of comparative anthologies initiated in France by Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand’s Recueil et parallèle.1 Here, however, the comparative anthology has been historicised and is devoted to the sole issue of housing. Gérald Ledent and Alessandro Porotto have selected 108 case studies for which meticulous documents, plans, sections, and elevations have been drawn up. These enable us to understand the typological and distributive layouts. The second research direction is a history that outlines the changes and evolutions of­ ­hou­sing programmes and types. It is divided into three main periods: before the First World War; from 1914 to the end of the 20th century; and since the year 2000. This history of course needs the above comparative anthology to be “concrete”. Before 1914, the dominant type, i.e. the most widespread in the Brussels area, was the row house. It gave its physiognomy to many of the city’s streets and districts. From the beginning of the 19th century, the row house became what Gérald Ledent calls a “referential type”, the bourgeois terraced house, i.e. a type of which there are many specimens, all of which, to varying degrees, are similar and different: similar in that they share the room layout, a distribution method and the same principle of urban embedding; different in that they respond to variations in the programme, specific local situations and particular architectural treatments. From this typological perspective, we are dealing with what I have called a vernacular production.2 Brussels Housing is thus the very example of an analytical and typological effort that produces real knowledge and enables comparisons and

contrasts that are never liable to be superficial or arbitrary. It should be noted here that the book can only make one regret the disappearance or dismantling of some of the cases presented on the basis of archival documents and graphic reconstructions. There is no doubt that many of these buildings, if they had been preserved, would today be witnesses to the heritage of Brussels, which should be protected and valorised. This is to say that the way in which we look at a city and at what makes the city does not remain identical from one era to the next, but also that we must show caution when assessing architecture (and real estate). After the long history of the row house, which did not end after 1914, the years following the First World War saw housing develop in two main directions, given that Brussels, like other European cities, went through a period of growth. The first direction was the construction of rather suburban single-family houses or villas, ranging from exceptional cases to programmes aimed at the general public, among others in the form of garden cities. The other direction is that of collective housing, in which field some architects wanted to apply the principles of modern architecture and urban planning. However, this would only happen, on a large scale, after the Second World War. The field of collective housing is where what I call new “forms of housing” were trying to define themselves. These forms were not so much concerned with the typologies of the housing units themselves in their “internal” layout, but rather with the way in which these units were grouped together to form complexes. However, in the development of collective housing, certain “internal” typologies tended to take root, each with their own interpretation and variation, depending on the architect. Here again, in the final analysis, we are dealing with the problem of vernacular production (modern and contemporary).

1  Durand, Jean-Nicolas-Louis. Recueil et parallèle des édifices de tout genre, anciens et modernes, remarquables par leur beauté, par leur grandeur ou par leur singularité, et dessinés sur une même échelle. (Comparative anthology of buildings of all kinds, ancient and modern, remarkable on account of their beauty, their grandness or their singularity, and drawn on the same scale). Gillé Fils, Paris, 1799–1801.   2  See Lucan, Jacques. Habiter: Ville et Architecture. EPFL Press, Lausanne, 2021.

7

Like many, if not most, European cities and ­metropolises, the problems that Brussels has been facing since the beginning of the 21st century are numerous and interrelated. They concern both suburban sprawl that is difficult to control and an urban renewal or redevelopment, which must take into account all aspects of construction, particularly from the point of view of sustainable development and social change. As Alessandro Porotto points out, Brussels has become a veritable “palimpsest”, which is what Brussels Housing is also analogously, with a succession of case studies that echo each other in a reading that gains by being both synchronic and diachronic. For someone who is a stranger to Brussels, i.e. someone who has not lived in the city for a significant period of time, Gérald Ledent and

Alessandro Porotto outline a genealogy of Brussels housing, many aspects of which would not be apparent to us if we were to look at the city “from a distance”. The “close-up” view they offer allows us to understand Brussels in all its complexity. It also enables us to highlight specific local urban and architectural characteristics. Because they are discreet, these characteristics might not be perceived at first glance, or might be confused with features common to all contemporary buildings, even in other cities. Finally, it is worth pointing out that, unlike traditional anthologies of building examples, Brussels Housing does not offer models to be imitated, but rather food for thought for living in the city. Paris, January 2023

8

City life is challenged by the Belgian dream of a free-standing house in a garden – which might just be an architect’s nightmare, as pictured by Hannes Coudenys in Ugly Belgian Houses.

9

BRUSSELS HOUSING

Gérald Ledent and Alessandro Porotto

Brussels Housing: A Typology «Dans l’art de l’architecture, la maison est certainement ce qui caractérise le mieux les mœurs, les goûts et les usages d’une population; son ordonnance, comme ses distributions, ne se modifie qu’à la longue, et si puissants que soient des conquérants, leur tyrannie ne va jamais jusqu’à tenter de changer la forme des habitations du peuple conquis» EUGÈN E EM M A N U EL V IOLLET-LE-DUC  1

Housing This book sets out to analyse and illustrate the various housing forms that exist in Brussels. This objective is undertaken from an architectural viewpoint by examining the spatial features of housing across the various phases of the city’s evolution, from its origin to its golden age at the turn of the 20th century, and on to contemporary practice. In addition to documenting the qual­ ities of housing itself, the book investigates the mechanisms that drove housing’s evolution and the ways in which housing production has shaped the city. The variety of housing forms in Brussels is vast, as are the continuing debates and private or public initiatives that have enriched them. Interestingly, discussions about housing quality have been revived in recent decades as a means to address several challenges: the city’s growing popu­ lation, climate change, and social inclusion. In addition, since the 1960s, Brussels’ urban housing has developed in competition with that of the city’s hinterland, which extends as far as the Belgian coast. The competition between the city and its periphery is fuelled by the tenacious dream many people have of living in a villa on an isolated plot of suburban land, as illustrated by Hannes Coudenys’ Ugly Belgian Houses2 project. This unbridled desire for individuality poses a fierce challenge to city living, which in response needs to become more inviting. Housing has a central place in the quest to renew and enhance urban quality of life, and answers to contempor­

ary challenges include introducing new layouts, foreseeing innovative relationships to the public realm, addressing the evolution of the household, or even developing alternative forms of land and property tenure. If an analysis of housing spaces is central to this book, it is not without reason. Through the study of these spaces, the local lifestyles, uses, and dwelling practices are equally revealed. As David Harvey elegantly puts it, “we make the house and the house makes us”.3 By understanding the places we live in, we also come to understand ourselves. For people living in Brussels, there is an immediate interest in this knowledge. Knowing one’s city better means understanding oneself better, while offering tools to help shape one’s environment. For those who do not live there, this knowledge promotes a better understanding of a city and its identity, how it is ­inhabited, and how history is engraved on its spaces. This understanding of identity through domestic space can be compared with August Sander’s work from the 1920s, People of the 20 th Century,4 a collective portrait of German society at that time in which attitudes and clothing indicated what kind of people were portrayed. Likewise, this book aims to give a better understanding of local habits and practices through the study of domestic spaces. In short, tell me where you live, and I will tell you who you are!

1  “In architecture, the house is certainly what best characterises the customs, tastes and habits of a population; its layout, like its distribution, is only modified in the long run, and however powerful conquerors may be, their tyranny never goes so far as to attempt to change the houses of the conquered.” (author’s translation) In: Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène Emmanuel. Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIème au XVIème siècle. vol. 6. Paris, Bance et Morel, 1863.    2  Coudenys, Hannes. Ugly Belgian Houses: Don’t Try This at Home. Ghent, Borgerhoff & Lamberigts, 2015.   3  Harvey, David. Spaces of Hope. Berkeley, University of California Press, 2000.   4  Sander, August. People of the 20th Century: A Cultural Work of Photographs Divided Into Seven Groups. Munich, Schirmer/Mosel, 2013.

10

Brussels

A Typology

In its particular relationship between domestic spaces and local uses, Brussels is unusual. The diversity of its political roles signals this distinct­ iveness. As the seat of the European institutions and NATO, it is one of the most multi-cultural cities in the world. But it is also the capital of ­Belgium, a complex federal country where three linguistic communities – Dutch, French, and German – live together, two of which have elected it as their capital. Finally, in this interlocking of political levels, Brussels is one of the three fully fledged regions of Belgium, alongside Flanders and Wallonia, positioned as an enclave within Flanders. This city–region duality makes it a dense city cut off from its hinterland. This feature informs the geographical framework of the book, which focuses on housing in this limited regional territory. Besides being a politically isolated territory, Brussels is a city of houses. Unlike in many Euro­ pean cities, but as in other capitals such as ­London or Amsterdam, housing in Brussels has developed around the individual terraced house. This housing form is so common that its locals don’t question it, even if foreign visitors are a­ lways struck by a capital city of row houses. A fascinating collage by the Brussels-based ar­chi­tecture studio BAUKUNST, 3 Cities – Bruxelles, expresses this by producing an image of the city as if there were only row houses, erasing any other kind of building. The majority of Brussels’ row houses were built at the turn of the 20th century and row houses still constitute more than one third of its housing stock. They are not the only form of housing one can find here, however: Brussels at times displays the collage of styles and types typical of Belgian cities. Tracing the origins of Brussels housing is a difficult task for two reasons. Wars have meant few buildings survived unharmed from the Middle Ages to the present day, but even more important has been a constant remodelling of the city by the people of Brussels themselves. In add­ ition, iconographic resources are limited since city archives prior to the 17th century perished in the great fire following bombardment by­ Louis XIV’s troops in 1695. Despite these lim­i­ tations, meticulous collation using paintings, ­engravings, valuable assistance from archaeologists, and the similarity of nearby towns have allowed us to retrace a continuous path from the city’s origins to today.

Typo-morphological analysis was used to ex­am­ ine the multiple housing forms found in B ­ russels. This tool combines investigations into the urban form and the layout of housing. In ­addition to being a device for analysing built s­ paces, it is also a tool for inventing new designs. The two books, both entitled Typology, by E ­ mmanuel Christ and Christoph Ganten­bein5 are a prime example of both approaches, as they inventory housing from various cities around the world to serve as a possible basis for new housing designs. This book has the same objective. The terms “type” and “typology” sound familiar to architects, but their definitions are often ­unclear. While vagueness may be valuable in ­certain circumstances, these concepts require clarity in a book revolving around Typology. A type can be ­defined as a collection of qualities common to objects of the same nature, grouped according to a specific criterion. Based on this defi­nition, a t­ ypology is a classification of different types. The obsession with inventories in ­Diderot & D’Alembert’s Encyclopaedia6 is at the heart of this notion of typology, offering classifications of just about everything, ranging from birds’ beaks to shoe soles, human anatomy, ­flower forms or music instruments to padlocks. The Encyclopaedia presents architecture in the same way, arranging buildings according to their styles, construction methods, or spatial layouts. Spatial layout is p ­ recisely what can lead to misunderstandings, because architects refer to it as typology as well, using “housing ­typology” to designate the composition and ­articulation of spaces in a building. The present book lies at the meeting point of these two ­definitions. It aims, on the one hand, to classify the housing forms present in Brussels, and, on the other hand, to analyse their spatial compositions. The spatial ingredients of a housing type cannot be dissociated from social practices. While space supports social interactions, it is also influenced by them. Within this particular interpretation of type, it is interesting to note that most cities have a dominant type. It is usually the resi­ dential type commonly built during a demographic boom and largely spread across a city’s territory. Its pervasiveness makes it identifiable, and linked to the identity of the city ­itself. Paris is identified with Haussmannian buildings from the 19th century, Naples with its 18th-century ­palazzi, Amsterdam with the 17th-century herenhuis along the canals, Bath with its late-18th- to early-19th-century crescents, or Berlin with its Mietskasernen but also Siedlungen from 1850 to 1940. In Brussels, the dominant type corres­ ponds to what Victor ­Horta called the bonne ­maison moyenne 7 of the turn of the 20th century.

5  Christ, Emmanuel et al. Typology: Hong Kong, Rome, New York, Buenos Aires. Zürich, Park Books, 2012; Christ, Emmanuel et al. Typology: Paris, Delhi, São Paulo, Athens. ETH Zürich, 2015.    6  Diderot, Denis and Jean Le Rond D’Alembert. Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers par une ­société de gens de lettres. Paris, Briasson – Le Breton – David-­Durand, 1751–1772.   7  Dulière, Cécile. Victor Horta, mémoires. Brussels, Ministère de la Communauté française de Belgique: Administration du Patrimoine culturel, 1985, p. 34.

11

Like Amsterdam or London, Brussels is a city of houses. The Brussels-based architecture studio BAUKUNST illustrates this character in the 3 Cities – Bruxelles photomontage by imagining the city of Brussels as if there were only houses.

BRUSSELS HOUSING

12

Understanding a city’s dominant type is valuable because, as a reference, it provides valuable knowledge about the city’s social and spatial conditions. First, the dominant type sheds light on the socio-cultural identity of a place. Indeed, given the double nature of type – spatial arrangements and social practices – and its refer­ential position, identifying the spatial characteristics of the dominant type opens a window on the socio-­ cultural identity of its environment. Second, it can be used as a standard with which other housing configurations can be compared. Third, it can inspire contemporary interpre­tations. For example, types can be interpreted into new forms. These three aspects of the dominant type – socio-­ cultural definition, housing variations, and interpretations – are the core of this book, providing an extensive overview of housing in Brussels.

Book Structure The structure of this book is threefold. First, it traces the origins of housing in Brussels and the formation of its most common and dominant housing type, generating a city of row houses. The implementation of this dominant type ­coincides with the first large-scale development plan for the city of Brussels at the end of the 19th century. Second, it examines the other forms of ­housing present in the city by comparing them with the dominant type. This establishes a new ­genealogy of housing by explaining the reasons for the appearance of other forms of housing through comparison with the dominant type. Rather than a strictly chronological overview, this chapter offers a classification of residential forms according to their spatial and typological features. That is the reason, for instance, why the Cité de ­Dilbeek from the 1870s is presented in the second chapter together with the garden ­cities movement from the 1920s (Le Logis-Floréal, Cité Moderne, or Kapelleveld) as they share the same typo-morphological characteristics (free-­ standing low-rise villas set in gardens, built at the periphery of the city). The juxtaposition of these other housing forms sometimes makes Brussels look like a gigantic collage – this is often how the city is depicted in Belgian cartoons. Finally, the last chapter ­investigates contemporary housing production in Brussels. This investigation sheds light on ­current social changes and the transitions housing is undergoing to accommodate the cultural ­diversity that defines the city today. To narrate these three stages, three media were used: writing, drawing, and photography. All three tell in their own way the story of ­housing in Brussels and the domestic or urban qualities it contains. The texts are enhanced by

­ ocuments from the periods they relate to. An d extensive atlas of Brussels brings together more than 100 exemplary case studies, documented in chronological order. They have been selected to illustrate the diversity of Brussels housing typ­ ologies from the Middle Ages to today and are characterised by particularly interesting layout solutions. As in Bernd and Hilla Becher’s typological work on industrial buildings, a protocol was established to redraw all the case studies in plan, section, and elevation with identical graphic codes and at the same scale in ­order to enable comparisons. Finally, Maxime Delvaux’s photographs tell a story of their own: they convey the atmosphere and quality of the urban spaces ­created by the buildings selected in various parts of Brussels. The book offers an insight into the variety of Brussels housing forms over the years. This ­diversity is extremely obvious as narrow gabled-­ roof houses stand side by side with modernist apartment buildings or 19th-century mansions, creating an at times surreal cityscape. This typ­ ical Belgian layering of housing solutions is a ­formal poetic chaos, but it might also provide answers to tomorrow’s challenges, such as diversifying socio-demographics. May this book be a tool for understanding, perpetuating, and inventing new Belgian solutions!

13

BRUSSELS HOUSING

A typology is a classification of objects based on distinctive criteria. Diderot and D’Alembert’s Encyclopaedia used the principle to a large extent. Shown here are birds sorted according to the shapes of their feet and beaks.

15

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

Gérald Ledent

A City of Row Houses: From the Origins to 1914 From Rural to Urban Houses In Roman times, Brussels did not yet exist; its territory consisted only of several secondary roads. 1 Three Gallo-Roman villas have been found in the area.2 Although very little remains of these villas, we can nevertheless make certain observations: rural housing was set on ridges and slopes to avoid floods;3 single-storey villas were organised around a large central room4 opening onto a portico; and building materials included bricks, cob, and tiles. Things changed after the fall of the Roman Empire. Wooden construction re-appeared, resuming pre-Roman traditions.5 The 19th-century architect Louis Cloquet 6 points out two other evolutions during this period: women were no longer isolated within houses, which now included large openings to the exterior. Two forms of housing could be found in Brussels in the early Middle Ages. On the one hand, peasant houses, common across the region, displayed a single large quadrangular space organised around a central family hearth.7 Their construction was rudimentary, with wooden and cob walls capped by large thatched-ridge roofs. On the other hand, local lords built stone houses – steens in Dutch. In the absence of city walls, these costly houses were designed to protect their residents, as suggested by their stone construction, central towers, and crenelated walls.8 Such buildings consisted of several floors erected on vaulted basements. Texts mention

< A city of streets and dense urban fabric (Grasmarkt – rue du Marché aux Herbes)

various steens in Brussels,9 but none of these ­noble houses remains today; the last one was destroyed in 1910 during work on the north–south railway connection.10

City Housing Brussels was officially founded around 979,11 when its first marketplace developed along the Senne River. The real turning point for housing, however, was the construction of the earliest city walls in the 12th century.12 The aim at the time was to fit as many residents as possible ­behind the walls; buildings were therefore packed tightly together. In order to be accessible, houses

Reconstruction drawing and model of the Gallo-Roman villa in Jette, third century AD

1  Known as diverticula. “The ‘Roman road’ in Wemmel, the ‘Dieweg’ in Uccle, the ‘Rue Haute’ and the ‘Chaussée de Haecht’ in Brussels would be the ­distant evidence of this.” Martiny, Victor-Gaston. Bruxelles: architecture civile et militaire avant 1900. Brussels, J.M. Collet, 1992, p. 12.  2  Remains of ­Roman villas have been found in the Brussels municipalities of Anderlecht, Laeken, and Jette. Matthys, André. “La villa gallo-romaine de Jette.” Archeologica Belgica, vol. 2, no. 152, 1972, pp. 7–37.    3  Charruadas, Paulo. “De la campagne à la ville. Peuplement, structures foncières et croissance économique dans la région de Bruxelles avant l’an mil.” Medieval and Modern Matters, vol. 2, 2011, pp. 1–24. 4  Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900; Matthys, André. “La ­villa gallo-romaine de Jette.” Archeologica Belgica, vol. 2, no. 152, 1972, pp. 7–37.   5  Following the invasions from the north, Gauls resumed their ­tradition of building with wood. Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène. Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle. vol. 6, Paris, Bance, 1863, p. 214.   6  Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900, p. 2.   7 van de Walle, Adelbrecht. Het bouwbedrijf in de Lage Landen tijdens de middeleeuwen. Antwerp, De Nederlandsche Boekhandel, 1959.   8  Verniers, Louis. Un millénaire d’histoire de Bruxelles: depuis les origines jusqu’en 1830. Brussels, de Boeck, 1965, pp. 77–78.   9  Valkenborgsteen, Ketelsteen, Meynaersteen, Machiaensteen Martiny, Victor-Gaston. Bruxelles: architecture civile et militaire avant 1900. Brussels, J.M. Collet, 1992, p. 14; Henne, Alexandre and Alfonse Guillaume Ghislain Wauters. Histoire de la ville de Bruxelles. Perichon, 1845, vol. 1, pp. 22–23; Millin, Aubin-Louis. Antiquités nationales ou Recueil de monuments pour servir à l’histoire générale. vol. 5, Paris, Drouhin, 1797.   10 Martiny, Victor-Gaston. Bruxelles: architecture civile et militaire avant 1900. Brussels, J.M. Collet, 1992, p. 14.   11 CERAA. Morphologie urbaine à Bruxelles. Brussels, CERAA, 1987. 12  Bonenfant, Paul. “Les premiers remparts de Bruxelles.” Annales de la Société Royale d’Archéologie de Bruxelles, vol. XL, 1936, pp. 7–47; Deligne, Chloé. Bruxelles et sa rivière. Genèse d’un territoire urbain (12e-18e siècle). Turnhout, Brepols Publishers, 2003. Studies in European Urban History.  

16

Wooden rural house as depicted by Jan Brueghel the Elder in The Adoration of the Kings, 1598

evolved from breedhuis (broadhouses) to diephuis (deephouses) by pivoting to offer their shortest side to the street.13 Housing consequently developed in depth and height on long and narrow plots of land determined by acknowledging previous (agrarian) divisions, finding an optimum width between façade apertures and beam spans to allow as many dwellings as possible within a limited area.14 Housing inside the walls developed in two stages: wooden houses followed by brick and stone residences.

Wooden Houses

The first form of urban dwelling in Brussels was the timber-frame house. Although the last ex­ ample was demolished in 1818,15 drawings, paintings, and surviving built structures in the surroundings of Brussels give us a good overview of their composition (Duivelshuis, pp. 52–53).16 As in many medieval cities, narrow streets –

­kattesteghe17 – were created between properties to prevent fires spreading between wooden ­constructions. City blocks were therefore permeable, allowing collective uses (drying greens for household linens, orchards, etc.) in their ­centres.18 Gutter walls were organised along these kattesteghe, leading to the appearance of gables on the main streets.19 The layout of these wooden houses was determined by their reduced street frontage and restricted development in height. Compared with rural houses, urban dwellings had become too narrow for a central hearth, and the constraint of continuous vertical ducts through the different floors led to placing the hearth against party walls. In addition, since light was very scarce in the kattesteghe, large apertures were made on street façades. Houses consisted of two to four floors of similar height usually with two add­ itional floors below the attic.20 Semi-buried basements were directly accessible from the street

13  Martens, Mina and Victor-Gaston Martiny. Histoire de Bruxelles. Privat, 1976; Martiny, Victor-Gaston. “La maison bourgeoise unifamiliale à façade étroite, du 16ème siècle à l’aube du 20ème à Bruxelles.” New Approaches to Living Patterns, edited by Roland Baetens, Anvers, Brepols Publishers, 1991, pp. 109–146.   14  The most common plot width in the Middle Ages was around 6 metres. Cabestan, Jean-François. La conquête du plain-pied : l’immeuble à Paris au XVIIIe siècle. Paris, Picard, 2004, p. 203.   15  Cloquet, Louis. Les maisons anciennes en Belgique. Gand, Victor van Doosselaere, 1907.   16  Together with other wooden constructions from Belgium, this house was illustrated by Grabbe and Colinet. Grabbe, Ernst. “Der flämische Holzbau.” Zeitschrift für Bauwesen, 1919, pp. 613–638; Colinet, Émile. Recueil des restes de notre art national. Colinet, 1872. vol. 1.   17  Viollet-le-Duc also refers to these streets as “ambitus” or “endronne”. Martiny, Victor-Gaston. “La maison bourgeoise unifamiliale à façade étroite, du 16ème siècle à l’aube du 20ème à Bruxelles.” New Approaches to Living Patterns, edited by Roland Baetens, Anvers, Brepols Publishers, 1991, pp. 109–146.   18  As can be seen on Joan Blaeu’s 1649 map of Brussels.   19 Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène. Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIe au XVIe siècle. vol. 6, Paris, Bance, 1863, p. 225.   20  “The very high gable roof represents up to half the height of the building (compared to one third in Paris); there are two floors of rooms opening onto the street through small rectangular windows piercing a vast stepped or curved gable.” Bertrand, Jean-Michel. Architecture de l’habitat urbain: la maison, le quartier, la ville. Paris, Dunod, 1980, p. 15.

The stone house Sleeuws Steen, in a hypothetical reconstruction by the antiquary Aubin-Louis Millin in 1797

17

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

through a double door and a staircase. In general, the ground floor was very public, used for commercial or work space as well as a room for f­ amily gatherings. The upper floors, connected by a s­ piral staircase located either inside or outside the building, usually comprised two identical rooms laid out in a row. Due to the narrowness of these buildings, a lifting beam with a pulley was placed on the façade to hoist bulky goods to the upper floors. To allow additional light, a courtyard was placed at the back of the building, where a cesspit and a rainwater tank could be found. Drinking water generally came from public fountains. Within these recurring features, very diverse layouts could be found, usually legible from the outside by the entrance position (centred or not, elevated or not, in the kattesteghe or not). Oak wood was used for the structure, façade, and finishing elements. Structurally, each level of a timber-frame house was independent by virtue of having its own wood panelling. From floor to floor, corbels of around half a metre allowed a lighter structure,21 increasing the floor surface and protecting the street from bad weather. The roofs were supported by “trussed rafters” or “truss and purlin” and presented their triangular gables to the streets. They were capped with thatch, which would later be replaced by clay tiles.22 Roofs perpendicular to the streets had a major consequence: in the absence of a kattesteghe, adjoining houses shared a common cornice where water and snow accumulated. While wood was the main material, brick and stone were nevertheless used for gutter walls, chimneystacks, ­cellars, and vaulted basements to protect the wooden structures from humidity. Apertures were split into two registers: glass (when affordable) for the upper parts of the bays and thick wooden shutters for the lower parts. Timber-frame housing survived in Brussels until the beginning of the 19th century. From the 14th century onwards, however, it was gradually overtaken by the brick house.

Brick Houses

Fires and successive bans on wood construction23 sounded the death knell for wooden houses; brick gradually gained the upper hand in the 16th century. This shift was not instantaneous: wood remained common for rear façades.24 The 1695 bombardment of the city by French troops and the resulting fire25 marked a turning point in

Timber-frame house with corbels in Brussels’ Petite rue des Pierres, aquatint 1875

construction techniques. The Grand Place is a clear example of this trend – although plot div­ isions remained unchanged. Three major changes occurred with brick construction. First, façade apertures tended to align vertically to avoid overhangs and traction strains brick cannot bear. This is, according to Viollet-­­leDuc, the origin of the bay.26 A later horizontal alignment of the windows would be for stylistic rather than constructive reasons.27 The overall predominance of voids over solids remained as it had been in wooden façades (Chapeliers 22–24, pp. 54–55).28 Second, kattesteghe became obsolete and were incorporated in the houses, which became strictly terraced. City blocks were thus rendered impervious to the public realm. Third, sharing a common gutter was a recurring source of problems among neighbours due to water infiltration. Consequently, at the end of the ­ 17th century,29 a local law required rainwater to be collected on the street façade and conducted to the ground. This led to a progressive reversal of

21 Cloquet, Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900, p. 49.   22  Houbrechts, David. “Les maisons en pan-de-bois de la Grand-Place.” Les maisons de la Grand-Place de ­Bruxelles, edited by Vincent Heymans et al., Brussels, CFC éditions, 2007, pp. 25–37, p. 33.   23  1342: ban on thatched roofs; 1465: ban on wooden façades; 1466: ban on maintaining wooden façades, etc. Eloy, Marc et al. Influence de la législation sur les façades bruxelloises. Brussels, C.A.R.A./ C.F.C., 1985.   24  van de Castyne, Oda. L’architecture privée en Belgique dans les centres urbains aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles. Brussels, M. Hayez, Imprimeur de l’Académie royale de Belgique, 1934, p. 38.   25  This date is a milestone for iconographic resources since most of the ­archives perished in the fire following the bombardment. Martiny, Victor-Gaston. Bruxelles: l’architecture des origines à 1900. Brussels, ­Nouvelles Editions Vokaer, 1980.   26  Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène Emmanuel. Dictionnaire raisonné de l’architecture française du XIème au XVIème siècle. vol. 3, Paris, Morel, 1875, pp. 190–191.   27  Cabestan, Jean-François. La conquête du plain-pied: l’immeuble à Paris au XVIIIe siècle. Paris, Picard, 2004.   28  Gautier, Patrice et al. “Recherche archéologique d’une maison et de son achterhuis sises rue des Chapeliers 22–24 à 1000 Bruxelles [BR392-02].” Musées royaux d’Art et d’Histoire, 2018.   29  Eloy, Marc et al. Influence de la législation sur les façades bruxelloises. Brussels, C.A.R.A./C.F.C., 1985.  

18

The transformation from timber (left) to brick houses (right) led to vertical window alignment and roof reversal (house transformation by Henri Partoes, Rue d’Accolay in 1819).

the roofs, modifying the physiognomy of streetscapes. In terms of layout, staircase position became an important issue in the 16th century. While an exterior staircase requires an enfilade between rooms, an interior one provides a landing allowing access to all rooms independently. At a time when the Counter-Reformation promoted prudishness and privacy, this difference in the articulation of spaces was essential. While an enfilade imposes intimacy among household members, a landing – and corridor, in some cases – allows for independence, a solution favoured from then on in domestic architecture.30 Interestingly, Le Muet’s housing manual31 sheds light on possible staircase positions depending on plot widths. Only on those above 5 to 6 metres should the staircase be included within the house, allowing for rooms to be served independently by a landing. It seems therefore that moral concerns, coupled with technical contingencies, led medieval plots to evolve towards greater widths.32 Dwelling types other than these widespread forms of ordinary terrace housing could nonetheless be found in Brussels in this period. For instance, two beguinages (housing communities of women living together in closed premises without taking vows) were built in Brussels in the 13th century, one – the Great Beguinage – in the centre, the other in Anderlecht. Although

Le Muet’s possible staircase position on 15-foot-wide (approximately 4.5 metre) plots, exterior (left) or interior (right), 1647

isolated from the city by a perimeter wall, this type of housing was similar to those found elsewhere in town. Two forms of buildings emerged for the upper class. L-shaped buildings,33 such as the Hôtel Clèves-Ravenstein, pp. 50–51, displayed a broad façade on the street coupled with a perpendicular building.34 This arrangement allowed large façades on relatively narrow plots with a courtyard in the centre of the composition. Palaces with courts and gardens, such as the Hôtel Vanderlinden d’Hooghvorst, pp. 56–57, appeared from the 18th century on. Inspired by French models, the buildings sat between a courtyard one the street side and a garden at the back. Outside densely populated areas, particularly on the “chaussées”,35 where wider plots could be found, buildings – breedehuis – developed parallel to the street rather than perpendicular to it. In terms of construction, brick became common in Brussels from the time of the Roman occupation thanks to easily exploitable out­ ­ cropping clay deposits.36 It was also the main ­material for the second city wall built in the 14th century. Brick factories operated in Brussels until the 18th century.37 In addition to houses’ vertical structure, partition walls were built of brick from the 16th century onwards. Stone, usually Gobertange limestone and Belgian bluestone, was used for chiselled elements or fragile edges. Although wood disappeared from the façades, it

30  Robin Evans expands on the invention of the corridor as a means for household members to be able to avoid one another. Evans, Robin. “Figures, Doors and Passages.” Architectural Design, 1978, pp. 267–277.   31  Le Muet, Pierre. Manière de bien bastir pour toutes sortes de personnes. Paris, François Langlois, 1647.   32  If 6 metres (three toises) was optimal, most medieval houses were nonetheless far narrower. Cabestan, Jean-François. La conquête du plain-pied : l’immeuble à Paris au XVIIIe siècle. Paris, Picard, 2004; van de Castyne, Oda. L’architecture privée en Belgique dans les centres urbains aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles. Brussels, M. Hayez, Imprimeur de l’Académie royale de Belgique, 1934. 33  Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900.   34  Ibid.; Martiny, Victor-Gaston. “La maison bourgeoise unifamiliale à façade étroite, du 16ème siècle à l’aube du 20ème à Bruxelles.” New Approaches to Living Patterns, edited by Roland Baetens, Anvers, Brepols Publishers, 1991, pp. 109–146.   35  Chaussées, or steenwegen, were major medieval roads linking one city to another.   36  Two types of clay are present in Brussels at the Paniselian and Ypresian layers of the Lower Eocene. Geological map of Belgium, Military Cartographic Institute, 1893.   37  Such factories were banned in Brussels from 1776. Martiny, Victor-Gaston. “La maison bourgeoise unifamiliale à façade étroite, du 16ème siècle à l’aube du 20ème à B ­ ruxelles.” New Approaches to Living Patterns, edited by Roland Baetens, Anvers, Brepols Publishers, 1991, pp. 109–146, p. 130.  

19

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

The Great Beguinage built at the centre of Brussels in the 13th century, engraving 1727

A typical street of stepped gable houses in the beginning of the 19th century, Place de la Vieille Halle aux Blés, drawing 1919

was still used for staircases, floors, and roof structures. It nevertheless had a lasting influence on the design of façades, which recalled the floor alignment of timber constructions (corbels, bands, and skirting boards) and on the gable ­tradition that persisted until the 17th century.38

As a consequence of the decline of wooden structures, the Sonian Forest at the south-east edge of Brussels, a major supplier of oak, would gradually be transformed into a beech forest from the 17th century on.39

38  van de Castyne, Oda. L’architecture privée en Belgique dans les centres urbains aux XVIe et XVIIe siècles. Brussels, M. Hayez, Imprimeur de l’Académie royale de Belgique, 1934.   39  Roland, Lee. “Quand les arbres cachent la ville. Pour une analyse conjointe de la forêt de Soignes et du fait urbain.” Brussels Studies, no. 60, 2012, p. 10.  

20

Early 19th Century In the early 19th century, housing underwent radical changes that would lead to the development of a dominant typology at the end of the century: Brussels’ referential type. The referential type can be defined as the archetypal and most ordin­ ary residential type in a particular place. In most cases, it is the residential type commonly built during a demographic boom such as the Haussmann period in Paris or the 18th century in N ­ aples. In Brussels, the evolution towards a referential type took place in four stages. First, at the beginning of the century, foreign treatises such as Jean-Nicolas-Louis Durand’s40 had a significant impact on Brussels’ domestic architecture. Moreover, classicism became popu­ lar in Brussels, disrupting its medieval image. Several municipal policies tried to unify the u ­ rban landscape by whitening and plastering façades.41 During the French Revolution, the Great Beguinage was sacked and, along with most religious orders, dissolved. The subsequent remodelling of the Great Beguinage by Henri P ­ artoes illustrated the influence of Durand (Grand ­Hospice Houses, pp. 60–61). Ordinary housing was concealed behind the regular and sober façades of two urban palaces. ­Behind these unifying masks, three-window houses followed a layout similar to Durand’s maison à loyer,42 dividing the building into two longitudinal bays: the main bay displayed an enfilade of rooms of equivalent size, while the distribution bay included a vestibule, a staircase with a turning flight, and access to the garden. The houses shared twin entrances, giving the impression of larger residences. They were raised 60 centimetres, offering some natural light to the basement. Latrines were located in the garden, in which no well was visible, ­ probably ­replaced by the public fountain on the small square in front of the buildings. Finally, ­despite the fact that they were terraced, the intermediate walls between two houses were not strictly included in a vertical plane as the space above the entrances belonged to only one of the two. This real-estate operation was based on sanitation and modernisation of a poor existing neighbourhood. The same motives led to the transformation in the first half of the 19th century of the area around the small Rue St-Hubert close to the Grand Place into the Galeries Royales Saint-­­Hubert, pp. 64–66, where housing was combined with retail in a classical passage. Ten years after Partoes, Tilman-François Suys proposed an urban plan for the Quartier Léopold to house the emerging upper class. In its ideal block (Quartier Léopold Ideal Urban Block,

Durand’s layout of a ­maison à loyer, divided in two longitudinal bays, 1809

pp. 62–63), its housing displayed similarities with ­Partoes’: raised ground floors allowing direct light into basements, two-floor-high houses topped by a gable roof, and a floor plan divided into two uneven longitudinal bays. There were nonetheless significant differences. Unlike the unitary approach taken in Partoes’ beguinage, Suys’ design displayed a great variety between corner and centre buildings in terms of plans, size, expression, exterior spaces, and attached service buildings. The terraced houses had three rooms in a row in the main bay rather than two, with a very narrow central room that seemed ­uncomfortable to use. The façade expression was no longer repetitive, with clear distinctions between the large and the narrow bays. Single-­ flight staircases also differed from the beguinage, allowing a horizontal coordination of all windows in the rear façade. Finally, all party walls fit in absolutely vertical planes. Between 1830 and 1870, Léopoldian Houses, p. 67,43 named after the first Belgian king, Leo­ pold I (1790–1865), initiated a series of evolutions. The ground floor was no longer elevated, which meant there could be no living spaces in the cellars. The kitchen was located in an annex to the main building, an extension of the distribution bay. The staircase featured two flights of steps, creating an intermediate level on the landing – entresol – under which one had to pass to reach the annex. In the main bay, a veranda punctuated the three-room enfilade on the garden side. Capped with a skylight, this room provided more light for the central room. Towards the end of the 19th century, façades became more ornamented, reflecting the desires

40 Durand, Jean-Nicolas-Louis. Précis des leçons d’architecture données à l’école polytechnique. vol. 2, Paris, Ecole polytechnique, 1809.   41  Although officially, façades were whitewashed for hygiene reasons, the main aim was to give a unified image to the streets of Brussels. Eloy, Marc et al. Influence de la législation sur les façades bruxelloises. Brussels, C.A.R.A./C.F.C., 1985.   42  Coekelberghs, Denis et al. Un ensemble néo-classique à Bruxelles: le Grand Hospice et le quartier du Béguinage. Institut royal du patrimoine artistique, Ministère de la communauté française, 1983.   43 Martiny, Victor-Gaston. “La maison bourgeoise unifamiliale à façade étroite, du 16ème siècle à l’aube du 20ème à ­Bruxelles.” New Approaches to Living Patterns, edited by Roland Baetens, Anvers, Brepols Publishers, 1991, pp. 109–146.  

21

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

The eclectic façade of the row house Hier ist in den kater en de kat by Henri Beyaert, 1874

Quartier Léopold drawn by Suys in 1838

22

of the newly founded Belgian state’s bourgeoisie. Henri Beyaert’s design for the Hôtel Marnix, pp. 72–73, was a prime example of this eclectic style – Flemish Renaissance – that evoked the past glory of the low countries.44 Eschewing the classical canons followed by Partoes and Suys, this trend visibly individualised each house. Façades became more elaborate, eliminating any stylistic unity in streets. Polychromy became more and more pronounced and the use of bluestone was common for plinths and window frames. Additionally, ground floors were raised by between 50 centimetres and 2 metres during that period. Combined with the mandatory implementation of sidewalks (1846) that protected the bases of the walls, large apertures could now be made at ground level, allowing living functions in the basements, something made possible by Brussels’ well-drained sandy subsoil.

Brussels’ Dominant ­Housing Type: The 1870–1914 Bourgeois Terraced House From 1870 to 1914, Brussels experienced a golden age.45 The economy thrived, the population tripled, and Brussels expanded rapidly. Victor Besme, Brussels’ road inspector, proposed an urban plan to accommodate the city’s expansion. His proposal relied on an intersection46 of public institutions in the form of peripheral boulevard cared for by the public authorities with private housing built by the rising middle class, around whom this plan was centred. The city beyond “the ­Pentagon” – the city’s second belt of walls – was built according to this arrangement. In the second half of the 19th century, major technical and social changes forged what would become Brussels’ dominant housing type, the “bonne maison moyenne”. From a technical point of view, new materials emerged from the industrial revolution: re­ inforced glass, concrete, metal beams, etc. transformed the art of building. Lighting evolved too, from oil lamps to gas in the 1870s to electricity starting in 1880. From the 1860s, drinking water was supplied directly to buildings via a water-­ supply network. Subsequently, dedicated pipes and ducts would be installed in houses.47 This also resulted in a higher specification of the location of water-related rooms such as kitchens and

Victor Besme, in his Plan d’ensemble pour l’extension et l’embellissement de l’agglomération bruxelloise of 1866, proposed an urban plan for the city’s expansion.

bathrooms, whose furniture had previously been movable. The first sewage systems were installed between 1840 and 1850.48 With the invention of the siphon and flushing toilets, latrines no longer needed to be located in courtyards; they were installed within the house, where vertical water drainage became a technical constraint that determined housing layouts. From a socio-cultural point of view, the bourgeois model of the nuclear family spread as a ­political instrument to tame the working class. Relationships within the household were increasingly codified, among spouses, children, domestic servants, and guests. In this model, intimacy among members of the household was now prohibited, leading to a multiplication of circulation spaces. Social status was now measured by the degree of domestic workers’ invisibility. These social codes were spatialised by local architects such as Louis Cloquet.49

44  Beyaert, Henri. Travaux d’architecture exécutés en Belgique. vol. 1, Brussels, Lyon-Claessen, 1894; Castermans, Auguste. Parallèle des maisons de Bruxelles et des principales villes de la Belgique. Liège, Noblet, 1854; Loze, Pierre. La maison Blondel de Henri Beyaert, 1886: 11 rue Potagère à ­Saint-Josse-ten-Noode, Bruxelles. Brussels, Éditions A.P.A.-C.I.D.E.P, 1993.   45  Ledent, Gérald. “Genèse de la maison bruxelloise.” Montréal et Bruxelles en projet[s]. Les enjeux de la densification urbaine, edited by Priscilla Ananian and Bernard Declève, Louvain-la-Neuve, PUL, 2017, pp. 127–156.  46 Zitouni, Benedikte. Agglomérer. Une anatomie de l’extension bruxelloise (1828–1915). Maldegem, VUB-Press, 2010.   47  Heymans, Vincent. Les dimensions de l’ordinaire: la maison particulière entre mitoyens à Bruxelles. Paris, L’Harmattan, 1998.   48 Abeels, Gustave. Pierres et rues: Bruxelles, croissance urbaine, 1780–1980: exposition. Brussels, La société générale de banque, St.-Lukasarchief v.z.w, 1982, p. 29.  49  Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’archi­ tecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900.  

23

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

The Ingredients of the “bonne maison moyenne”

Interwoven Relationship with Closed Urban Blocks

In the 1870s, a synthesis of past housing forms and new domestic uses and construction techniques50 generated Brussels’ referential housing type, one that would not be called into question until the First World War. What Victor Horta also called the “type de la bonne maison moyenne” 51 ­remained largely an implicit set of design rules within which architects could produce a large number of variations. These rules can be summarised in four spatial properties.

First, the referential or standard housing type was set in a closed urban block. Compared with those of the Middle Ages, these blocks are smaller and more regular, with 10 to 20 houses on each side. Moreover, they are closed off to the street, as undeveloped land had to be fenced. Within blocks, plots were structured in a ration­ al way, as perpendicular to the street as possible. If the average plot width stabilised at around 6 metres, social hierarchies could be read in the built structures: plot widths ranged from­ 5.8 to 7.2 metres on normal streets and 12 to 16 metres on avenues. In an interwoven relation-

1554

1777

1880

1930

1951

2019

City blocks’ evolution from the 16th century to today

50  Devillers, Christian. “Typologie de l’habitat et morphologie urbaine.” L’architecture d’aujourd’hui, vol. 174, 1974, pp. 18–22; Ledent, Gérald and Olivier Masson. “Living Utopia – Leaving Utopia. Brussels: Modernist Urban Forms Evaluated against Pre-Existing Row Houses.” Cities in Transformation – Research & Design, Politecnico di Milano, 2012.   51  Dulière, Cécile. Victor Horta, mémoires. Brussels, Ministère de la Communauté française de Belgique: Administration du Patrimoine culturel, 1985, p. 34.  

24

ship, terraced houses formed the perimeter of the blocks, to a depth of 10 to 15 metres. Their party walls extended outdoors to delineate private gardens that form an interior compound, shared visually by the block’s inhabitants.

Polyvalent Interior Layout The house contained all the spaces necessary for daily bourgeois life, organised according to three modes: reception, family, and domestic ­service.52 To accommodate them, the internal layout was based on a double division already seen in ­Durand’s scheme (Lambermont 73, pp. 86–87; Trooz 12, pp. 96–97). The plan was divided longitudinally in two uneven parts (⅓, ⅔), creating a main bay of 3 to 4.5 metres and a small bay of 1.6 to 2.1 metres. The house was also partitioned par­allel to the street into two to three equivalent ­adjoining rooms. Their depth, around 4 metres, related to the usual span of wooden beams.53 These divisions produced rooms of two distinctive kinds in terms of dimensions. Main rooms had high ceilings, wide windows, and numerous connections to service areas. They were organised in an enfilade. Secondary rooms occupied the narrower bay on either side of the staircase. Within these divisions, a precise hierarch­ ical principle applied, namely a spatial progression from public to private: the deeper, higher, and smaller the space, the more intimate it was. The circulation space was designed to allow for the independence and differentiated uses of these rooms. For instance, the dining room was accessible from the living room for receiving guests, from the corridor for daily use by the family, and from the pantry for service by domestic servants. This circulation was located in the narrow bay. It started with one or two exter­ ior steps leading to the door, which opened into a very high entrance hall of generally more than 5 metres. This vestibule sorted two kinds of traffic. Hidden behind a side door, a wooden staircase gave direct access to a sunken basement where domestic staff were based. Family members and guests used the main staircase, commonly made out of marble on vaulted bricks. It led to the landing of the raised ground floor – bel étage – which was often closed off from the vestibule by a glass door for thermal reasons. On this landing, a moulded portico marked the limit ­between reception and family life. Before the portico was a door to the reception room, while crossing the portico gave access to the dining room or the staircase to the upper floors. As in Leopoldian Houses, p. 67, this was a two-flight staircase. The first two flights were asymmetrical, however, to allow passage under the first

Brussels’ standard housing type in section and plan. The layout is characterised by two to three adjoining rooms and a lateral staircase.

landing. On intermediate landing levels, entresol rooms could be found, which were characterised by lower ceilings; these were naturally used as service spaces. On the upper floors, the landings were ingeniously centred on two adjoining bays to directly serve all rooms. A closer look at the levels of the house reveals first a half-buried basement that takes direct light from the low windows enabled by the implementation of sidewalks. This floor was the domain of the domestic staff. It housed several functions: in the main bay, a kitchen was connected to the upper floor by a service stair and, often, a dumbwaiter. A coal, wine, or beer cellar and storage and laundry room can be found in the narrow bay. On the rear side, the floor opened up to a courtyard below the garden, whose soil was retained by a rainwater tank. Latrines for the domestic servants were located in this lower courtyard. The long and narrow gardens were flanked by brick party walls that provided priv­ acy from the neighbours. The bel étage was raised ½ to 2 metres above street level to enhance privacy on the main floor and to admit light into the sunken basement. ­Reception and family living areas were found in its main bay, with ceiling heights that ranged from 3 to 5 metres.54 Large mantle pieces against the party walls indicated the centres of the rooms. Given its position on the street side, the living room was naturally the place for receiving guests. This led directly to the dining room, the

52  Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900, pp. 40–44.   53  Burniat, Patrick. “Le type de la maison urbaine bruxelloise.” Bruxelles Patrimoines, vol. 3–4, September 2012.  54  For these rooms, Julien Guadet and Louis Cloquet recommend a minimum width of 4 metres. Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900; ­Guadet, ­Julien. Eléments et théorie de l’architecture. vol. 2, Paris, Aulanier et Cie, 1904, pp. 13–14.  

25

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

heart of the family house, while a ­veranda often concluded the enfilade. This late-­ 19th-century ­invention can be seen as a direct extension of the garden into the house. It was made possible with the invention of skylights thanks to the iron and glass industries, and the pronounced taste of the bourgeoisie for botany, greenhouses, and exotic plants. Verandas usually had a lower ceiling, ­enabling direct light to enter the dining room. Beside the veranda, a lower-ceilinged room, the pantry, created a hinge between the sunken basement and bel étage. The upper floors were the domain of family intimacy. In these rooms, ceiling heights remained high for reasons of both hygiene and light. In keeping with the hierarchical organisation of the house, the main bedroom faced the street. It opened through a double door into a second room on the garden side. In the narrow bay, a smaller room was typically used for daily

washing. With the advent of running water, however, bathrooms and toilets would gradually migrate to the entresols. In the garret, the hierarchical principle distinguished three more spaces. The main room was for guests, in the wide bay facing the street. The narrow room parallel to it was reserved for servants, while an attic occupied the garden side.

Limited Heights and Façades City blocks bordered directly on streets. Local regulations therefore limited cornice heights to 12 to 14 metres, in direct proportion to the width of the streets.55 With this limited height, the building volumes were defined by four walls. Two blind brick party walls were built on prop­ erty limits. On the interior side of the block, the rear wall was not considered a façade in its own

Axonometric views and plans of a traditional house, with sunken basement, bel étage, first floor, and attic

55  Eloy, Marc et al. Influence de la législation sur les façades bruxelloises. Brussels, C.A.R.A./C.F.C., 1985, p. 4.  

26

private gardens row housing

garden

10 –15 m

6m

staircase

street

large rooms small rooms

= one household

4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

The four features of the standard type: relationship with a closed urban block, polyvalent layout, limited height, and individual character

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

garden

right and was subject to the contingencies of the throughout the walls. Two exceptions appeared, internal layout. however. The roof structure was made of purlins Conversely, the street façades were remark-functionthat bore on the party walls. As such, they were private gardens building able free-standing for a profusion of decoration consistent related one of the determining elements of the plot rooms width that corresponded to the usual span of with eclecticism. Façades’ designs responded to northern red-pine wood sections. The ground internal hierarchies: wider windows marked the noble bay, echoing the openings of the longitu­ floor also presented a different structure. Thanks dinal enfilade. Given the very repetitive floor to the reduction of the party walls’ thickness ­between the basement and the bel étage, it was plans, the façades became the main challenge for possible to lay wooden beams directly on this architects. Instead of floor plans, they enticed clients with a series of façade variations – cartons.56 ­recess without embedding them in the walls. To address the question of associating two very different longitudinal bays as well as different floor heights and the openings of the semi-sunken Individual Character basement, a set of architecture elements was private gardens polyvalent projecting bands, plinths, copings, ­developed: The last defining feature of the bourgeois terrow housing raced house was its individual aspect. Initially, balconies, glass transoms, bolt holes, skylights, rooms downpipes, French windows, oriels, spies, letter buildings were designed for single families with boxes, façade numbers, cornices, railings, etc. domestic servants. They emphasised Belgian ­society’s individualistic nature and great sense Those playful elements could be picked out of catalogues57 or designed by the architects themof autonomy. Each house accommodated a single selves. The bow window was a characteristic household and the façades expressed this individual character as emphatically as possible, ­f­eature of the 19th-century façade. It marked the leading to very heterogeneous streets. This social status of the building while allowing light and side views on the street. Curiously, it was ­feature clearly distinguishes Brussels from other rarely a part of the bel étage, the building’s most “cities of houses” such as London, Bath, or Amsterdam, where on the façades a sense of collect­ imposing floor, as was the case in the English private gardens central lightwell ivism prevails over individual expression. house.rowThis anomaly can be explained by local housing regulations on protruding elements as well as Altogether, these four features – i.e. the relathe overall balance of the façade. In terms of mationship with the closed urban block, the polyvaterials, craft and industry mingled, with polylent layout, the height limitation determining chrome composite and relief masonry, natural the façade, and its individuality – defined the stone, richly sculpted woodwork, elaborate ironmost common housing type in Brussels, its referential type.58 work, prefabricated cast-iron elements, etc. The façades became the place for all kinds of extrava­ gance, as shown by the competitions organised at the end of the 19th century, leading to an incredible diversity of cityscapes. In addition to those challenges were fire-­ prevention regulations, forbidding the thick brick private gardens polyvalent building partyfree-standing walls from bearing the loads of the build- rooms Within these four basic features, there could be ing. The load-bearing walls were therefore the variations in plot width, position in the block, façades and the partition walls of the enfilade, and the social status of the residents. whose thicknesses were also codified. In terms Differences in social status were reflected in of uses, this system was contradictory, since plot widths. While the standard type accommofaçades and partition walls were largely open to dated the middle class, certain variations siglet light in and allow people to move around. nalled residents’ wealth. More complex layouts These openings were made possible by a combin­ were designed for the better-off classes (Molière ation of relief vaults and metal lintels scattered 112, pp. 84–85). Housing was built on larger plots,

= one household

= one household

= mutliple households

10 –15 m

street

Variations on the Dominant Type

private gardens

garden

15 m

street

56  Bastin, Christine et al. 19e siècle en Belgique: architecture et intérieurs. Brussels, Racine, 1994.   57  Just like IKEA catalogues today, such polyvalent row housing catalogues were used by architects and clients. Fonteyne, Jules. Documents roomspratiques d’architecture. Brussels, Bourotte, 1876; Herman, Joseph. Modern Kunstsmeedwerk. Amsterdam, Ahrend en zoon, 1904.   58  In the Album de la Maison Moderne, Fernand Salmain pictures these early-­­ 20th-century houses, and their great variety, although systematically based on similar plans. Salmain, Fernand. Album de la maison moderne. Brussels, 1908–1913, vol. 1–5.  

= mutliple households

27

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

Façade variations on a repetitive plan as published by Fernand Salmain from 1908 to 1913

28

City blocks in Schaerbeek (Josaphat neighbourhood) with missing corner buildings, 1951

enabling the service bay to expand with a carriage entrance and service staircase, separating family and domestic service flows even more. For the working classes (Worker Terraced House, pp. 74–75), individual housing was built on narrower plots,59 offering a reduced version of the referential type deprived of its reception and service functions. This transposition to popular housing60 reflected the bourgeois desire to dominate the working class by imposing its own way of life through architecture. Isolated in individual housing, workers lost the communal life found in the bataillons carrés, a type of housing gathered around a courtyard or a small street that had developed in the interior of old city blocks, accessible only by a dead-end street, such as Impasse Vanhoeter, pp. 68–69. Another variation on the ­referential type was small-scale private development, with apartment buildings designed on two adjoining plots (Discailles 9, pp. 82–83). These apartment buildings retained the façade design of the individual traditional housing type. Only the respectable image of the type was maintained, however, as each room independently accommodated a family, with shared bathrooms on the entresols. Other differences could be found within the usual 6-metre-wide plot. When shops occupied the ground floor of the houses, they were natur­ ally on street level, precluding any living functions in the basement. The requirement for two

Free-standing Brussels terraced house, a pioneer of further projected development

entrances – one for the dwelling, the other for the shop – allowed the façade to be symmetrical. More modest houses were also built on the­ usual plot width (Perdrix 33, pp. 90–91). They usually did not have a bel étage, but at most one or two steps that allowed some privacy from the street. To light the basement, window wells were created in the pavement. Some of these modest houses had only two adjoining rooms and no veranda. Corner plots had a special status since they allowed little or no access to the interior of the block. Three approaches to the corner location can be observed. The first created an avatar of the referential housing type (Reyers 213, pp. 94– 95), with additional openings in the side wall. In some extreme cases, however, the design ignor­ ed the corner position by favouring one street over the other by presenting a blind façade, ­often with walled windows. In other cases, the openings on the secondary street were freer. The plan then combined the typical enfilade with a more random composition. Some corner buildings had a garden or courtyard facing the street rather than the interior of the block. In this case, a wall protected the courtyard from the road (Le Bon 70, pp. 76–77). Finally, another ­approach included a shop on the ground floor and flats on the upper floors (Berkendael 203, pp. 88–89). It is interesting to note that, given their particularities and need for inventive lay-

59  At the turn of the 20th century, Emile Demany produced a manual with standard floor plans for worker’s housing in Belgium. Demany, Emile. Construction de maisons ouvrières: notice, plans, évaluations & conditions. 2 ed., Liège, Vaillant-Carmanne, 1899.   60  The standard plan recommended by the 1852 Congress for Public Hygiene proposed “an entrance, two rooms and an annex on the ground floor, two bedrooms on the first floor and an attic, sometimes converted into an attic room under the roof”. Smets, Marcel. L’avènement de la cité-jardin en Belgique, Histoire de l’habitat social en Belgique de 1830 à 1930. Liège, Pierre Mardaga, 1977. Collection Architecture + Documents, p. 51.  

29

A CIT Y OF ROW HOUSES

outs, corner parcels were the last to be built to close off the blocks.61 Other atypical plots could be found in a block. For instance, some were completely closed off on three sides by other buildings, forcing them to get all their light from the street, as in the case of the architect Victor Taelemans’ personal house on Rue Ernest Solvay 32, pp. 80–81. Some plots ­located near block corners gave onto two different streets, allowing two entrances as well as very different atmospheres in the house (­ Maison Strauven, pp. 78–79; Commerçants 6, pp. 92–93).

Implementation of the Dominant Type An unprecedented building frenzy took place between 1870 and 1914. A road network based on Besme’s plan structured the city and its buildings. Accordingly, new roads were quickly laid out and put in place even before the first houses were built. It was not uncommon at the time to see free-standing terraced houses in streets that were entirely paved, surrounded by pavements and bristling with lampposts. In many cases, individuals built their own houses; speculation was nevertheless the real driver of Brussels’ expansion. Besme himself ­supported this movement and did not hesitate to advise relatives to purchase land he knew to be earmarked for development.62 Real-estate developers built in the hope of reselling or renting out their properties. Homeowners didn’t necessarily live in their houses, which had become commodities. The vast majority of these developers were private. Such developments usually involved ­individual houses or city blocks (Commerçants 6), but tycoons such as Georges Brugmann and ­Edmond Parmentier constructed entire d ­ istricts. A few public operations were also undertaken. For instance, the SABH63 built an ­entire city block in Schaerbeek in 1875 based on plans by Gédéon Bordiau (Cité Louvain, pp. 138–139). ­Despite the larger scale of these developments, however, the standard type and its individual character persisted.

The Terraced House Today Brussels’ identity is closely tied to its referential type, the bourgeois terraced house, which is still its most common form of housing. Currently, approximately 140,000 houses built before 1918 are still standing64 and more than one-third of the dwellings in the city are in houses built between 1870 and 1914.65 In addition to this quantitative representativeness, the individual terraced house enjoys tacit recognition in the local residential imagination. Its spatial organisation also mirrors and supports local socio-cultural relations. In this way, the ­domestic space of the city can be read as meaningful.66 In Brussels, an analysis of the features of the referential housing type reveals a series of socio-anthropological elements that characterise the city. First, front and rear positions created by closed blocks enable contrasting dwelling arrangements, a typical feature of many Euro­ pean cities, although with large variations.67 While public practices take place on the street side, very private ones (ranging from drying clothes to self-built additions) are possible at the rear of the dwelling. Secondly, even on a building’s highest floor, the distance to the public realm remains limited to about 15 metres, a threshold within which sensory relationships are still possible.68 Thirdly, the individual character of the dwellings emphasises the individualistic nature of Belgian society. Indeed, Belgian citizens demonstrate a great sense of autonomy ­regarding political authority and collective efforts. Finally, the function-free floor plan reveals traditional Brussels households’ socially conditioned relations. The plan enables a genuine ­hierarchy within the dwelling (front/back pos­ itions, small/large rooms, low/high situation) as well as various possible relations between occupants through a variety of circulation spaces. ­I­nterestingly, the house only displays two sizes of room, which would prove extremely polyvalent in the century that follows.

61  In this respect, these corners function as a block’s keystones. Modernist planners in the 1950s through the 1980s clearly understood this when they systematically razed corner buildings in the hope of initiating the decline of the block as a whole. Conversely, works undertaken within the framework of the “contrats de quartier” (Neighbourhood Contracts) are particularly concerned with their reconstruction. 62 Such as the banker André Langrand-Dumonceau, who was advised by Victor Besme to buy hectares of land around the avenue Louise before the avenue was created. Smets, Marcel. L’avènement de la cité-jardin en Belgique, Histoire de l’habitat social en Belgique de 1830 à 1930. Liège, Pierre Mardaga, 1977. Collection Architecture + Documents, p. 40.   63  Originally the Société Anonyme des Habitations Ouvrières dans ­l’Agglomération Bruxelloise, founded in 1868 by Leopold II.   64  Heymans, Vincent. Les dimensions de l’ordinaire: la maison particulière entre mitoyens à Bruxelles. Paris, L’Harmattan, 1998, p. 10.   65  In 2014, out of 546,118 housing units in the Brussels region, 195,831 dwellings were located in terraced houses. This figure is certainly underestimated, as informal divisions of such houses are very common. Ledent, Gérald. “Potentiels Relationnels. L’aptitude des dispositifs physiques de l’habitat à soutenir la sociabilité. Bruxelles, le cas des immeubles élevés et isolés de logement.” LOCI, UCLouvain, 2014; RBDH. “Quotas de logements sociaux : les idées à retenir, les écueils à éviter.” Art.23, no. 38, 2010, p. 9.   66  Devillers, Christian. “Typologie de l’habitat et morphologie urbaine.” L’architecture d’aujourd’hui, vol. 174, 1974, pp. 18–22. 67  Panerai, Philippe et al. Analyse Urbaine. Mercuès, Parenthèse, 2009. Eupalinos.  68  Alexander, Christopher et al. A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. New York, Oxford University Press, 1977, p. 118.

30

L-shaped brick housing from the 15th century Hôtel Clèves-Ravenstein, pp. 50–51

31

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

32

Gable row housing from the 17 th and 18th century Sint-Katelijnestraat – rue Sainte-Catherine Korte Boterstraat – petite rue au Beurre

33

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

34

Dead-end streets to house the working class Vanhoetergang – impasse Vanhoeter, pp. 68–69 Strijdersgang – impasse des Combattants

35

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

36

Neo-classical remodelling of the Great Beguinage Grootgodshuisstraat – rue du Grand Hospice, pp. 60–61 Grand Hospice, pp. 58–59

37

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

38

Combining housing and covered passages Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert, pp. 64–66 Passage du Nord

39

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

40

Traditional row houses for various social classes in the 19th century Generaal Gratrystraat – rue du Général Gratry Gasstraat – rue du Gaz

41

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

42

Traditional row houses for various social classes in the 19th century Louis Bertrandlaan – avenue Louis Bertrand Patrijzenstraat – rue des Perdrix, pp. 90–91

43

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

44

Traditional row houses for various social classes in the 19th century Jules de Troozlaan – avenue de Jules de Trooz, pp. 96–97 Molièrelaan – avenue Molière, pp. 84–85

45

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

46

Corner houses in traditional 19th-century housing blocks Filips de Goedestraat 70 rue Philippe Le Bon, pp. 76–77 Hermann Dumontplein – place Hermann Dumont

47

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   I

Housing Atlas I 1. Hôtel Clèves-Ravenstein 2. Duivelshuis 3. Chapeliers 22–24 4. Hôtel Vanderlinden d’Hooghvorst 5. Grand Hospice 6. Grand Hospice Houses 7. Quartier Léopold Ideal Urban Block 8. Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert 9. Léopoldian House 10. Impasse Vanhoeter 11. Cité Pauwels 12. Hôtel Marnix 13. Worker Terraced House 14. Le Bon 70 15. Maison Strauven 16. Solvay 32 17. Discailles 9 18. Molière 112 19. Lambermont 73 20. Berkendael 203 21. Perdrix 33 22. Commerçants 6 23. Reyers 213 24. Trooz 12

Landmarks A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L.

Brussels Canal National Basilica of the Sacred Heart Atomium Palace of Laeken Brussels-South railway station Palace of Justice of Brussels Brussels Town Hall Cathedral of St. Michael and St. Gudula Royal Palace of Brussels European Parliament Cinquantenaire Arcade and Parc du Cinquantenaire Bois de la Cambre and Sonian Forest

HOUSING ATL AS   I

C

D

19

B 17

10 22

5 6

11

4 G

15

H 14

8 3

12

I E

23

1 K

7

F 16

J 24 21

A 18

20

L

50

1 Hôtel Clèves-­Ravenstein COMPLETION: Late 15th century to early

16th century ARCHITECT: Unknown ADDR ESS: Ravensteinstraat 3 rue Ravenstein, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 1170 m2 + courtyard 458 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached house

This imposing brick building is one of the only town mansions remaining from the Burgundian period (see also pp. 30–31). It is positioned at the crossing of the very steep Rue Ravenstein and the smaller

Cross section 1:500

Rue des Sols that has now been cut off by Victor Horta’s Centre for Fine Arts. The patrician house has four floors, ­complemented by two levels under an imposing wooden roof structure. It is a fine example of the L-shape typical of wealthy housing of the 15th ­century. This particular layout allows for greater façade development and the creation of a courtyard (a higher and a lower courtyard in this case because of the sloping ground). The staircase is positioned in the angle of the building. Therefore, all rooms are arranged in a row, as in most ­Renaissance buildings. The gothic façade is made of red bricks with chisell­ed sandstone for the building edges and to frame the windows, which are stone-mullioned. The building also features crenelated gables and two imposing, stone bay-windows on the side street.

Façade 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

51

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

52

2 Duivelshuis COMPLETION : 1545–1550 ARCHITECT : Unknown ADDR ESS : Haverwerf 20, 2800 Mechelen NUMBER OF UNITS : 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA : 201 m2 + courtyard 22 m2 HOUSING T YPE : Terraced house

No timber-framed houses could be found in Brussels after the 19th century, and local archives are too incomplete to give an accurate record of any entire building. For this reason, we turned to the Duivelshuis in Mechelen. This house is located on a street facing the Dyle River. It is a deep house with successive corbelled levels. The house is built on a brick-and-stone vaulted cellar. It features two floors, with another two

l­ evels under the attic. The entire building is ­covered by a tiled gable roof. The floors are served by a wooden ­spiral staircase. They offer a column-­ free plan thanks to a wooden beam structure that spans from party wall to party wall. The wooden gabled façade dates from the second quarter of the 16th century. The ground floor rests on a low blue-limestone plinth. It has a central door with a lintel carved with a scene of the prodigal son. Its transom window is divided into two bays flanked by two sculpted satyrs. The vertical jambs of the upper first-floor windows are decorated with folk imagery. The gable is decorated with two sculptures: a satyr on the right and a mermaid on the left.

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

53

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

54

3  Chapeliers 22–24 COMPLETION : 1696 ARCHITECT : Unknown ADDR ESS : Hoedenmakersstraat 22–​24 rue des Chapeliers, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS : 1 + 1 rear house UNIT FLOOR AR EA : 230 m2 + courtyard 40 m2 HOUSING T YPE : Terraced house

Built directly after the bombardment of Brussels by Louis XIV’s troops in 1695, this house is typical of the brick houses built around the Grand Place. The 5.5-m-wide plot features two buildings sep­ arated by a courtyard. On the street side is a row house built on three levels over vaulted cellars and under a gable roof perpendicular to the street. The house has four structural bays parallel to the

street. The entrance opens onto a corridor that runs through the house to the courtyard. This corridor serves a spiral staircase with an octagonal core. On the upper floors, this staircase leads to two rooms separated by a light partition wall. Each of these rooms has a fireplace placed against the party wall opposite the staircase. The front house is topped by a “truss and purlin” roof composed of three porticoed trusses. To the back of the plot, the rear house – achterhuis – is a three-storey building, with one room per floor, served by a miller’s staircase. It has a large chimney against the east wall. The front of the building is characteristic of the late 17th century with a baroque gable, scrolled volutes, and fleur-de-lis anchors. Facing the street, the original bays had stone cross-windows.

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

55

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

56

4  Hôtel Vanderlinden d’Hooghvorst COMPLETION: 1725 DEMOLITION: 1955 ARCHITECT: Unknown ADDR ESS: Wolvengracht 28–30 rue Fossé aux Loups, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 1406 m2 + courtyard 269 m2, garden 162 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This building, which has now disappeared, was a witness to the influence of French architecture in Brussels. Located in the historical centre of the city, the Louis XIV-style building was a typical example of a private mansion between courtyard and garden.

Façade 1:500

Designed for Martin Robyns in the early 18th century, the H-shaped building was located on the Rue Fossé au Loups. A courtyard flanked by two outbuildings could be found behind a high wall with a carriage entrance. At the end of the courtyard, a main building opened onto a garden at the rear of the plot. The composition of the ensemble was symmetrical along an axis perpendicular to the street side. A wide staircase started in the central hall of the main body of the building. This body was divided into two longitudinal bays. The one on the garden side had a large reception room. The building had two levels with a mansard roof. The floor heights were identical, approximately 4.5 m. The classical façades were stuccoed in order to imitate stone. The openings were regular, with large bays set with interior shutters. The building has now been replaced by the 1955 “Monnaie-­ Building”, whose H-shape is reminiscent of the original hotel’s layout.

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

57

Unit plan 1:200

0

10 m

58

5  Grand Hospice

galleries. Transversely, three wings are arranged in parallel, two on the streets bordering the hospice, and one between the two courtyards. Three pavilions occupy their centres, accommodating large entrances on the street sides and the director’s house in the central one. In the opposite direction, two longitudinal wings present a succession of dormitory rooms and staircases. A chapel is located in the central transverse wing. This composition is undoubtedly inspired by the courtyards illustrated in Durand’s Précis (vol. 1, pl. 16). The building has two levels and a roof. It has a sober and regular white-rendered façade, animated by a few elements such as a blue-limestone base and horizontal bands, sandstone arches around the pavilion’s bays, and metal bolt holes. In the 20th century, several buildings were added at the periphery to house the hospice’s services. The hospice retained its function until 2017 and will now be converted into housing.

COMPLETION: 1827 ARCHITECT: Henri Partoes ADDR ESS: Grootgodshuisstraat 7 rue du Grand Hospice, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: n/a UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 80 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Hospice

The Grand Hospice (see also p. 37) is located on the former grounds of the Great Beguinage. It is part of a classical c­ omposition with a group of 16 houses on the other side of the Rue du Grand Hospice. It was originally designed to accommodate sick and elderly people. The plan reveals a symmetrical ­composition along two axes. It consists of a vast rectangle of almost 140 m by 100 m, hollowed out by two identical courtyards bordered by columned

Unit plan 1:100

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

59

0

25 m

60

6  Grand Hospice Houses COMPLETION: 1829 ARCHITECT: Henri Partoes ADDR ESS: Grootgodshuisstraat 6 – 22 rue du Grand Hospice, Fermerijstraat 1–8 rue de l’Infirmerie, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 16 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 214 m2 + garden 39 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced houses

A few years after completing the Grand Hospice, Henri Partoes supplemented it with a classical housing composition (see also p. 36). The orthogonal grid that governs the Grand Hospice seems to continue outside its walls to generate this ensemble. It is designed as a double L-shape plan with symmetry,

around the Rue de l’Infirmerie. Externally, the individual buildings disappear behind the sober and regular façade of two classical palaces. The façades are white and only a few bands, balconies, and ­relieving arches liven up their mouldings. Behind these regular façades, different types of three-­ storey-high houses can be found. The standard house replicates the plan of the maison à loyer illustrated in Durand’s Précis (vol. 2, pl. 25). The houses are organised in two longitudinal bays. The first bay contains the circulation areas with the vestibule, a winding staircase, and access to the garden. The second is occupied by rooms of equivalent size (5 m by 4/4.5 m) arranged in a row. The ground floor is raised about 60 cm above street level, allowing some natural light into the cellars. In the garden is a latrine but no fountain, which can be explained by the presence of a public fountain in the square bordering the Grand Hospice.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

61

Façade 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

62

7  Quartier Léopold Ideal Urban Block COMPLETION: 1837 ARCHITECT: Tilman-François Suys ADDR ESS: Belliardstraat – rue Belliard, Wettenschapstraat – rue de la Science, Montoyer­ straat – rue Montoyer, Nijverheidsstraat – rue de l’Industrie, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 20 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 273 m2 + courtyard 35 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced houses

In the early 19th century, the replacement of the ancient ramparts by boulevards was the starting point for the Quartier Léopold, conceived as an ­extension of the neighbouring Park of Brussels. In 1837, together with an urban-planning proposal, Suys designed an ideal city block. The block presents

a clear hierarchy with a continuous building front on Rue Belliard and Rue Montoyer. It also offers a socio-­ spatial mix by combining different plot widths: 15 and 13 m for patrician mansions in the centre and the corners of the block, and 6 m for more modest houses between them. The mansions are characterised by a carriage entrance leading to an exterior space where stables and outbuildings can be found. The modest houses accommodate a double division: three rooms in a row in the wide bay and circulation in the narrow bay. All the buildings are three storeys high with gable roofs. The façades of the mansions are quite ornate, with blue-limestone ­bases and window frames, and continuous balcon­ ies on the first floor. The more modest houses are simply rendered in white on a blue-limestone base. Today the area, better known as the European ­District, has fallen prey to property speculation and only two houses of the initial block remain, i.e. Rue Montoyer 26 and 28; the others have been demolished.

Modest-house unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

63

Façade 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

64

8  Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

HOUSING ATL AS   I

65

0

25 m

66

8  Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert COMPLETION: 1847 ARCHITECT: Jean-Pierre Cluysenaar ADDR ESS: Konings- en koninginnegalerij – galerie du Roi et de la Reine, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 80 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 139 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced houses

The Saint-Hubert Royal Galleries (see also p. 38) are among the oldest in Europe. Particularly suited to the damp Belgian climate, they allow shopping ­under cover. In addition to retail, the galleries also contain a theatre and, today, a cinema. The passage consists of a 213-m-long main nave divided into two ­sections: the King’s and Queen’s galleries. A delib-

erate interruption was created between the two sections, where a slight change of axis is made, making the composition less monumental. Perpendicular to it is a more modest gallery: the Princes’. The main gallery is 8.3 m wide and 18 m high, and is crowned by a metal-framed skylight with a raised rooflight that allows for natural ventilation. The buildings flanking the gallery have three ­l­evels. Their regular ochre and pink façades are decorated with statues and fake-marble panels. Apartments are found above the tall commercial ground floor, which includes a mezzanine level. These dwellings are accessed from the gallery by stairwells arranged in a regular pattern, perpendicular to the gallery. On each floor, they serve two apartments, which are three or four bays wide on average. The standard dwelling has a central corridor, parallel to the ­gallery, with rooms on both sides. The main rooms, on the gallery side, have a width of 4.5 m.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

67

HOUSING ATL AS   I

9  Léopoldian House COMPLETION : 1830–1880 (unbuilt project) ARCHITECT: Unknown (drawing by Louis Cloquet) ADDR ESS: n/a NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 210 m2 + terrace 21 m2 ,

garden 58 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This type of house, drawn by Louis Cloquet, was common in Brussels from 1830 to 1880. It featured two or three steps leading to the entrance hall. This small rise of the ground floor did not allow for the basement to be made habitable, with only two small windows on the street. The house had two longitudinal bays. The narrow bay widened towards

the rear of the plot to accommodate an entrance hall and a double-flight staircase, under the landing of which one passed to reach a kitchen and a laundry room. An external toilet completed the sequence. The wider parallel bay hosted successively a living room, a dining room, and a veranda. The veranda, the kitchen, and the laundry were covered with a flat roof, which was lower than the ceiling of the dining room, enabling light in that central room. This roof included two skylights, one above the ­veranda and the other on the staircase landing. Two rooms were found on the upper floors: a bedroom that ran the full width of the plot on the street side and a room parallel to the staircase. The façade was three levels topped by a gable roof with a dormer window. It exhibited a classical language with windows arranged equidistantly, white coating, and a blue-limestone base.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

68

10  Impasse Vanhoeter COMPLETION: 1848 ARCHITECT: C. Vanhoeter ADDR ESS: Vanhoetergang 1 – 8 impasse Vanhoeter, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 12 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 23 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

The Impasse Vanhoeter is a fine example of the “bataillons carrés” that largely developed to accommodate the working classes (see also p. 86). In the 19th century, a population boom brought about a densification of the city. In particular, groups of workers’ dwellings appear along alleys or courtyards that are created in the interior of city blocks. In general, these dwellings are only accessible from

the street via a dead end. The Impasse Vanhoeter consists of twelve modest dwellings around three sides of a quadrangular courtyard paved in cobblestone. Originally, communal latrines were located on one side of the courtyard. The entrance to the impasse is located on the Quai au Foin, where a stone porch gives access to a narrow alleyway leading to the courtyard. On the east and north sides of the courtyard, the dwellings are single-aspect in a 4.5-m-­deep construction. They accommodate two rooms on either side of a single-flight staircase. On the west side, the dwellings are arranged perpen­ dicular to the façade with a deeper layout (7 m) of two rooms in a row and windows to the back. The buildings are two storeys high and covered with tiled gable roofs. The façades are very simple, with whitewashed bricks and sober blue-limestone ­window sills.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

69

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

70

11  Cité Pauwels COMPLETION: 1850 DEMOLITION: late 1870s ARCHITECT: Félix Pauwels ADDR ESS: Delaunoystraat 20 rue Delaunoy, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 32 rooms + 1 dwelling for the caretaker UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 124 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

The Cité Pauwels, which has now disappeared, was one of the first social-housing projects in Brussels, in the Old Molenbeek area. Modelled on London lodging houses, it could accommodate 32 single workers from the Pauwels railway equipment company, by far one of the largest companies in Brussels

at the time. On the ground floor, there was a threeroom flat for the caretaker. For hygiene reasons, he could operate all the building windows by means of an ingenious rope system. The caretaker was also the foreman of the Pauwels factory, who thus controlled the workers even in their homes. On the other side of the entrance hall there was a library and a large room where reading, writing, and arithmetic lessons were given. The garden at the back accommodated toilets and a water pump. In the basement, there was a communal kitchen, bathroom with bathtub, laundry room with hot water, and individual lockers for the tenants. The first and second floors accommodated single rooms along a central corridor. A drying room and a storehouse were found in the attic under a tiled gable roof. The façades alternated pink and white bricks and some cemented elements. The central bay of the building’s entrance was marked by a slight recess and a stone stoop.

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

71

Unit plan floor 1:100

0

5m

72

12  Hôtel Marnix COMPLETION: 1880 DEMOLITION: late 1960s ARCHITECT: Henri Beyaert ADDR ESS: Wetstraat 99 rue de la Loi, 1040 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 905 m2 + terrace 4 m2, garden 35 m2 + courtyard 13 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This private mansion was built for Count Marnix on the Rue de la Loi, which was home to a succession of aristocratic houses in the late 19th century. It was situated on a large plot of land, 11 m wide and 50 m deep. A carriage entrance lead to a passageway into the garden, where an outbuilding with stables was

found. The entrance to the main building was located on the side of this passageway, and served a ­vestibule and the main staircase. A semi-buried ­level was occupied by the servants’ quarters (kitchen, store and laundry rooms, etc.). The slightly ­elevated ground floor accommodated a living and a very large dining room. It had very high ceilings (4.5 m) – just like the first floor, which housed the master bedroom and a second living room on the street side. The second floor had a large hallway and four bedrooms. In the attic, there were five bedrooms for the servants. At the rear of the building, an ­annex with a service staircase housed storage areas and bathrooms. The façade of the building displayed a long stone balcony on the first floor and an imposing slate roof. It was a fine example of eclectic architecture, with lavish stone and brick decorations and ironwork.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

73

HOUSING ATL AS   I

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

74

13  Worker Terraced House COMPLETION: 1899 (unbuilt project) ARCHITECT: Emile Demany ADDR ESS: / NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 63 m2 + garden 19 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This ideal workers’ house was presented in a manual by Emile Demany to assist administrations and private individuals in charge of housing the working classes. It reflected the desire of the ruling classes to house workers according to the former's own

codes: in an individual family house with a great concern for hygiene. There are many such houses in the Brussels area. The proposed plot is small: 5.5 m wide by 11 m long. The house is placed on the street side while a garden occupies the rear of the plot, where an exterior toilet can be found. The house is organised in two bays, one containing the staircase and the ­other the main room, which is just over 4 m deep. On the ground floor, an annex with the kit­chen ­extends the house into the garden. On the first floor, there are two bedrooms. The house has a cellar, as well as an attic in which two rooms are found. The façade of the building is made of brick, ­enhanced by some ornamental blue-limestone elem­ents. The motifs and the carefully organised brick and stone bonding are reminiscent of larger, bourgeois, houses.

Façade 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

75

HOUSING ATL AS   I

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

76

14  Le Bon 70 COMPLETION: 1901 ARCHITECT: Victor Taelemans ADDR ESS: Filips de Goedestraat 70 rue Philippe Le Bon, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 471 m2 + courtyard 53 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This house was also the office of the architect ­Victor Taelemans. It is located at the corner of Rue Philippe Le Bon and Rue de la Pacification, where there is a courtyard closed off from the street by a wall. This courtyard was originally accessed through a large gate. In plan, the building is divided into two longitudinal bays of equal width. A staircase

occupies the centre of the bay against the party wall. The ground floor contained the architect’s office and a dining room on the Rue de la Pacification side. The first floor accommodates the living quarters. The second floor has three bedrooms as well as a bathroom and a toilet. The interior is very richly decorated (moulded ceilings with Art Nouveau motifs, interior doors with stained-glass windows, mosaic floors, fireplaces with ­pilasters and capitals, etc.). The three-storey façade is made of light-coloured stone on a blue-limestone base. On the first floor, there are three stone bay-windows. The ensemble features elegantly carved Art Nouveau stonework. The window frames are also very elaborate, incorporating stained glass. The building seems to have been inspired by H. Van de Velde’s Hôtel Otlet in Rue de Florence, built ten years earlier.

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

77

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

78

15  Maison Strauven

This house was also the office of the architect ­ ustave Strauven (see also p. 121). It is situated on G a very peculiar boomerang-shaped plot opening onto two streets. The plot is very narrow and only 3.75 m wide. The entrance on Rue Luther is closed off by an elaborate gate. It serves the ground

floor and a semi-buried level by an ingenious set of external stairs. The plan of the house takes advantage of the plot’s geom­etry by placing a pentagonal staircase at the hinge of the lot. It is naturally lit by a skylight. The spaces are organised on either side of this staircase, opening onto Rue Calvin or Luther. The building is topped by a roof terrace. The façades of the building are highly ornamented on the Rue Luther side, featuring a clever interplay of blue and yellow bricks, white and rubble stone, and ironwork with Art Nouveau motifs. There is also a large bay-window on the first floor. The Rue Calvin façade is more sober, with large windows on each floor that span the entire width of the plot. The interior and exterior woodwork is coloured: green for the window frames and red for the railings and staircases.

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

COMPLETION: 1902 ARCHITECT: Gustave Strauven ADDR ESS: Lutherstraat 28 rue Luther, Calvinstraat 5 rue Calvin, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 158 m2 + terrace 18 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

79

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

80

16  Solvay 32 COMPLETION: 1904 ARCHITECT: Victor Taelemans ADDR ESS: Ernest Solvaystraat 32 rue Ernest Solvay, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 293 m2 + courtyard 9 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This house is located on a very unusual plot of land: it is only 7 m deep, allowing no real outdoor space except for a very small courtyard. The house has four levels with a flat roof. On the ground floor, a central door opens onto a hallway that leads to the stairwell at the back of the plot. There is a room on

either side – one of them the architect’s office. On each of the three floors, a similar plan is repeated, with two rooms opening onto the street. To compensate for the lack of outdoor space at the rear of the building, the house features a clever interplay of three bay-windows to the front: trapezoidal and rectangular on the first floor, and a large rectangular bay-window adjacent to a balcony on the second floor. The façade is made of light-coloured stone, and blue limestone for the basement, the balcony, and the bay-window rims. The façade is particularly elaborate; for example, the right-hand jamb of the entrance door extends into a bracket supporting one side of one of the first-floor bay-windows. The same play is repeated in the extension of the lefthand bay jamb of the first floor.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

81

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

82

17  Discailles 9

This small apartment building simulates two twin houses. It is built on an 11.5-m-wide plot in a residential street of terraced houses. The building accommodates four apartments: two triplexes on the lower floors and two simplexes on the second and third floors. The central entrance to the building leads directly into a common stairwell. The triplex-

es accommodate two living rooms on the ground floor, a kitchen at the backyard level, which is 3 m lower than the street, and two bedrooms on the first floor. The simplexes have a symmetrical plan with two rooms on either side of the staircase and one room in its extension. Each dwelling has a storeroom and a coal cellar; these are accessible directly from the kitchen for the triplexes and via the common staircase for the simplexes. The building’s façade is made of light-coloured brick and blue limestone, with stone balconies from the first floor upwards. It is topped by a hipped-tiled roof. The common staircase is clearly seen on the façade by unaligned central windows. Each floor has a ­different fenestration, in line with the apartments’ functions and room heights: 2.7 m in the basement and first floor; 3.6 m high on the ground floor for the triplexes; and 3.3 m high for the simplexes.

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

COMPLETION: 1904 ARCHITECT: Florent Van Roelen ADDR ESS: Ernest Discaillesstraat 9 rue Ernest Discailles, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 4 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 158 m2 + courtyard 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

Second and third floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

83

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

84

18  Molière 112 COMPLETION: 1907 TR ANSFOR M ATION: 1922 ARCHITECT: Paul Picquet ADDR ESS: Molièrelaan 112 avenue Molière, 1190 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 452 m2 + garden 1035 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house (Apartment building after 1922 extension)

This large bourgeois house (see also p.  45) is set on one of the most beautiful avenues in Brussels, where it is integrated into a string of remarkable buildings. The 13-m-­wide house is located on a very long plot of land that opens onto the Rue Berkendael. The building is set back from Avenue Molière by a few

Cross section 1:500

metres, revealing a small garden enclosed by low walls and pillars of blue limestone and iron fences. On the ground floor, a large carriage entrance opens onto a passageway that leads to a large garden and, sideways, to the vestibule of the building. Parallel to this ­passageway, the house has two ­longitudinal bays. The first is a service wing with a grand staircase and ­service rooms including a second staircase. To its left are three large rooms in a row. The façade of the building is entirely built in blue and light stone. The left-hand bay has a loggia on the ground floor, ­covered by a terrace on the upper floor. The centre of the composition features two pilasters that frame a dormer window. The ­second floor has a mansard roof with slates and two ­pedimented dormers. In 1922, the house was ­transformed into an apartment building with the addition of two floors; the loggia was altered then as well.

Façade 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

85

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

86

19  Lambermont 73 COMPLETION: 1909 ARCHITECT: François Hemelsoet ADDR ESS: Lambermontlaan 73 boulevard ­Lambermont, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 501 m2 + garden 64 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This terraced house, originally built for the Van Mol family, is set in Victor Besme’s 19th-century boulevard belt. The architect, François Hemelsoet, designed several other houses in the street as well (57, 61, 69, 71, 75–81). Altogether, they are part of an urban block delineated by buildings of a similar

height. Set on a narrow plot of 6 m, the house has a depth of 17 m. Inside, three rooms are arranged in a row on the first four floors. They are characterised by standardised dimensions: 3.8 m wide and 5.5 m or 4 m long, allowing flexible uses of the spaces. On the first floor a room of full plot width is positioned towards the street with a bay-window. The section features a semi-sunken basement, a raised ground floor (bel étage), and three floors above. The floor heights are very generous, ranging from almost 5 m on the bel étage to 3 m on the top floor. Access to each level is via a narrow entry hallway or staircase landing. The façade featuring white brick enhanced with blue limestone is capped with a mansard roof. The large curved-angle bay-window, resting on brackets, is made of blue limestone. It supports a balcony with wrought-iron railings.

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

87

HOUSING ATL AS   I

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

88

20  Berkendael 203 COMPLETION: 1909 ARCHITECT: Joseph Diongre ADDR ESS: Berkendaalstraat 203 rue Berkendael, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 3 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 110 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

Located on the corner of Place Brugmann, the building occupies a triangular plot. Its composition is symmetrical around the bisector of the plot with the exception of one bay, which comprises the entrance to the building. It houses a commercial ground floor and three apartments on the upper floors. Besides the commercial space, the ground

floor contains four rooms that were used as complementary accommodation, with access to a small triangular courtyard. On the upper floors, the staircase opens onto a central vestibule that serves all the rooms of the dwelling: three rooms on the street side, and two rooms to the rear. Only the central bathroom does not have a window to the outside. The building has four levels, the second of which is of lower height. It is crowned by a tiled roof with four dormer windows, including the ­central one which marks the central bay at the ­corner of the building by its height and its elaborate treatment. The façade is composed of red bricks enhanced by white stone, as well as blue-limestone for the base and wall cappings. A bay-window is positioned in the central bay. The entablature and the base of the bay-window are decorated with sgraffiti.

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

89

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

90

21  Perdrix 33 COMPLETION: 1910 ARCHITECT: Unknown ADDR ESS: Patrijzenstraat 33 rue des Perdrix, 1040

Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 180 m2 + garden 35 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This house (see also p. 43) is set in a street created in 1906 following the transformation of the Cité Debray, a workers’ housing estate on a dead-end street. Like all the other houses in the new street, the building is situated on a 5-m-wide plot. On the

Façade

rear side, the dwelling has a 7-m-deep garden, where an outdoor toilet was initially attached to the building. The dwelling has three levels, the last of which is under the roof. The house is two rooms deep, positioned in an adjoining manner. The ground floor is slightly raised from the street by 60 cm by a three-step blue-limestone stoop. It features two longitudinal bays perpendicular to the street side, the narrow bay housing a vestibule and the stairwell. On the first and second floors, the room on the street side runs the full width of the plot. The floor heights decrease from level to level, varying from 3.3 m on the ground floor to 2.5 m on the second floor. The façade features alternating red and white bricks and blue-limestone elements such as a base, sills, and lintel supports, as well as metal lintels.

Cross section 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

91

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

92

22  Commerçants 6 COMPLETION: 1911 ARCHITECT: Jean Michiels ADDR ESS: Koopliedenstraat 6 rue des ­Commerçants, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 412 m2 + courtyard 10 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This group of terraced houses and two apartment buildings is a small private development. The ensemble forms a complete triangular block without interior, surrounded by three streets. Two apartment buildings with commercial ground floors oc­ cupy the ends of the block. One accommodates four apartments per floor, the second has only a single apartment on each level. Six houses stand between

them, four of which open onto two streets. The houses have a classic plan, with two asymmet­rical longitudinal bays and two or three adjoining rooms. Despite being designed as a unit by a single architect, they were made to look as if they were built independently: each façade differs from the others. The corner buildings are built in light stone with a series of decorative elements (sgraffiti, wrought ironwork, metal lintels, and bay-windows). The houses, varying between three and four floors, have diametrically opposed façades. On the Rue des Commerçants side, they feature a classic early 20th-century style, alternating coloured brick patterns, blue-limestone bases, bay-windows, and bracketed balconies. On the Rue St Jean Népomucène side, the brick façades are rendered and incised with an imitation stone pattern. These façades have various setbacks, giving the street a very sculptural aspect.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

93

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

94

23  Reyers 213 COMPLETION: 1914 ARCHITECT : Chrétien Guillaume Veraart ADDR ESS: Auguste Reyerslaan 213 boulevard Auguste Reyers, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 664 m2 + terrace 204 m2, garden 537 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This mansion is located at the corner of the Boulevard Reyers and Vergote Square, onto which it opens laterally. The building is set back from the street by a small garden, through which one reaches the entrance to the house. This opens onto a vestibule leading to the main staircase. On either side

are two small rooms and a garage, while a kitchen and laundry occupy the rear of the building. The plan is divided into two longitudinal bays. The main staircase and a small service staircase are found in the narrow bay. On the first floor are three enfilade living and reception rooms with almost 4-m-high ceilings. These areas are extended to the outside by a large terrace and a garden at the back of the plot. On the second floor there are three bedrooms and another terrace on the garden side. The servants’ quarters are located in the attic, which is accessible via the service staircase. The Beaux-Arts façade is composed of yellow sandstone rubble, enhanced with blue limestone. The corner of the building is occupied by a turret with bays offering views in two directions. Two bay-windows can be found on the first floor.

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

95

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

96

24  Trooz 12 COMPLETION: 1914 ARCHITECT: Unknown ADDR ESS: Jules de Troozlaan 12 avenue de Jules de Trooz, 1150 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 262 m2 + garden 74 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This dwelling (see also p. 44) is part of a group of two similar ­houses arranged symmetrically – one, more carefully decorated, intended for the owner, the other (number 14) intended for rental. It is ­located in a residential area close to the Woluwe Park. The plan of the house features a longitudinal division, with a narrow bay occupied by the circula-

tion spaces. The house has a semi-buried level that opens onto a courtyard. The difference in level ­between the courtyard and the garden is cleverly occupied by a rainwater tank. The bel étage houses two adjoining rooms as well as a room in the extension of the stairwell. While the adjoining rooms enjoy a 3.8-m-­high ceiling, this room is much lower (2.6 m) and is topped by a room accessible from the staircase landing. On the first floor are two adjoining rooms and a narrower room in the extension of the staircase. The attic is occupied by three rooms repeating a near-identical layout to the floors below. The façades of the house are made of white brick with blue-limestone elements such as the base, window surrounds, stringcourses, and balcony. This balcony, on the first floor, is closed off by curving iron railings.

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   I

97

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

99

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE

Gérald Ledent

Perpetuating or Opposing the Terraced House The bourgeois terraced house, Brussels’ domin­ ant housing type as documented in the preceding chapter, is not the city’s only residential form. However, its importance in terms of numbers as well as in the city’s collective unconscious has made it a benchmark against which to compare all other housing forms in the territory, including those that existed before. Comparing other residential forms with the standard form of housing allows us to understand why and how they appeared on the Brussels territory, both before and after the golden age of the Brussels terraced house at the turn of the 20th century. Hence, this chapter aims to offer a genealogy of such residential forms, organised according to spatial and typological features rather than chronologically. While some resemble the dominant – referential – type, others diverge partially or completely from it.

Continuing the Terraced House Two of these other forms of housing are directly related to the referential type: palaces consisting of multiple houses and houses built over a sunken garage.

Palace of Houses

< A city of wide open green spaces (Tachtigbeukenlaan – avenue des Quatre-Vingts Hêtres)

The earliest forms of social housing are consist­ ent with the dominant type, producing only ­minor variations on its four basic spatial features yet often complementing them and producing a collective effect that goes beyond the individual house. The Cité Fontainas, pp. 134–135, next to the Porte de Hal, reflects this desire to create a unified setting for a group of modest dwellings.1 Similar to Partoes’ classical beguinage or English crescents, the building gives the illusion of living in a palace, which corresponds to the bourgeois image of the city.

Behind the façade of a palace stand a series of 16 terraced houses (Beyaert – Trappeniers, Cité Fontainas, 1867).

Replacing Servants’ Quarters in the Basement with Garages At the end of the First World War, two changes had a direct impact on housing in Brussels. From a social point of view, home-based domestic servants were disappearing. From a technical point of view, the widespread use of the car modified people’s relationship with public space as well as with individual housing, which now required garages. These changes did not dramatically modify the standard housing type: garages replaced the servants’ spaces in the sunken basement. Houses were set back from the street to allow access ramps for automobiles (Saint-Michel 97, pp. 162– 163). In addition, with the disappearance of ­domestic servants, the kitchen migrated to an annex on the bel étage, where it had been in the Leopoldian Houses, p. 67, of the 19th century. These houses were built largely in the city’s second belt, primarily in the east (Woluwé-St-Pierre, Woluwé-­St-Lambert, Auderghem, etc.). They were built on plot widths similar to those used at the end of the 19th century and were likewise organised as closed city blocks. They reproduced the individual character, the limited height, and the repetitive layout of the referential type.

1  Smets, Marcel. L’avènement de la cité-jardin en Belgique, Histoire de l’habitat social en Belgique de 1830 à 1930. Liège, Pierre Mardaga, 1977. ­Collection Architecture + Documents, pp. 34–35.

100

In both variations the socio-cultural conventions associated with the bourgeois terraced house were preserved, together with the four spatial characteristics of the traditional type.

Departing from the Terraced House Type All other forms of housing in Brussels represent a departure from the dominant type of the bourgeois terraced house, the bonne maison moyenne, and can be characterised by these deviations from Brussels’s dominant type. Looking at them through this lens generates a new typology based on spatial composition rather than chronology.

(Sub)Urban Villas Just as terraced buildings were built in the centre during the 19th-century expansion, free-standing villas were chiefly built on the outskirts of the city. Until the early 20th century, municipalities such as Uccle or Laeken were located just outside the city. They were trendy weekend getaways featuring destinations such as the Châlet Robinson, the Châlet du Laerbeek, etc.,2 and also became very popular locations for secondary residences and villas for the wealthy. King Leopold II himself set the tone by adding two wings to the Castle of Laeken, which supplemented the royal palace in the city centre. Those houses deviated from the pattern of closed urban blocks, and were usually free-standing on large plots of land. The garden was no longer residual, but rather designed in its own right as a park with expensive features such as pavilions, pools, and pergolas (Villa Empain, pp. 180– 181). Houses developed forms and volumes unconstrained by party walls, often leading to free and innovative compositions (Villa Bloemenwerf, pp. 146–147) in which the traditional hierarchy of the bourgeois row house was abandoned. Some of these richly ornamented houses could be considered a Gesamtkunstwerk in which architecture and art merged; an excellent example is the Palais Stoclet, pp. 154–155, with its built-in works by Gustav Klimt and Fernand Khnopff. From a stylistic point of view, inspiration could be drawn from widely different sources – from the English cottage (albeit with a very modernist layout, as in the Villa Bloemenwerf) to Art Deco (Villa Empain, Palais Stoclet). A recurring feature of these free-standing villas was the double-­ height hall with an upper gallery leading to the bedrooms. Additional functions were often incorporated in these villas: these could include an

After the First World War, houses were set back from the street to allow access to garages set in sunken basements (De Ridder, boulevard Saint-Michel 97, 1923).

atelier (Villa Bloemenwerf); a personal office (Villa Empain); or the complete bourgeois pan­oply such as a smoking room for the gentlemen, piano room, study, and servants’ quarters (Palais Stoclet). In these villas, while the individual character and the low heights of the dominant type were maintained, there was no longer a connection to closed urban blocks and their layouts were much more innovative, with rooms that fitted their functions.

Early Collective Public H ­ ousing With the growth of the city in the 19th century, housing the working class became a major issue. Brussels was Belgium’s main industrial city and the ruling class tried to keep the workers under its thumb. The governing bourgeoisie had three major fears: epidemics, social conflicts, and working-class morality. Housing was one of the levers used to address these concerns. Several national congresses3 recommended breaking with traditional housing formations such as bataillons carrés (Impasse Vanhoeter, pp. 68–69), dead ends, etc., which could be found in the old parts of town. Widespread social unrest in 1886 led to the first social-housing law.4 The law of 9 August 1889 endorsed the single-family house by prioritising access to private property, part of a process by which the bourgeoisie tried to control

2  Dessouroux, Christian. Espaces partagés, espaces disputés. Bruxelles, une capitale et ses habitants. Brussels, Direction Études et Planification (AATL), 2008.    3  “The influence of housing on the morals, habits, health and well-being of populations is indisputable, and we might add that experience has made it an axiom. Wherever one finds a healthy, clean, tidy home, with a small garden, a few flowers, a few books, one can be sure in advance that the household that inhabits it is honest, thrifty, industrious and therefore relatively happy.” National Congress on Hygiene, 1852. In: Smets, Marcel. L’avènement de la cité-jardin en Belgique, Histoire de l’habitat social en Belgique de 1830 à 1930. Liège, Pierre Mardaga, 1977. Collection Architecture + Documents, pp. 192–194.   4  Ibid., pp. 46–58.  

101

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE

Standing alone in its private park, the Van Buuren Villa is free from terraced housing’s party walls, opening up the urban block (Govaerts-Van Vaerenbergh, 1928). private gardens row housing

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

street

10 –15 m

garden garden

staircase

street

PLAN LAYOUT

10 –15 m

6m

RELATION TO THE CIT Y BLOCK

large rooms small rooms

HEIGHT

HOUSING T YPE

= one household

4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m private gardens row housing

large rooms 6m

small rooms staircase 4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens free-standing building

private gardens

functionrelated rooms

function-

Comparing urbanbuilding villas with the standard housing type of terraced related housing free-standing rooms

private gardens row housing

polyvalent rooms

= mutliple households

private gardens row housing

polyvalent rooms

= mutliple households

102

Before the Second World War, social housing gradually became collective while retaining the relatively low height and polyvalence of standard row housing (Adolphe Puissant, Cité Dubrucq, 1924).

precarious populations by imposing its own way of living on them. A nuclear-family-centred model was favoured to avoid larger gatherings that could disturb the public order. In the first chapter, we saw that several solutions sought to place workers in homes mimicking bourgeois houses (Worker Terraced House, pp. 74–75). The desire to isolate working people manifested itself in schemes to house workers in individual houses. In addition to these single-family dwellings, several collective housing projects were erected reflecting a strong paternalistic approach, using housing as a tool to control workers.5 Inspired by the work- and lodging-houses of London or the Cité Napoléon in Paris,6 the Cité Pauwels, pp. 70– 71 (no longer extant), was one of these projects. Built in 1850, it was designed for bachelors; they shared a series of services (common kitchen, bath­ room, laundry room with hot water, workshop, and library with a reading room) and a ­garden on the ground floor.7 On the upper floors, single rooms were organised along a central ­corridor. Two decades later, inspired by Charles Fourier, the founder of utopian socialism, Jean-­Baptiste André Godin built the Familistère, pp. 142–143, of Laeken, attached to his stove factory on the canal.8 As in Guise, where he built his first f­amilistère, Godin produced an autarkic environment bring-

ing to­gether housing, collective amenities, and work. Such paternalist designs were nonetheless exceptions. At the turn of the century, social-sector collective housing projects conceived to house the working class recalled these earlier, paternalist approaches. The reason was simple: apartment buildings proved more cost-effective and produced a larger number of dwellings than the arche­typal individual house. Between 1899 and 1914, the earliest social-housing companies9 built over 60,000 dwelling units in Belgium.10 In Brussels, this period saw the construction of the Cité Reine Astrid, pp. 156–157; Cité de l’Olivier, pp. 152– 153; Cité de la Forêt d’Houthulst; Cité ­Dubrucq; Berkendael; Delva; Osseghem; Marconi 32, pp. 148–149; and Rodenbach 14–35, pp. 150–151. In 1919, the Société Nationale des Habitations et Logements à Bon Marché (SNHLBM) was founded following pressure from left-wing politicians. It promoted the construction by local housing companies of collective and affordable workers’ housing. Its mission was to meet the huge demand for housing following the devastation of the First World War, during which more than 200,000 homes were destroyed in Belgium. These pre- and post-war collective public-­ housing projects shared similar spatial charac-

5  Cité des Grandes Rames in Verviers, 1808; Cité du Grand Hornu in Hornu, 1832; Cité de Bosquetville in Bois-du-Luc, 1836; Cité de l’Olivette Ste Catherine in Mariemont, 1854; etc.   6  Higginbotham, Peter. The Workhouse Encyclopedia. London, History Press, 2012; Posener, Julius. “Historique des HBM.” L’architecture d’aujourd’hui, no. 6, 1935, pp. 15–44.   7  Smets, Marcel. L’avènement de la cité-jardin en Belgique, Histoire de l’habitat social en Belgique de 1830 à 1930. Liège, Pierre Mardaga, 1977. Collection Architecture + Documents.   8  Brauman, Annick et al. Jean-Baptiste André Godin, 1817–1888: le familistère de Guise, ou, les équivalents de la richesse: the familistère at Guise, or, the Equivalents of Wealth. Brussels, Archives d’architecture moderne, 1980.   9  The first social-housing company, the Foyer Schaerbeekois, was founded in 1899. 10  Noël, Françoise. “Les politiques d’habitat.” Université Libre de Bruxelles, 2009, p. 7.

private gardens row housing

garden garden garden

garden

street

10 –15 m

street

10 –15 m

street

10 –15 m

street

staircase

10 –15 m

6m

103

large rooms small rooms

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE = one household

4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens free-standing building RELATION TO THE CIT Y BLOCK

functionrelated rooms PLAN LAYOUT

HEIGHT

HOUSING T YPE

= one household

private gardens row housing

large rooms 6m

small rooms staircase

= one household

4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens row housing

private gardens

polyvalent rooms

= mutliple households

functionrelated

street

row housing

free-standing building

garden garden garden garden garden

= mutliple households

polyvalent 11  Van Dijk, Pauline. Immeubles à appartements de l’entre-deux-guerres. Brussels, Ministère de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, 2007. Bruxelles, rooms Ville d’Art et d’Histoire, no. 43, p. 17.   12  Castermans, Auguste. Parallèle des maisons de Bruxelles et des principales villes de Belgique construites depuis 1870 jusqu’à nos jours. vol. 1, Liège, Noblet, 1852–1869, p. 84.   13  Paul Hankar did his internship in Henri Beyaert’s office, which might ­explain the influence of the Flemish Renaissance style in his work. Collectif. Bruxelles, construire et reconstruire: architecture aménage= oneethousehold ment urbain, 1780–1914. Brussels, Crédit communal de Belgique, 1979. street

private gardens free-standing building

function-

garden

private gardens

At the end of a frantic 19th century, the Art Nouveau movement led to another evolution. While often considered a stylistic revolution, in Brussels polyvalent it was closely associatedrooms with a reconsideration

= one household

of the referential housing type. The use of iron was at the root of this upheaval;12 its malleability allowed for a new aesthetic language, but also for a substantial lightening of buildings’ load-­bearing elements. In combination with glass, which could = one household now be wired, it made possible skylights that revolutionised domestic spaces. The traditional bourgeois row house consisted of three rooms in a row. The central room of the enfilade was usually dark since it had no direct = mutliple households opening to the outside. Moreover, its central position put it at the crossroads of the floor’s circulation. It was therefore difficult to use, especially as its width was limited by the space taken up by the staircase in the adjoining narrow bay. Art Nouveau architects would transform this layout by creating light wells combined with staircases = one household in the middle of the house, allowing natural light into every room. In that sense, Victor Horta shook up the Brussels’ referential type in a luminous way. In Horta’s late 19th-century housing designs, the dark central room disappears, re= one household placed by a generous skylight that illuminates the entire building. The staircase and the circulation were no longer relegated to a dark corridor, but rather built into this skylit space. The Hôtel Tassel, pp. 144–145, in Ixelles (1894), and the ­Aubecq House (1902), Horta House (1901), and garden

street

The Light of Art Nouveau

10 –15 m

street

row housing

10 –15 m

street

private gardens

street

street

private gardens free-standing building

10 –15 m

row housing

10 –15 m

private gardens

15 m

row housing

teristics.11 Like the dominant terraced-house type, they were limited to four or five floors as central lightwell lifts were not yet affordable in the social sector. In terms of layout, they share another feature with Brussels’ standard type, namely the inclusion of two kinds of rooms, large and small, that were very flexible in terms of use. In addition to polyvalent rejecting the dominant type’s individual characrooms ter, these projects also questioned its connection to closed city blocks and its small plot divisions. City blocks were opened up and semi-­public or entirely public spaces such as courtyards (Cité de l’Olivier, pp. 152–153; Cité Melckmans, pp. 184– 185), alleyways (recalling the dead-end streets found in medieval city blocks, as in Cité Reine polyvalent Astrid, pp. 156–157), or rooms even shortcuts through the block (Cité Van Hemelrijck, pp. 186–187) were developed. While admitting more light into the dwellings, these central new lightwell urban morphologies disrupted the traditional front/rear opposition.

10 –15 m

private gardens

10 –15 m

free-standing building Comparing early collective public housing with the standard housing rooms type of terraced housing

104

private gardens row housing

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

10 –15 m

garden

6m

staircase

street

large rooms small rooms

= one household

4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens free-standing building

functionrelated rooms

By introducing a light well at the heart of the house, Victor Horta took the opposite approach to standard housing, which was traditionally dark in the centre (van Eetvelde House, 1900; Horta House, 1901). private gardens

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

10 –15 m

garden

PLAN LAYOUT

street

RELATION TO THE CIT Y BLOCK

street

polyvalent rooms

row housing

= one household

HEIGHT

HOUSING T YPE

= mutliple households

private gardens row housing

large rooms 6m

small rooms staircase 4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens

central lightwell

row housing

private gardens

function-

related housing. Comparing Art Nouveau free-standing building with the standard housing type of terraced rooms

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

15 m

garden

van Eetvelde House (1900), built for Edmond van Nevertheless, Horta and followers such as ­Gustave Eetvelde, the administrator of Congo Free State, Strauven (Maison Strauven, pp. 78–79, Maison gardens areprivate dazzling applications of this central light St Cyr) revolutionised the layout of the standard polyvalent free-standing building well. Beyond the new plastic language and the rooms house. Even if all its other spatial features remain formal research, therefore, the Brussels masters’ unchanged, central rooms acquired a grander stroke of genius lay in overturning the traditionstatus – thus modifying the interior ­hierarchy of al bourgeois terrace-housing type. the dwelling. private gardens Notrow allhousing Art Nouveau embraced this revolutionpolyvalent ary plan, however. Some made few changes to rooms the traditional bourgeois terraced-house plan, making only stylistic adjustments. Paul Hankar’s personal house in Ixelles (1893) was a good ex­ ample13 of this tendency.

= one household

= mutliple households

private gardens row housing

private gardens row housing

polyvalent rooms

central lightwell

= mutliple households

105

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE

Public garden city Private garden city

Locations of Brussels’ public and private garden cities

Blending City and Nature At the end of the 19th century, the SABH (Société Anonyme des Habitations Ouvrières, founded in 1868) built two developments inspired by Emile Muller’s carrés mulhousiens (1854). In the carrés mulhousiens, workers were housed in free-standing villas surrounded by gardens. This respectable patrician image was just a simulacrum, ­however: each villa contained four dwellings.14 Besides giving worker housing an honourable appearance, the projects located in Cité de ­Dilbeek, pp. 136–137, in Molenbeek, and Cité de Linthout (1871) in Schaerbeek were set in a green environment near the city. The garden-city movement of the 1920s stemmed from the same ambition, with settlements, often organised as cooperatives, built along the city’s green fringes.15 The first garden

cities were inspired by the English movement begun by Ebezener Howard and Raymond Unwin, to whom obvious tribute was paid through a series of stylistic elements (pitched roofs, window divisions and shutters, use of brick and tile, etc.), giving the impression of wandering in an English village (Le Logis-Floréal, pp. 158–161). Some settlements, on the other hand, were ­clearly inspired by the modernist movement and the German Siedlungen. Victor Bourgeois’ project for the Cité Moderne, pp. 164–169, was among the earliest examples of modernist housing, with clear-cut changes in construction such as the use of concrete, flat roofs, etc. The project and its ­unbuilt extension were exhibited at the second Frankfurt CIAM in 1929. The Kapelleveld, pp. 170– 173, designed by Van der Swaelmen in Woluwé-­ St-Lambert with the contribution of various architects, was another example of this modernist

14  Posener, Julius. “Le plan de l’habitation à bon marché.” L’architecture d’aujourd’hui, no. 7, 1935.    15  Hennaut, Eric and Liliane Liesens. Cités-jardins. 1920–1940. Brussels, AAM éditions, 1994; Schoonbrodt, René. Sociologie de l’habitat social. Gand, Editions des Archives ­d’Architecture Moderne, 1979; Smets, Marcel. L’avènement de la cité-jardin en Belgique, Histoire de l’habitat social en Belgique de 1830 à 1930. Liège, Pierre Mardaga, 1977. Collection Architecture + Documents; Van Dijk, Pauline. Immeubles à appartements de l’entre-deux-guerres. ­Brussels, Ministère de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, 2007. Bruxelles, Ville d’Art et d’Histoire, no. 43.

garden

10 –15

street

= one household

106

street

garden

polyvalent rooms

row housing

10 –15 m

private gardens

= mutliple households

Garden cities blended nature and city, while opening up the traditionally closed urban block (Cité de Dilbeek, 1870; Le Logis-Floréal, 1922; Cité Moderne, 1925). private gardens

central lightwell

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

10 –15 m

garden

PLAN LAYOUT

street

RELATION TO THE CIT Y BLOCK

street

row housing

= one household

HEIGHT

HOUSING T YPE

= one household

private gardens row housing

large rooms 6m

small rooms staircase 4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens free-standing building

private gardens

polyvalent rooms

function-

Comparing garden cities with the standard housing type of terraced related housing free-standing building rooms

street

15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

15 m

garden

= mutliple households

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

tt

m

nn

trend. It displayed an entire, self-sufficient neighthese garden cities can be found almost uniformbourhood with services, shops, and sports facilily around the city, caught up in the urban sprawl private gardens ties on the outskirts of the city. While all these of the 20th century. polyvalent row housing examples emerged from public or cooperative rooms Both the Mulhouse-based projects and the initiatives, the Coghen Square in Uccle was an ex­garden cities maintained three features from the ception. It was designed as a private developterraced housing type: low-rise housing, individment in the late 1920s for the wealthy bourgeoiual character, and function-free layouts. One private gardens sie. Designed to offer an oasis of greenery in the main difference was introduced, however: the polyvalent row housing middle of an urban block, it included the work of rooms opening of city blocks to allow nature to spread within the developments, while reducing dwellseveral Belgian modernist architects such as ers’ visual privacy. Josse Franssen, Louis-Herman De Koninck, or Pierre Verbruggen. From 1926 onwards, the garden-city movement was considered too costly for the state and Private Collective Housing free-standing building too space-consuming. Conservative politiciansfunctionspace were semi-public also worried about the development of a related Unlike in many European cities, Brussels’ bourrooms “socialist ring” around the city. They opposed sogeoisie did not turn to apartment buildings in cial rental or cooperative housing, preferring the 19th century. On the contrary, the middle and strictly private housing. Although short-lived, upper classes remained very attached to the ingarden cities’ dispersed planning and green envidependent life enabled by the bourgeois row private gardens central lightwell row housing ronments nevertheless had a great effect on house. Despite this deeply-rooted attachment to Brussels and on people’s imagination. Today, individual housing, early large-scale develop-

private gardens row housing

polyvalent rooms

= mutliple households

= mutliple households

garden

street

10 –15

107

= mutliple households

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE

private gardens

central lightwell

garden

street

10 –15 m

row housing

= one household

Jean Delhaye’s ideal apartment layout, introducing a clear day/night division in a single-storey space (1946) private gardens free-standing building

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

15 m

garden

= mutliple households

garden

PLAN LAYOUT

street

RELATION TO THE CIT Y BLOCK

polyvalent rooms

= one household

HEIGHT

HOUSING T YPE

= one household

private gardens row housing

large rooms 6m

small rooms staircase 4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens row housing

private gardens

polyvalent rooms

function-

row housing

garden

garden

15 m

15 m

private gardens

10 –15 m

row housing

street

private gardens

street

street

row housing

which was annexed by the Métropole H ­ otel at th the beginning of the 20 century. Until the First World War, private apartment buildings were uncommon, except for some ­corner-plot constructions or twin houses (see =turning mutliple p. 28). The year 1918, however, was a households point on several levels. Private domestic staff ­became unaffordable for the common bourgeoisie. Moreover, new technologies – such as lifts, reinforc­ ed concrete, pile foundations, steel = mutliple frames, intercom systems, central heating, runhouseholds ning water, etc. – became available, at a time when most standard bourgeois houses were still equipped with coal stoves and no running water.17 In 1924, a new co-ownership law was passed, enabling the smooth management of collective life in an apartment building. Consequently, numerous private promoters = mutliple such as the Société Belge Immobilière,households the Société des Pavillons Français (see also pp. 190–191), Kaisin père et fils, Etrimo, etc. began building garden

private gardens

10 –15 m

street

free-standing building semi-public space

ment was carried out in 1870 on the new central boulevards following the culverting of the Senne functionRiver, which had become an open-air sewer. Built related by French developers according to a successful rooms Parisian Haussmannian model, the operation was a financial debacle. There were several reasons: as mentioned, apartments did not correspond to the bourgeoisie’s way of life. Additionally, the polyvalent project was located in the roomslower part of town – which was traditionally dedicated to trade, industry, and lower-class housing – while the wealthy population occupied the higher ground of the eastern slopes. To make matters worse, the plots on which the apartment buildings were set were less deep than in Paris, preventing the polyvalent proper implementation of well-lit courtyards.16 rooms Eventually, the bourgeoisie’s lack of interest in this new development forced the city of Brussels to buy many of the buildings, which it still owns to central lightwell this day. Other buildings were transformed, as in the case of Place de Brouckère 33–35, pp. 140–141,

garden

street

rooms

10 –15 m

Comparing private collective housing with the standard housing type of terraced housing related free-standing building

= one household

16  Brauman, Annick et al. L’immeuble et la parcelle. Les immeubles à appartements comme éléments constitutifs du tissu urbain. Le cas de Bruxelles. 1870–1980. Brussels, Archives d’Architecture Moderne, 1982, pp. 7–21.   17 Van Dijk, Pauline. Immeubles à appartements de l’entre-deuxguerres. Brussels, Ministère de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, 2007. Bruxelles, Ville d’Art et d’Histoire, no. 43.  

108

apartment buildings after the First World War. Among the achievements of the interwar period were two buildings that heralded the changes to come, one displaying an abundance of shared amenities, the other unprecedented heights. On the one hand, the Résidence Palace, pp. 174–175, symbolised the interwar bourgeoisie congregating around collective facilities. Built in 1927 for a wealthy clientele on the initiative of Lucien Kaisin, it was both a hotel and a residential project, with 180 apartments. The building complex offered an incredible series of services and amenities of a rare quality: an indoor swimming pool, cinema, theatre, bank, restaurant, hairdressers, shops, garages, fencing and tennis courts, gymnasium, etc. The project was the last of its kind, however, a victim of the 1929 stock-market crash. By 1941, it was uninhabited. On the other hand, the Résidence de la Cambre, pp. 196–197, offered fewer amenities but took full advantage of new construction techniques. Built in 1937, its 18 floors made it Brussels’ first skyscraper.18 Collective amenities and greater heights characterised the new apartment buildings built in the private sector between the wars. On the boule­ vards, avenues, and roundabouts of the city, new apartment buildings were erected (Palais de la Folle Chanson, pp. 182–183; Les Pavillons Français, pp. 190–191; Résidence Léopold, pp. 194–195). These wider roads allowed taller buildings without compromising natural light. Their skyline thus evolved dramatically; the personal interactions made possible by low-rise housing were lost. These buildings conveyed a sense of majesty, with large and ornamented entry halls, façades with three registers (base, shaft, and ­capital), precious and highly crafted materials, etc. Sometimes, the grandeur was only a mirage: some buildings, such as the twin apartment buildings at avenue de Broqueville 1–4, pp. 188–189, were barely more than a façade. Jean Delhaye, one of Horta’s disciples, published a book on the advantages of apartment living.19 Just as Louis Cloquet’s book20 influenced the single-family house in the early 20th century, Delhaye’s had a lasting impact on Brussels housing. Besides collective living and greater building heights, the major change concerned living on a single floor. Delhaye developed a scheme organised around a clear day/night separation for living functions. Private collective buildings diverged in two ways from the referential type of the terraced house. In addition to rejecting individual hous-

ing, they were taller. Nevertheless, rooms remained fairly flexible in terms of use and the buildings were still set in closed urban blocks.

The Counterpoint to the Terraced House: Modernism In Belgium, the influence of modernism developed in two stages. Before the Second World War, a few pioneering architects tried to impose their vision, but their influence was very limited in terms of construction. Massive post-war reconstruction, however, operated with the tools developed by modernism.

Interwar Period

After the First World War, modernist architects strongly believed that architecture could revolutionise human societies.21 The need for housing was acute and the first three Congrès Internationaux d’Architecture Moderne (CIAM) explicitly addressed this issue. Before the Second World War, modernism was introduced by CIAM’s Belgian members – Victor Bourgeois, Huib Hoste, Louis-­ Herman De Koninck, Renaat Braem, and Raphaël Verwilghen22 – but also through publications L’Equerre23 and Opbouwen. The third CIAM, held in Brussels in 1930, was the pinnacle of the modernist movement in Belgium. Most projects developed at the time were visionary and remained rhetorical,24 such as ­ ­Renaat Braem’s linear city between Antwerp and Liège (1934),25 the 1933 competitions for Antwerp’s east bank, or Jasinski’s administrative city on Brussels’ central boulevards (1930).26 Victor Bourgeois was one of the leading figures of this movement. He developed two urban schemes for Brussels, both presented at the 1930 CIAM:27 Le Nouveau Bruxelles, pp. 178–179, and Le Grand Bruxelles.28 Bourgeois defined the city as a territorial phenomenon that went beyond its usual limits and spread out along the canal between its two economic centres to the north and south (Vilvoorde and Clabecq). In Le Nouveau Bruxelles, Bourgeois planned a new neighbourhood north of the city, along the Senne Valley, on the western bank of the canal. Its structure differed from that of the traditional city, and was based on the functional city’s four quadrants: residential, commercial, leisure, and mobility.29 The 25,000­dwelling development was divided into four res-

18  Ibid., p. 27.   19  Delhaye, Jean. L’appartement d’aujourd’hui. Liège, Desoer, 1946.   20  Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900.   21  Bauer, Catherine. Modern Housing. Cambridge, The Riverside Press, 1934; Giedion, Sigfried. Rationelle Bebauungsweisen: Ergebnisse des 3. Internationalen Kongresses für Neues Bauen, Brüssel, Nov. 1930. Stuttgart, Englert & Schlosser, 1931.   22  Steinmann, Martin. International Congress for Modern Architecture. CIAM: Dokumente 1928–1939. Basel, Birkhäuser, 1979.   23  Charlier, Sébastien. L’équerre: réédition intégrale – the complete edition. Liège, Édititons Fourre-Tout, 2012.   24  Beekaert, Geert and Francis Strauven. La construction en Belgique. 1945–1970. Anvers, Confédération nationale de la Construction, 1971; Vandenbreeden, Jos. Art Déco et Modernisme en Belgique. Brussels, Racine, 1996.   25 Strauven, Francis and Renaat Braem. René Braem: les aventures dialectiques d’un moderniste flamand. Brussels, Archives d’architecture moderne, 1985. 26  Vandenbreeden, Jos. Art Déco et Modernisme en Belgique. Brussels, Racine, 1996, p. 207.   27  Bourgeois, Victor. “Habitations Minima.” L’émulation, no. 11, 1931, pp. 391–414; Giedion, Sigfried. Rationelle Bebauungsweisen: Ergebnisse des 3. Internationalen Kongresses für Neues Bauen, Brüssel, Nov. 1930. Stuttgart, Englert & Schlosser, 1931.   28  Ledent, Gérald. “From Ideal Proposals to Serial Developments: Victor Bourgeois’s Schemes in the Light of Post-War Developments in Brussels.” Urban Planning, vol. 4, no. 3, 2019, pp. 196–211.   29  Mumford, Eric Paul. The CIAM Discourse on Urbanism, 1928–1960. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 2002.

109

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE

In the Nouveau Bruxelles (1930), Victor Bourgeois designed an entirely new neighbourhood completely unlike the traditional city.

The double-height glazed living-room walls of the Maison Dotremont by Louis-Herman De Koninck (1932)

idential zones by a large cross-shaped public green zone featuring leisure and community facilities. Housing was in elongated, ten-storey, free-standing buildings located in green spaces in the immediate vicinity of services such as kindergartens, playgrounds, parking lots, etc. The first two floors were occupied by commercial spaces, while the upper floors were dedicated to dwellings. These were organised in duplexes accessible from a wide central interior corridor on every other floor. Broad terraces off the living spaces allowed light to enter this collective circulation directly. All modern comforts were foreseen: these included well-organised kitchen equipment and bathrooms, but also a supply line for goods. Finally, collective amenities such as gardens, sports facilities, and sun decks were located on the top floor. These large-scale projects remained theor­ etical, but modernist architects built a series of smaller projects and individual houses in the modernist garden cities mentioned before such as the Kapelleveld, pp. 170–173, but also for private commissions such as the Maison Dotremont by Louis-­Herman De Koninck. In these houses, the architects often follow the Five Points of modern architecture developed by Le Corbusier: free design of the plan, free design of the façade, horizontal windows, roof gardens, and pilotis. The Maison de Verre, pp. 192–193, was a prime example of such modernist architecture from the interwar period, ­applying most of Le Corbusier’s precepts. The

layout was very flex­ible, with a double-height living room ending with a solarium terrace. In his design, Paul-­Amaury Michel took advantage of new materials such as glass, which was used in different ways, transparent or not, depending on the room’s function and position. Just a stone’s throw from the Maison de Verre, Henry Van de Velde designed another version of modernism, the Hôtel Wolfers, pp. 176–177. Rather than various types and thicknesses of glass, this corner brick building displayed playful volumes and stepped terraces.

Reconstruction Period

Born in the interwar period, modernism came late to Brussels – but when it arrived, it affected the city significantly.30 The Brussels 1958 Universal Exhibition clearly illustrated the will to take a modernist approach to reconstructing the country. Two developments left lasting marks on the city: new public infrastructures were built, ­mainly to accommodate automobile traffic; and two laws attempted to provide concrete solutions to the housing deficit brought about by the war. The law introduced by De Taye (1948) ­encouraged private initiatives, while Brunfaut’s act (1949) supported public housing activities through the financing of public space and infrastructure. Additionally, two complementary regulations (De Taye 1953 and 1956) led to a massive clean-up and destruction of lower-class neighbourhoods (according to master plans known

30  Demey, Thierry. Bruxelles, chronique d’une capitale en chantier, de l’Expo ’58, au siège de la C.E.E. Brussels, Paul Legrain/CFC éditions, 1992.

110

Built on the site of the former North Station, the Tour Martini was one of Brussels’ modernist landmarks, accommodating a theatre, shops, a café, exhibition halls, offices, and housing (Jacques Cuisinier, 1961 – demolished).

Willy Van Der Meeren’s free-standing housing slab displayed all the features of modernist architecture: pilotis, free façade, roof terrace, and open plan (Ieder Zijn Huis, Evere, 1958).

as Tekhné and Manhattan);31 state subsidies were reserved for developments of at least 25 dwellings, prompting the production of large apartment buildings in the form of slabs and towers. These two developments brought about large apartment blocks grafted onto a new infrastructural network. If the Résidence Palace is a symbol of the interwar period, the Martini Tower or Centre International Rogier, pp. 216–219,32 is probably its postwar counterpart. Built on the site of the former North Station, it is no longer a bourgeois palace but rather a multi-functional project that shelters a theatre, shops, a café, exhibition halls, offices, and housing. Its architect, Jacques Cuisinier, built a series of modernist landmarks in Brussels, such as the Brusilia Tower, pp. 230–231, in Schaer­ beek or La Magnanerie, pp. 222–223, in Forest. After the Second World War, housing was reso­ lutely collective, designed to generate solidarity among neighbours.33 In terms of layout, plans were determined by functions. While Delhaye continued to be a reference, the National Housing Society (now SNL) also produced collections of standard plans.34 Breaking with the tradition of standard row houses, housing projects reached new heights, despite sustained criticism from both the popular and specialist press.35 Two major approaches can be seen in post-­ war housing production. Public housing, on the one hand, tended to have a clearer affiliation with

i­nter-war models (Avenue Van Overbeke 243, pp. 220–221; Peterbos 6, pp. 226–227). Two projects stood out in that regard. First, the wellnamed Cité Modèle in Laeken, pp. 202–207, was designed to demonstrate Belgium’s position in terms of public housing.36 Planned for the 1958 World Exhibition, it was an autonomous neighbourhood imagined as an “island of order and clarity”37 taking a radical stand against “the chaos of the randomly drawn streets, filled, in Brussels, with particularly incoherent buildings.”38 Its buildings included collective amenities such as shops, an auditorium, church, post office, etc., and rigorously followed the Five Points of modernist architecture. Willy Van Der Meeren’s Ieder Zijn Huis, pp. 208–209, in Evere exemplified this attitude even better.39 Free-standing on a grassy plain, the tall and slender building was oriented towards the north like a magnetised bar. It was raised on pilotis that initiated a repetitive por­ tico structure spanning the entire width of the building. This simple and economical structure freed up façades made up of prefabricated concrete elements. Collective spaces were spread throughout the building, and included a meeting room, workshop, laundry, and even a morgue. Interior circulation was literally thought of as the extension of public space; from its two large entrance halls, large galleries every three levels designed as an extension of the public sidewalk, to a roof terrace accessible to all on the top floor.

31  de Saulnier, Pierre. “Bruxelles à l’heure de la rénovation.” Habiter, 1963, pp. 2–34; Martens, Albert and Myriam Vanden Eende. Quartier Nord. Le relogement des expulsés. Brussels, EPO, 1994.   32  Built in 1961 by Jacques Cuisinier. Dejemeppe, Pierre. Bruxelles, les tours, la ville. ­Brussels, Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, 2010, pp. 53–56 and 120–121; Crop, Paul-Alexander. “Residentiële hoogbouw in Brussel van architect Jacques Cuisinier.” Faculteit Letteren en Wijsbegeerte, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, 2007.   33  Jasinski, Stanislas. “A propos des immeubles à logement collectif.” La Maison, no. 6, 1957.   34  Mombach, Marcel. Plans minima. Première série. 1948–1949. Brussels, Société Nationale des ­habitations et logement à bon marché, 1948.   35  Van Dijk, Pauline. Immeubles à appartements de l’entre-deux-guerres. Brussels, Ministère de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale, 2007. Bruxelles, Ville d’Art et d’Histoire, no. 43, p. 30; Marique, Robert. “Buildings ou tours à t­ audis.” La ­Maison, vol. 7, 1947, pp. 172–197.   36  Bernard, Pierre et al. La cité modèle à Bruxelles. Vie(s) d’un grand projet. Brussels, Aparté, 2012.   37 Strauven, Francis and Renaat Braem. René Braem: les aventures dialectiques d’un moderniste flamand. Bruxelles, Archives d’architecture moderne, 1985, p. 75.   38  Ibid., p. 75.   39  De Kooning, Mil. Willy Van Der Meeren: Ieder Zijn Huis, passé et futur d’une unité d’habitation à Evere. ­Brussels, CIVA, 2012; Ledent, Gérald. “Habiter toutes les dimensions. Un regard sur le bâtiment Ieder Zijn Huis de Willy Van der Meeren.” Willy Van Der Meeren: Ieder Zijn Huis, passé et futur d’une unité d’habitation à Evere, edited by CIVA, Brussels, CIVA, 2012, pp. 51–57.

111

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE

The function-free layout of the flats was shaped by cupboards and movable walls that made it possible to produce several types of housing. In these functionalist layouts, circulation was limited and each living space reduced to a minimum. It was private developers, responsible for more than two-thirds of post-war production, who would have the greatest impact on the city (e.g. La Magnanerie, pp. 222–223; Europa II, pp. 224– 225; Brusilia, pp. 230–231). Generally speaking, these were less radical than public operations. Two private actors stood out during this period: Etrimo and Amelinckx. Founded in the 1930s by Jean-Florian Collin, Etrimo left its mark on housing with the production of 14,000 dwellings, but also on the Brussels subconscious with exceptionally homogeneous and easily r­ecognisable buildings. Etrimo’s post-war production included three types of developments: “villa districts” such as the Chant d’Oiseau in Woluwé-St-Pierre or the Villas Parc Albert I, pp. 214–215, in Gans­ horen; “bungalows” such as Domaine de l’Empereur in Uccle; or “apartment buildings in a park” such as Parc Aristide Briand in Woluwé-­­St-Lam­­ bert, Parc Jean Vivès in Anderlecht, Parc Beaulieu in Auderghem, Parc du Forum in Neder-over-­ Heembeek, and Résidence Parc Albert I, pp. 228– 229, in Ganshoren among others. These largescale operations were built on large landholdings (Château de Rivieren, Château Lambeau, etc.); former farms; or fallow land. In the absence of any legislation on heights or density, Etrimo set the tone by negotiating ­directly with municipalities and, in this respect, played a decisive role in the development of Brussels’ second belt. Those developments of the 1960s were located on the direct outskirts of the dense city back then, which has of course by now caught up with them. One of the main selling points was precisely the green surroundings and the accessibility of the city by car. Etrimo’s post-war production followed a repetitive logic. Buildings were generally limited to twelve storeys with an underground

garage. Oriented along a north–south axis, they had ­balconies running along both long sides. Their painted pale-blue underside was a distinctive ­Etrimo feature. Inside, a basic layout of four dwellings around a vertical core was repeated two to four times depending on what the site allowed. Common services were provided for each building: rooftop drying rooms and a caretaker’s flat per core. ­Another of Etrimo’s influences was its resounding bankruptcy in 1970, which instigated the Breyne Act (1971) regulating real-estate sales on layaway, which is still in effect today. A great deal of post-war housing production was free-standing. Some, however, extend the interwar tradition of taller collective buildings on the boulevards and larger streets of the city (Churchill 126, pp. 198–199; De Roovere 14–16, pp. 200–201). Additionally, individual private houses were still built during the period (Maison Volckrick, pp. 210–211; Maison Verhaegen, pp. 212– 213), perpetuating the city’s expansion based on closed city blocks. These modernist buildings formed the fabric of Brussels’ 20th-century (second) belt, modifying the cityscape tremendously. If other housing forms challenged some of the four recurrent features of the Brussels referential type, modernism dismissed them all. Free-standing buildings rejected the structuring character of the closed urban block that provided front–back positions for each dwelling. The individual character of housing was also challenged as, for ­modernist architects, urban housing should be collective: “the regime of isolated habitations is obsolete”.40 The limited height of traditional buildings was also criticised. In the interests of efficiency and the search for air and light, housing blocks soared towards the sky – thereby acquiring the status of monuments. Finally, the traditional layout of the bourgeois house was called into question. For modernist architects, circulation, room dimensions and location were determined by their purpose, deduced from ergonomic studies.

In the 1960s, Etrimo developed private housing as free-standing apartment buildings in parks at the fringes of the city (sales brochures for Etrimo and the Résidence Aurore).

40  Bourgeois, Victor. “Habitations Minima.” L’émulation, no. 11, 1931, p. 402.

112

private gardens

street

15 m

garden

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

garden

= mutliple households

10 –15 m

garden

PLAN LAYOUT

street

RELATION TO THE CIT Y BLOCK

15 m

row housing

street

polyvalent rooms

= one household

HEIGHT

HOUSING T YPE

= mutliple households

private gardens row housing

large rooms 6m

small rooms staircase 4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

free-standing building semi-public space

private gardens

functionrelated rooms

function-

street

related free-standing building Comparing modernist housing with the standard housing type of terraced housing rooms

Post-Modernism

street

15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

street

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

street

10 –15 m

garden

and the place d’Espagne around the Central Station, which is a pastiche of the traditional city private gardens Architectural modernism marked the end of polyvalent a with colonnades, gabled roofs and brick façades row housing built in the 1980s. In terms of housing, a number ­cycle.41 At the end of the 1960s, modernism was rooms challenged as having a peremptory approach. of trends could be identified. Renovation became From a social point of view, modernist buildings an alternative to demolition, as seen in the Rue were rejected for their inability to create qualitaaux Laines in front of the Palace of Justice, where private gardens tive public spaces. Moreover, May ’68 marked demonstrations against the demolition of 26 polyvalent row housing the end of the centrality of the nuclear family rooms houses led to their comprehensive renovation. around which modernist housing had been Several new projects embraced the city’s trad­ ­designed. From a technical point of view, too, itional features such as the closed urban block modern materials such as Quarzolith, Glasal, or and the street. The rue de Laeken 95–121, pp. 236– ­Colorbel began showing signs of decay. The earli­ 237, illustrated this tendency. Replacing a modest oil crises revealed that these buildings sufernist office tower, the project featured a comfered from energy inefficiency and were expenpletely new urban block built on a parking garage. sive to build, just as they dealt a fatal blow to the Alternating individual houses and apartment general optimism born of economic growth. blocks, the buildings literally replicated 19th-century European façades. Behind this ­veneer, howBrussels at the end of the 1970s was marked by ever, could be found all the comforts of moderna rejection of the city and the departure in vast private gardens central lightwell numbers of the middle and upper classes for the ist housing. In Woluwé-St-Pierre, Les Venelles, row housing hinterland, leaving the city with the scars of pp. 234–235, produced a similar interpretation of pre-20th-century architecture. It framed a modernist ambitions. Brussels was in the hands ­low-rise, close-like settlement where materials, of developers who approached it as a place of business rather than a qualitative place to live. volumes, and routes referred to an idealised imThis phenomenon was called “Bruxellisation”. age of European medieval cities. In both projThe remaining inhabitants protested against this ects, there was an explicit quest for formal and demolition and the mercantile vision of the city, typological variations to house a diversity of peoholding large demonstrations in the Marolles and ple and household configurations. Lucien Kroll the Northern District. These grassroots movepushed this awareness of user variety even furments prompted the creation of associations ther in La Mémé, pp. 232–233, a student housing such as l’Atelier de Recherche et d’Actions ­Urbaines project based on inhabitants’ participation at (ARAU) and numerous inhabitants’ committees. UCLouvain’s Woluwé-St-­Lambert site. Kroll’s idea private gardens polyvalent free-standing buildingurban-planning consultations Mandatory public was to produce a flexible building where residents rooms would be one of their achievements. would be able to modify their dwellings as needed in fruitful cooperation with their neighbours. Embracing the “right to the city”42 and urban renewal, this movement developed a nostalgic The façade of the building expressed this intenand at times naive glorification of the past. This tion, displaying a kaleidoscope of different winwould in some cases lead to caricatures such as dow frames and materials that contrasted with the the neighbourhood of the Carrefour de l’Europe stern and repetitive aspects of post-war buildings.

= one household

= mutliple households

= mutliple households

41  Several authors such as Manfredo Tafuri, Charles Jencks, and Reyner Banham claim that the late 1960s coincided with the end of modern bourgeois ideologies and the “death” of modernist architecture, opening up a new cycle. Banham, Reyner and François Dallegret. “A home is not a house.” Art in America, vol. 2, 1965, pp. 70–79 ; Jencks, Charles. The Language of Post-modern Architecture. New York, Rizzoli, 1977; ­Tafuri, Manfredo. Architecture and Utopia: Design and Capitalist Development. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 1976.   42  The “right to the city” is a gardens conceptprivate proposed by Henri Lefebvre, understood as a call to the citizens to reclaim the city. Lefebvre, Henri. Le droit à la ville. 3 ed., Paris, polyvalent row 1968. housing Anthropos, garden

15 m

street

rooms

= mutliple households

free-standing building semi-public space

street

15 m

garden

10 –15 m

garden

= one household

15 m

garden

= mutliple households

10 –15 m

garden

PLAN LAYOUT

street

RELATION TO THE CIT Y BLOCK

PERPETUATING OR OPPOSING THE TERRACED HOUSE

functionrelated rooms

street

113

= one household

HEIGHT

HOUSING T YPE

= mutliple households

private gardens row housing

large rooms 6m

small rooms staircase 4–5 m 4–5 m 4–5 m

private gardens row housing

private gardens

polyvalent rooms

function-

street

related free-standing building Comparing post-modernism with the standard housing type of terraced housing rooms

Whether nostalgic for the traditional city or ­trying to invent new ways of living, post-modernism adopted several features of the referential type. Flexible design and even individual character, which had been set aside for economic reasons, were once again emphasised.

garden

= mutliple households

In Lucien Kroll’s student housing, the walls could be moved according to residents’ needs (La Mémé, 1976).

garden

missing all the traditional features of the Brussels standard housing type of terraced housing. As new challenges arise in the 21st century, this spatial approach could be a key to envisioning future housing development for Brussels. Specific issues are examined in the next chapter. one household Interestingly, even though it can= serve as a yardstick against which to measure all the other forms of housing in Brussels, the referential type itself has evolved, for several reasons. First, although it still represents one third of the city’s housing stock, the traditional three-room-in-arow layout of the Brussels row house is forbidden today by the 1979 Building Regulations of the Agglomeration, which requires every newly built living space to have a direct opening to the outside.43 Second, the garden, which was considered a leftover space in the 19th century, has gained interest, particularly in response to in= one household creased automobile traffic on the street side, modifying the hierarchy of the house by placing the most important living spaces at the back. Third, the standard type has in many cases lost its individual character. Its buildings are too spacious for smaller contemporary Brussels households and their evolving lifestyles. garden

street

private gardens free-standing building

10 –15 m

Comparison with the referential type allows us to chart a new genealogy of housing forms for Brussels. Based on spatial qualities rather than chronology, it provides an indication of why housing choices were made at various times: the reasons could be political, economic, soci­ etal, or technical. The alteration of the basement lightwell to accommodate central garages with the arrival of cars and the disappearance of domestic servants; the recurring trend for living close to nature, whether individually in villas or collectively in garden cities; the possibilities introduced by the combined use of steel and glass, and their ­effect on housing layouts; the alternating housing ­policies sometimes advocating collectiveness, sometimes promoting individual homeownership; the in­­fluence of new technologies such as elevators, reinforced concrete, or prefabrication; the ­middle-­class reluctance to live in apartments; the modification of household configurations and wayspolyvalent ofrooms living, etc., are all ex­ amples of these transformations. These changes generated new forms of living and produced an intense and ­diverse city. This genealogy also sheds light on how particular ideologies such as modernism or classicism were embodied in a specific environment. While classicism affected housing only from a stylistic point of view without modifying its standard “DNA”, modernism brought radical change, disstreet

row housing

An Original Housing Genealogy

10 –15 m

private gardens

polyvalent rooms

street

row housing

10 –15 m

private gardens

private gardens polyvalent 43  Eloy, Marc et al. Influence de la législation sur les façades bruxelloises. Brussels, C.A.R.A./C.F.C., 1985. garden

15 m

rooms

street

row housing

= mutliple households

114

Palaces made of houses Cité Fontainas, pp. 134–135

115

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

116

Urban villas on the outskirts of the 19th-century city Villa Empain, pp. 180–181 Palais Stoclet, pp. 154–155

117

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

118

Early collective public housing at the turn of the 20th century Cité Reine Astrid, pp. 156–157 Rodenbach 14–35, pp. 150–151

119

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

120

Art Nouveau reinventing the row house Hôtel Tassel, pp. 144–145 Maison Strauven, pp. 78–79

121

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

122

Blending city and nature in the 1920s garden cities Le Logis-Floréal, pp. 158–161 Kapelleveld, pp. 170–173

123

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

124

Private collective housing introducing multi-storey cityscapes Résidence Palace, pp. 174–175 Les Pavillons Français, pp. 190–191

125

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

126

Individual modernist housing in the interwar period Hôtel Wolfers, pp. 176–177 Maison de Verre, pp. 192–193

127

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

128

Collective modernist buildings after the Second World War Brusilia, pp. 230–231 Ieder Zijn Huis, pp. 208–209

129

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

130

Post-modernist housing and the rejection of modernism after 1968 La Mémé, pp. 232–233 Les Venelles, pp. 234–235

131

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   II

Housing Atlas II 25. Cité Fontainas 26. Cité de Dilbeek 27. Cité Louvain 28. De Brouckère 33–35 29. Familistère Godin 30. Hôtel Tassel 31. Villa Bloemenwerf 32. Marconi 32 33. Rodenbach 14–35 34. Cité de l’Olivier 35. Palais Stoclet 36. Cité Reine Astrid 37. Le Logis-Floréal 38. Saint-Michel 97 39. Cité Moderne 40. Kappelleveld 41. Résidence Palace 42. Hôtel Wolfers 43. Le Nouveau Bruxelles 44. Villa Empain 45. Palais de la Folle Chanson 46. Cité Melckmans 47. Cité Van Hemelrijck 48. Broqueville 1–4 49. Les Pavillons Français 50. Maison de Verre 51. Résidence Léopold 52. Résidence de la Cambre 53. Churchill 126 54. De Roovere 14–16 55. Cité Modèle 3 56. Cité Modèle 6 57. Ieder Zijn Huis 58. Maison Volckrick 59. Maison Verhaegen 60. Villas Parc Albert I 61. Centre International Rogier 62. Van Overbeke 243 63. La Magnanerie 64. Europa II 65. Peterbos 6 66. Résidence Parc Albert I 67. Brusilia 68. La Mémé 69. Les Venelles 70. Laeken 95–121

Landmarks A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L.

Brussels Canal National Basilica of the Sacred Heart Atomium Palace of Laeken Brussels-South railway station Palace of Justice of Brussels Brussels Town Hall Cathedral of St. Michael and St. Gudula Royal Palace of Brussels European Parliament Cinquantenaire Arcade and Parc du Cinquantenaire Bois de la Cambre and Sonian Forest

HOUSING ATL AS   II

43

55 C

56

D

29

60 62

39

66

B

67 57 61 70

47 26

34

28

54

68

27

H

G

49

I

51

65 F

E

25

40

K

41 J

48

59

36

35 38

69

30 64

46

32

A

33

42 50

45

52

53 63 44 37

31

L

58

134

25  Cité Fontainas COMPLETION: 1867 ARCHITECT: Antoine Trappeniers, Henri Beyaert ADDR ESS: Fontainashof 1–8 cité Fontainas, 1060 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 32 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 134 m2 + garden 143 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced houses

This monumental neoclassical building is located close to the Hal Gate (see also pp. 114–115). It is surrounded by gardens closed off by wrought-iron fences. The wide entrance is flanked by two imposing carved blue-limestone pedestals bearing vases. The building was inspired by the English crescents, accommodating multiple dwellings behind a monumental façade. The housing estate comprises 16 houses, originally comprising 32 dwellings. They

were intended for Brussels’ retired teachers. Each house is divided into two longitudinal bays, the ­narrower of which contains the staircase and a ­toilet; the wider bay has two adjoining rooms. The two-storey façade is topped by a slate roof punctuated by eight dormer windows. This façade is marked by three pavilions: one in the centre, the other two at the ends. Each pavilion features engaged columns on the first floor supporting an entablature. It is topped by a pediment surrounded by a balustrade. The central pediment shows a bas-relief representing André-­Napoléon Fontainas (1807–1863), mayor of the city of Brussels, between two allegorical figures. The front façade is made of light-coloured stone, while the rear is ­plastered. Between the pavilions, the evenly spaced windows are interrupted every two bays by the ­entrance doors to the houses.

Façade 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

135

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

136

26  Cité de Dilbeek COMPLETION: 1870 ARCHITECT: Unknown ADDR ESS: Dilbeekstraat 1–66 rue de Dilbeek, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 44 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 62 m2 + garden 118 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached houses

This group of houses was one of the first social-­ housing projects in Brussels. It was built by the ­Société anonyme des Habitations ouvrières dans l’Agglomération bruxelloise (SAHAB). The houses are arranged on either side of the Rue de Dilbeek, and are supplemented by a building used as a stable and workshop shared by all the inhabitants. The

Cross section 1:500

estate consists of eleven houses (44 dwellings) and was inspired by the carrés mulhousiens designed by Emile Muller and presented at the 1855 London Universal Exhibition. Every house is divided into four dwellings, each with a private garden. This grouping of four dwellings under the same roof ­allows for valuable savings in terms of masonry, roof, cisterns, and sewerage provision. The dwellings are accessed by paved footpaths through the gardens. The layout is very efficient, featuring a steep staircase along the party wall and one or two rooms per floor. Outside toilets are found in an ­exterior extension. The façades are made of brick, now painted yellow. They are embellished with blue-limestone sills, and wooden shutters for the ground-floor windows. The roofs are covered with tiles. The SAHAB had built a similar complex, the Cité de Linthout, in Woluwe (1869).

Façade 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

137

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

138

27  Cité Louvain COMPLETION: 1875 ARCHITECT: Gédéon Bordiau ADDR ESS: Ringsteekstraat – rue du Carrousel, Paviastraat – rue de Pavie, Keizer Karelstraat – rue Charles Quint, Leuvensesteenweg – chaussée de Louvain, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 166 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 50 m2 + terrace 3 m2, garden 95 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment buildings

This workers’ housing estate was designed in 1875 in the north-eastern part of the city, following the creation of the Rue du Carrousel. Designed for the Société anonyme des Habitations ouvrières dans l’Agglomération bruxelloise (SAHAB), the project occupies an entire city block. It is composed of 22 houses for a total of, originally, 166 dwellings.

The project was one of the first large-scale social-­ housing complexes in Brussels. It was intended to accommodate the families who were evicted at the end of the 19th century following the complete ­restructuring of the Notre-Dame-aux-Neiges neighbourhood, located in the centre of Brussels at the back of the Federal Parliament building. With the exception of the corner buildings, which house commercial spaces on the ground floor, the dwellings feature a repetitive plan. Each building has a central 2-m-wide entrance, flanked by one apartment on either side. Each dwelling has two rooms measuring 4 m by 4 m and a balcony with an outdoor toilet. The façades are sober, with regular rectangular windows. Built in brick, they are plastered in white and highlighted by a few blue-limestone elements such as the sub-basements, stoops, thresholds, and lintels. Although the project was built at once as a whole, it generates a “crenelated” streetscape as the buildings alternate between three and four levels.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

139

Façade 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

140

28  De Brouckère 33–35 COMPLETION: 1876 ARCHITECT: Gédéon Bordiau ADDR ESS: De Brouckèreplein 33–35 place de Brouckère, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 10 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 231 m2 (400 m2 on the second floor) + terrace 10 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This building dates from the creation of Brussels’ central boulevards (1865–1880). It is located on a large plot of 22 m by 32 m. Behind a Haussmann-­ inspired façade, several dwelling types could originally be found. On the ground floor, three shops are connected to their first-floor ­accommodations by spiral staircases. On either side, two carriage doors open onto passageways leading to a courtyard. The

entrances are found on these passageways, with two monumental staircases and two service stair. The second floor accommodates the most luxurious apartment, intended for a wealthy family, with the living areas and the master bedroom ­occupying the entire 400 m2 floor. The upper floors have two dwellings per floor. The six-storey-high façade is richly decorated with white and blue limestone. The centre of the building features four ­columns supporting a continuous balcony with stone balustrades on the second floor. These columns continue through two levels. They are extended by pilasters bearing the cornice, surmounted by a balcony with an ­ironwork railing. The mansard roof and an imposing dormer window are topped by a sculpture representing Progress between Abundance and Peace. In the 1920s, the building was annexed to the Metropole Hotel.

Façade 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

141

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

142

29  Familistère Godin COMPLETION: 1888 ARCHITECT: Jean-Baptiste André Godin ADDR ESS: Werkhuizenkaai 155–158 quai des ­Usines, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 72 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 70 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

After building the renown Familistère of Guise between 1858 and 1883, Godin built another – smaller – apartment building in Brussels, by the canal, at the end of the 19th century. On a four-hectare site, the project consisted of a cast-iron stove factory, production halls, caretaker’s dwelling, offices, a showroom for the factory’s products, and a collect­ ive housing building. This building features a ­rectangular plan with an inner courtyard covered by a glass roof. At the corners of the building there

are two large communal stairwells and shared t­ oilets. The staircases lead to a perimeter gallery on each floor, which serves 72 dwellings of two, four, and five rooms. After a small hallway, the standard dwellings include two or three rooms of identical size, opening either onto the inner courtyard or the outside. These main rooms are complemented by two smaller service rooms. The entire building rests on large vaulted cellars. The attic is served by a peripheral corridor connected to the staircases. The four-storey ­building is made of red bricks under a continuous tiled gable roof. It has pilasters at its corners and a central projecting bay on the canal side where the entrance is located. A blue-limestone base supports the building. Today, only the housing building remains, as the stove-production structures were demolished to make way for a shopping centre.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

143

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

144

30  Hôtel Tassel COMPLETION: 1894 ARCHITECT: Victor Horta ADDR ESS: Paul Emile Jansonstraat 6 rue Paul Emile Janson, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 619 m2 + garden 50 m2, terrace 2 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This mansion (see also p. 120), built for the scientist and professor Emile Tassel, synthesises Victor ­Horta’s various ­innovations. Set on a plot of 8 m by 27 m, its plan features a radical shift from the traditional row houses that accommodate three rooms in a row. Here, the dwelling consists of two main volumes with a double skylight in between. The two buildings are connected by walkways on

the upper floors. The building on the street side houses the reception and work rooms, while that at the rear accommodates more intimate functions and domestic service. This part also has a service staircase. The whole plan is organised around a ­central axis, leading from the front door to the ­centre of the rear bay of the house. All the spaces are richly decorated with built-in furniture, stained glass, wall decorations, lighting, and furniture ­designed by Horta and various artists. The façade of the building is integrated into a residential street, with houses mostly built in the 19th century. This four-storey elevation is made of white stone with some blue-limestone elements. The façade is marked by a central two-storey bow-window above the entrance door. The bow window apertures ­become increasingly large as the floors go up, while the bays on either side become smaller. The treatment of the stonework and ironwork is particularly elaborate, with typical Art Nouveau motifs.

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Mezzanine floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

145

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

146

31  Villa Bloemenwerf COMPLETION: 1895 ARCHITECT: Henry Van de Velde ADDR ESS: Vanderaeylaan 102 avenue Vanderaey, 1180 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 794 m2 + garden 2610 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Detached house

This villa was Henry Van de Velde’s first architec­ tural work. It was both his personal residence and his studio. It is situated between two streets on a large wooded, sloping plot of land. The house is set in the middle of a garden designed by Van de Velde’s wife, Maria Sèthe. The building features an irregular pentagonal plan on two levels. It is organised

around a central skylight that serves all the rooms, sometimes through little hallways for the more private rooms. The house is organised along a slightly oblique axis leading from the entrance to the studio. To its right is a dining room and the kitchen areas, while to its left are two bedrooms and a bathroom. The studio is the largest room of the house, with a ceiling that reaches to the roof. The first floor is organised around a gallery surrounding the skylight which serves four bedrooms. Every space is decorated with colourful wallpaper and integrated furniture. The villa’s façade evokes an English cottage. Covered in white-rendered brick, it has three slatted gables with broken lines and a large canopy over the entrance door, which is preceded by a few steps and two sculpted lions. The latticed bays are fitted with wooden shutters.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

147

Cross section 1:500

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

148

32  Marconi 32 COMPLETION: 1901 ARCHITECT: Léon Govaerts ADDR ESS: Marconistraat 32 rue Marconi, 1190 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 8 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 87 m2 + terraces 8 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This social-housing apartment building is located in Forest commune on a large – 17 m – plot angled at 60 degrees to the street. The interior partitioning of the building is organised in relation to the geometry of the plot, with four parallel bays, two 4 m wide on the sides and two 3.5 m wide in the middle.

Façade 1:500

In the centre of the building, a monumental entrance porch closed by a wrought-iron gate leads to an exterior hall, followed by a few steps that lead to an interior hall serving a stairwell. The staircase serves eight apartments on four levels. The geom­ etry of the apartments, at an angle to the street, ­results in small triangular terraces on the street side. Each dwelling has a large entrance hall and two bedrooms. At the rear, there is a kitchen, a laundry room, and a toilet opening onto a terrace. The building has four levels under a flat roof. The façade is made of cement and grey concrete on a blue-­ limestone base and is topped by a high wooden cornice. On the ground floor, the entrance porch is particularly elaborate, with two pilasters and side windows with curved edges.

Cross section 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

149

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

150

33  Rodenbach 14–35 COMPLETION: 1903 ARCHITECT: Charles De Quéker, Alphonse

Hannaert ADDR ESS: Rodenbachstraat 14–22, 27–35 rue Rodenbach, 1190 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 64 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 68 m2 + terrace 9 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

Located in Forest commune, this social-housing complex (see also p. 119) features two apartment buildings on either side of the Rue Rodenbach. On the odd-numbered side, two houses are arranged on either side of the blocks of flats. The street is characterised by the detached volumes of the stairwells, three on the odd-numbered side, five on the other side. These five-level-high volumes are

aligned with the pavement and were originally topped with peaked roofs, which were destroyed in 1929. The buildings ­accommodating the dwellings themselves are set back 4 m and separated from the street by a small garden enclosed by an iron gate. The stairwells lead to two apartments per floor on four levels. Each apartment has a loggia lined with wrought-iron ­railings facing the street. Back-to-back external toilets separate two successive loggias. They are located in semi-circular turrets with loopholes. The apartments have a kitchen and three ­similarly sized rooms organised around a square hall. The hall is angled 45 degrees. The basement accommodates individual cellars and a common laundry room opening onto a courtyard at garden level. The four-level-high façades are made of ­yellow bricks, enhanced by blue-limestone and redbrick elements. The whole building is covered with a red-tiled roof.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

151

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

152

34  Cité de l’Olivier COMPLETION: 1905 ARCHITECT: Henri Jacobs ADDR ESS: L’Olivierstraat 16–44 rue de l’Olivier, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 50 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 61 m2 + terraces 5 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This workers’ housing estate was built on the site of two former workers’ housing cul-de-sacs, the impasses Dever and Gossey, which were destroyed in 1900. The project is organised around a 10 m by 40 m courtyard bordered by two buildings on the street side and one inside the block. This courtyard originally accommodated a large circular basin with

a water fountain. The five-storey-high buildings consist of a single floor plan repeated several times on each floor: a central staircase that serves two apartments on either side. Each dwelling consists of three identical 14 m2 rooms and a kitchen. An outdoor toilet is located on the terrace overlooking the courtyard. On the street side, the ground-floor units are different as they accommodate four ­commercial spaces linked to the dwellings. In the rear building, each ground-floor apartment has a small private courtyard. The façades are made of red brick, ­enhanced with sgraffito, blue and white stone, and rubble for the base. The flat roofs were originally bordered by a wrought-iron railing with latticework. The rounded courtyard balconies are fitted with wrought-iron railings. On the street front, the staircases feature three-storey-high avantcorps, windows with colonnettes, and sgraffito.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

153

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

154

35  Palais Stoclet COMPLETION: 1911 ARCHITECT: Josef Hoffmann ADDR ESS: Tervurenlaan 279–281 avenue de ­Tervueren, 1150 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 2080 m2 + terrace 215 m2, garden 6630 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Detached house

This Art Deco mansion (see also p. 117) is set in a large property, closed off from Tervueren Avenue by a fence between blue-limestone pillars. The entrance is marked by a canopy above the pavement leading into a gallery that opens onto a vestibule. To its right is a large wing of service rooms with a kitchen, pantry, laundry room, servants’ quarters, and ­garages. To the left, a double-height hall serves three main rooms: a large music room and two

rooms ­towards the garden: a smoking room and a dining room. A smaller living room is located on the street side. On the first floor, a gallery around the hall serves all the rooms. To the east, the master bedroom and its terrace are located above the music room. It is supplemented by a dressing room and a large bathroom on the garden side. The floor also accommodates bedrooms and bathrooms for the children and a governess. The attic houses the ­servants’ quarters. The project is a total work of art as the spaces are inseparable from the interior ­decoration realised by artists such as Gustav Klimt, Fernand Khnopff, and Leopold Forstner, while the furniture, chandeliers, and silverware were designed by the architect. The exterior spaces are ­designed around water features, pergolas, hornbeam and yew trees, etc. The sober Carrara marble façades are pierced by white latticed windows surrounded by bronze strips and topped by copper roofs. On the west side of the building, a small tower is topped by a sculpture by Franz Metzner.

Unit plan 1:200 0

10 m

155

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

156

36  Cité Reine Astrid COMPLETION: 1915 ARCHITECT: Émile Hellemans ADDR ESS: Blaesstraat 174–198 rue Blaes, Goudsmedenstraat – rue des Orfèvres, Borduurdersstraat – rue des Brodeurs, Kuipersstraat – rue des Tonneliers, Schoorsteenvegersstraat – rue des Ramoneurs, Stoelenmakersstraat – rue des Chaisiers, Timmerliedenstraat –  rue des Charpentiers, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 272 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 66 m2 + terraces 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

Located in the Marolles neighbourhood between Rue Haute and Rue Blaes, this social-housing c­ omplex (see also p. 118) replaced a block of a dozen cul-­desacs in appalling condition. The project’s ambition was therefore to provide the inhabitants with de-

cent living conditions and modern comforts such as r­ unning water and private toilets. The project features seven parallel slabs, oriented north–south and separated by pedestrian alleys, which are connected perpendicularly by passages under arcades. The 1.5 m difference between two successive buildings is used to position cellars that open to the west. Apart from the building on Rue Blaes, which has commercial spaces on the ground floor, the slabs consist of multiple identical units. Each unit features a central staircase flanked by an apartment on either side. The dwellings offer between one and four rooms, completed by a kitchen. They all have two terraces: one running the full width of the apartment on the east side, another leading to an outdoor toilet and a rubbish chute on the west side. The four-storey-high façades feature a polychromatic play of red, yellow, and white bricks. Blue limestone is used for the base, the sills, and the corners of the windows, while ironwork is found in the terraces and their railings. The roofs of the buildings are flat.

Unit plan 1:100

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

157

0

25 m

158

37  Le Logis-Floréal

Master plan 1:3000

HOUSING ATL AS   II

159

0

150 m

160

37  Le Logis-Floréal COMPLETION: 1922 ARCHITECT: Jean-Jules Eggerickx, Louis Van der

Swaelmen ADDR ESS: Around the Drie Lindenplein – rondpoint des Trois-Tilleuls and the Aartshertogenlaan – avenue des Archiducs, 1170 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 863 built before 1932 (657 houses and 206 apartments), 1739 today UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 126 m2 + garden 396 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached houses – Apartment buildings

Once lost in the countryside, this 80-hectare garden city designed for two cooperatives is now integrated into the urban fabric (see also p. 122). Its composition is based on the natural topography and features two landmarks at its summits: the Trois-­ Tilleuls roundabout and the high building of the Fer à Cheval, which served as a water reservoir. Verdant roads complemented by a pedestrian network

c­ onverge on these centres. Nature is the project’s organic link, with several hectares of lawns, Japanese cherry trees, hedges, and orchards. Each dwelling has the modern comforts of the time: outdoor toilets, running water, electricity, gas, and sewerage. The single-family home is at the heart of the design, despite a few apartment buildings. The houses are rarely free-standing, but treated in groups of at least 2 to more than 20. Three main types of houses can be found: the one-storey house for one dwelling, the bungalow and the two-storey house for two dwellings. ­Compared with the bourgeois houses of the time, the ceiling heights are lower, at around 2.6 m. For economic reasons, many of the elements are standardised and repeated in a serial manner. The façades recall picturesque English ­cottages, with variations in roofs, windows, dormer shapes, doors, shutters, canopies, and woodwork colour. At the outset, the initial garden city project was not limited by any natural boundaries. After the Second World War, more land was bought and the development was expanded further.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

161

Façade 1:500

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Cross section 1:500

First floor 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

162

38  Saint-Michel 97 COMPLETION: 1923 ARCHITECT: Julien De Ridder ADDR ESS: Sint-Michielslaan 97 boulevard Saint-Michel, 1040 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 382 m2 + terrace 20 m2, ­garden 197 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

Located on the ring of boulevards designed by ­Victor Besme in the second half of the 19th century, this house occupies a 7 m by 50 m plot (see also p. 100). Like its neighbours, it includes a 10 m setback from the sidewalk. This setback allows an access ramp to a garage in the basement, which also accommodates a laundry room. Behind the building on the

basement level is a courtyard followed by a long garden. The entrance to the house runs parallel to the ­garage ramp. After a few steps, a loggia leads into a hallway with a toilet and access to the ­staircase. Three rooms in a row occupy the parallel bay: a lounge and two dining rooms. On the upper floors, the bedrooms are located in the wide bay – one of them occupying the entire width of the house on the boulevard side. The bathroom is placed behind the staircase. A dumbwaiter connects all floors to the laundry room in the cellar and the drying room in the attic. The façade is composed of red brick, with blue limestone for the first two levels as well as the window frames. A two-­ storey bay-window ­occupies the first and second floors, topped by a dormer window of the same shape in the roof. On the ground floor, the bay-window widens and gives way to the entrance loggia next to the living-room windows.

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

First and second floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

163

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

164

39  Cité Moderne

Master plan 1:3000

HOUSING ATL AS   II

165

0

150 m

166

39  Cité Moderne COMPLETION: 1925 ARCHITECT: Victor Bourgeois ADDR ESS: around Medewerkers plein – place des Coopérateurs, 1082 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 274 (190 houses and 84 apartments) UNIT FLOOR AR EA: Apartment 47 m2 + terrace 4 m2 (pp. 166–167) /// Semi-detached house 118 m2 + garden 173 m2 (pp. 168–169) HOUSING T YPE: Apartment buildings (pp. 166–167) /// Semi-detached house (pp. 168–169)

The Cité Moderne was Victor Bourgeois’ first pro­ ject, when he was 25. It was intended for a housing cooperative founded by the architect and his brother. The initial plan encompasses 500 dwellings ­complemented by various public facilities, such as collective central heating and baths. The buildings

are organised according to a clear hierarchy reflected in the road structure, with small squares and public gardens. A large green area was imagined around the modernist project to clearly distinguish it from the traditional city. Unfortunately, the whole programme could not be realised (just over half of the planned dwellings were built). Twenty-­ two different types of housing were planned for the city, of which only fifteen were implemented. At the centre of the composition, the Place des Coopérateurs includes the most emblematic typologies. On its long sides, the houses are turned at a 45-degree angle, allowing each house to have four orientations. At the back, an apartment building features two simplexes on top of two duplexes linked to the commercial spaces on the ground floor. Once again, the angled design multiplies the ­dwellings’ ­orientations. The volumes are resolutely modernist, with slick, white façades on grey-painted bases ­under flat roofs. Their monochrome aspect is broken by elements such as brick window sills and coloured stained-glass windows.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

167

Cross section 1:500

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

168

39  Cité Moderne

Façade 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

169

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

170

40 Kapelleveld

Master plan 1:3000

HOUSING ATL AS   II

171

0

150 m

172

40 Kapelleveld COMPLETION: 1926 ARCHITECT: Louis Van der Swaelmen, Huibrecht

Hoste ADDR ESS: Wezembeeklaan – avenue de ­ ezembeek, Grensstraat – rue de la Limite, W ­Perspectieflaan – avenue de la Perspective, ­Ideaallaan – avenue de l’Idéal, 1200 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 400 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 138 m2 + garden 576 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached houses

The Kapelleveld garden city (see also p. 123) was built for a housing cooperative on a large, virgin plateau. Its layout, designed by Louis Van der Swaelmen, respects the natural topography by ­organising the project around three large avenues laid out in a fan shape, intersected by secondary perpendicular roads. The buildings are surrounded

by generous green spaces, both private and public, such as squares, playgrounds, and tree-lined streets. Housing is complemented by various services (party hall, library, school, church, sports fields, shops, and the cooperative’s offices). There was even a railway station. The houses, designed by four different architects, alternate between a modernist (Huibrecht Hoste and Paul Rubbers) and a regionalist style ­(Antoine Pompe and Jean-François Hoeben). There were 400 dwellings of 19 different types, most of which were semi-detached in groups of two or four. Hoste’s semi-detached houses have a fluid plan. An entrance hall serves three interconnected rooms on the ground floor, which is extended into the garden by a covered courtyard and a storage building. On the first floor, there are three bedrooms and a small attic as well as a bathroom on the landing. Their volumes are simple and uncluttered, with slick white or grey façades under flat roofs. After the war, the project was extended by Paul Posno and the Ausia group.

Façade 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

173

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

174

41  Résidence Palace COMPLETION: 1927 ARCHITECT: Michel Polak ADDR ESS: Wetstraat 155 rue de la Loi, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 180 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 326 m2 + terrace 10 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

Initiated by the developer Lucien Kaisin, this imposing complex is set between the Rue de la Loi and the Chaussée d’Etterbeek (see also p. 124). The ambition was to ­create a luxury building for the upper classes following the shortage of domestic staff. The project is organised around a central street that serves an entrance courtyard where a blue mosaic fountain is installed. Projected as a city within the city, it ­offers an incredible range of services: two restaurants, a theatre, meeting rooms, a swimming

pool with Turkish bath, fencing and gym rooms, tennis courts, a bank, and a central post office. The 180 dwellings of varying sizes are equipped with the most modern comforts of the time: hot and cold water, electricity, central heating, lifts, etc. The apartments include the same programme as the 19th-century aristocratic mansions: separate circulation for masters and servants, extensive living rooms, smoking rooms, antechambers, servant quarters, etc. The family dwellings were to be supplemented by a hotel-style wing for bachelors, which was never built. The building façades are ­sober, with white stone, bas-reliefs, and wroughtiron elements. The interiors are richly ornamented, with a profusion of marble, ornate Art Deco ceilings, and mosaics. The building lost its residential function after the Second World War; it was bought by the Belgian state to be transformed into offices, and gradually incorporated into the European ­institutions, for which it now houses the Council and the press centre.

Façade 1:1000

Ground floor plan 1:1000 0

50 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

175

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

176

42  Hôtel Wolfers COMPLETION: 1929 ARCHITECT: Henry Van de Velde ADDR ESS: Alphonse Renardstraat 60 rue Alphonse Renard, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 772 m2 + garden 245 m2, ­terraces 25 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached house

This corner house (see also p. 126), built for the master goldsmith and jeweller Raymond Wolfers, was erected on a ­funnel-shape plot of land. The building is extended by a garden designed by the landscape architect Lucien Boucher. It houses a double garage and it is closed off from the street by a brick wall. The house does not have a direct door to the street. It is accessed through a metal gate in

Façade 1:500

the garden wall that leads to an access path. The entrance to the house is located at the back of the plot under a canopy. It initiates a longitudinal ­service bay parallel to the party wall, which accommodates the circulation spaces including a main and a service staircase. On the street side, there is a row of three rooms: a dining room, a living room, and a music room. On the first floor there are three bedrooms, a boudoir, and two bathrooms as well as a terrace on the garden side. On the second floor there are four bedrooms, a gym, and a second ­terrace. The three-storey building under flat roofs offers a play of recessed volumes. The façades are made of light-brown bricks on a blue-limestone base. They are ornamented with wall-finishing black-glazed brick as well as green wooden shutters and canopies. Today, the residence is home to the artist Richard Venlet who has decided to let the building age without intervention.

Cross section 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

177

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

178

43  Le Nouveau ­Bruxelles COMPLETION: 1930 (unbuilt project) ARCHITECT: Victor Bourgeois ADDR ESS: Northern Laeken NUMBER OF UNITS: 25,000 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 81 m2 + terrace 10 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This urban plan was presented by Victor Bourgeois at the third CIAM, hosted in Brussels in 1930. The project shows a new neighbourhood to the north of Brussels, on the western bank of the canal. The 25,000-dwelling development is organised around the four quadrants of the “functional city”: circulation, leisure, work, and housing. The streets are

drawn according to a hierarchical grid, assigning a specific place to cars and pedestrians. Leisure activities are at the heart of the plan, in the shorter branch of a central cross-shaped green zone. Work is not directly specified in the plan but was intended to occur along the canal. Finally, housing is located in four zones. It is accommodated in long ten-storey buildings, free-standing in green spaces in the immediate vicinity of services such as kindergartens, playgrounds, and parking lots. The first two floors are intended for commercial use. On the upper floors, dwellings are organised in duplexes accessible on every other floor by a wide interior corridor in the middle of the buildings. Wide terr­ aces off the living spaces allow light to enter this collective circulation directly. All modern comforts are foreseen: kitchen equipment and bathrooms, but also a supply line for goods. Finally, sports facilities and sun decks are housed on the roofs.

Floor plan showing bedrooms 1:500

Circulation floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

179

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

180

44  Villa Empain COMPLETION: 1930 ARCHITECT: Michel Polak, Alfred Roth ADDR ESS: Franklin Rooseveltlaan 67 avenue ­Franklin Roosevelt, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 1530 m2 + terraces 317 m2, garden 3746 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Detached house

This Art Deco villa (see also p. 116), built for the wealthy baron Louis Empain, is situated between Franklin Roosevelt and Victoria Avenues, accessed by wrought-iron gates between blue-limestone posts. To the rear, outbuildings house stables, staff accommodation, and garages. In the middle of a garden, the main building relates directly to a large pool surrounded by a pergola. It is organised around a two-level square hall, topped by a sky-

light. On the garden side, it opens onto a large oblong space containing the ­living and dining rooms. To the right, there is a grand staircase that faces a second living room. The floor is completed by two offices on the street side and service areas: waiting room, cloakroom, pantry, and two secondary staircases. The first floor features a gallery on four ­columns that serves four bedrooms with private bathrooms. The second floor is recessed on all sides and accessed only by a service staircase. It houses the servants’ bedrooms and a solarium. The basement accommodates various service spaces: kitchen, boiler, and storage rooms. The interior materials are luxurious: marble, wrought iron, exotic wood, moulded ceilings, tapestries, and mirrors. On the outside, the entrance steps are topped by a brass canopy. The three-level façades are lined with ­polished granite, and surmounted by a copper roof. The window openings are bordered with gilded brass and their metal frames are finely profiled.

Unit plan 1:200

0

10 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

181

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

182

45  Palais de la Folle Chanson COMPLETION: 1931 ARCHITECT: Antoine Courtens ADDR ESS: Sterreplein 2 rond-point de l’Étoile, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 14 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 176 m2 + terrace 6 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This building is located on one of Brussels most interesting roundabouts, home to several Art Deco buildings (Residence Ernestine, Palais de la Cambre, and Palais du Congo). It owes its name to the ­Avenue de la Folle Chanson, commemorating the sculpture with the same name by Jef Lambeaux (1852–1908). The entrance to the building is located at the corner of the site, under an imposing

r­ otunda. A stunning vestibule leads to a naturally lit stairwell with two lifts. On top of a basement level with private cellars, the lower ground floor is occupied by garages, while the first floor houses two apartments and a caretaker’s lodge. The upper ­levels are occupied by two apartments per floor comprising a large hall, a living room, a dining room, a kitchen, four bedrooms, two bathrooms, and a terrace to the back. Each apartment has three orientations. The top floor is dedicated to the service staff and is slightly recessed to allow terraces. The upper part of the corner rotunda houses a collective room ­accessible to all the residents. The interior spaces are richly decorated, as can be seen in the entrance hall’s polychrome marble floors and walls, geometrically decorated ironwork, and light-box fixtures on the columns. The eight-level concrete elevation covered with washed terrazzo shows ­typical Art Deco mouldings. Four five-storey-high bay-windows are found on the two sides of the building, connected by the corner rotunda.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

183

Cross section 1:500

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Façade 1:500

Seventh floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Upper ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

184

46  Cité Melckmans COMPLETION: 1932 ARCHITECT: Fernand Brunfaut ADDR ESS: Mensenrechtenlaan 1–5 avenue des Droits de l’Homme, 1070 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 60 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 62 m2 + terrace 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This apartment building is a 1930s addition to the garden city of La Roue. On a triangular plot, the building is L-shaped. It has a continuous frontage on the main road, the Chaussée de Mons, and a ­patio that opens to the east between two street-­ facing building heads. The five accesses to the

building are through this courtyard or on the Avenue des Droits de l’Homme. All the dwellings have double orientation. Those located in the southern part of the building have a terrace on the southern side. These flats are organised around a living room, two bedrooms, and a kitchen. An external toilet is visible on the terrace. The building is five storeys high, with a semi-buried cellar level and a tiled ­gable roof. The stairwells are highlighted by the play of bricks and emphasised by large vertical bays throughout the height of the building. The façades are made of red bricks of different formats, with very long, thin bricks on the ground floor. The whole building is set on a blue-limestone base. The stone is omnipresent in the building at the level of the entablatures, thresholds, and the top floor, which is topped by wide wooden cornices.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

185

Cross section 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

186

47 Cité Van Hemelrijck COMPLETION: 1932 ARCHITECT: Joseph Diongre ADDR ESS: Onafhankelijkheidstraat 131 rue de l’Indépendance – Groeninghestraat 25 rue de Groeninghe, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 58 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 45 m2 + terrace 2 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This housing group is located on a plot of land set between Rue Groeninghe and Rue de l’Indépendance. Between the two streets, the project features a 9-m-wide pedestrian walkway onto which two buildings open. In the middle of the plot, a narrow construction containing a common staircase con-

nects the two buildings. On every floor, this leads to two galleries onto which all the apartments open. These dwellings have a similar layout with a living room on the gallery and a bedroom at the back. They are completed by a small kitchen-laundry room which opens onto a terrace with an exter­ ior toilet. Some apartments have an additional small bedroom on the side of the gallery. The five levels of the project have an identical configuration except for the ground floor, where the dwellings include a courtyard at the rear. The street-facing units have a different layout on the first two floors, featuring duplexes with a retail space on the lower level. The street and interior façades are in orange brick, with concrete elements. The galleries and the stairwell are in concrete with X-shaped railings. On the streets, the façades have two four-levelhigh bay-windows. The buildings are capped with flat roofs.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

187

Cross section 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

188

48  Broqueville 1–4 COMPLETION: 1932 ARCHITECT: Raymond Burgraeve ADDR ESS: de Broquevillelaan 1–4 avenue de Broqueville, 1150 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 12 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 158 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project, located in an affluent neighbourhood and intended for well-off residents, is set on two symmetrical triangular plots located on Brussels’ largest roundabout. It features two identical but mirrored buildings forming the entrance to the ­Avenue de Broqueville. The ground floor is occupied by two shops separated by the entrance hall.

Given the very narrow proportions of the plot (32 m long, and 7 m maximum width), the upper levels overhang the ground floor by almost 1 m. Each floor accommodates a single identical apartment. In the dwellings, every room opens directly onto the ­avenue. The common staircase with a lift is located against the party wall. It opens onto a wide hall that divides the apartment into two zones. Towards the roundabout, there is a dining room and a living room that extends into a rotunda. At the other end, there is a kitchen, two bedrooms, and a bathroom. The six-storey building is topped by an attic level and a flat roof. Its façades are in stone-like plaster. All the bays are fitted with ironwork railings with Art Deco motifs. The overhang of the floors is achieved by the ­addition of four bay-windows of different sizes and shapes. At the roundabout end, the rotunda is topped by a small dome.

Unit plan 1:200

0

10 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

189

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

190

49  Les Pavillons Français COMPLETION: 1934 ARCHITECT: Marcel Peeters ADDR ESS: Notelaarstraat 282–282b rue du Noyer, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 80 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 115 m2 + terrace 2 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This apartment building (see also p. 125) is set on a large 45 m by 80 m plot of land. It is built perpendicular to the street, parallel to an access alleyway and a low-walled terraced garden. The back of the plot is ­occupied by a small garage building. The main building is U-shaped, allowing a rear service courtyard accessible from the street via a carriageway. The building is accessed through three

­ ntrances on the alleyway. Each hall, flanked by a e caretaker’s lodge, leads to a stairwell with two lifts. The stand­ard floor features seven apartments, ranging from one to three bedrooms. They are ­organised around a large hall, parallel to the façade, serving the living rooms towards the garden and the sleeping rooms towards the courtyard. The ­central part of the building is three levels higher, with one apartment per floor. Various communal facilities are provided in the building such as a ­common kitchen and restaurant, servants’ rooms, meeting room, laundry room, and solarium. The concrete framework of the building is covered with black terrazzo on the first two levels and a light-­ coloured render on the upper floors, enhanced by elements of reconstituted stone, wrought iron, and wooden frames. The façades are punctuated by trapezoidal oriels supported by a wide cornice on the first floor. They are topped by a continuous balcony, extended by a ­veranda on the street side.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

191

Façade 1:500

Fourteenth floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

192

50  Maison de Verre COMPLETION: 1936 ARCHITECT: Paul-Amaury Michel ADDR ESS: Jules Lejeunestraat 69 rue Jules Lejeune, 1180 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 244 m2 + garden 56 m2, terraces 29 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached house

This architect’s private house (see also p. 127) is strongly inspired by Pierre Charreau’s glass house in Paris. It is situated on a traditional 6-m-wide plot, where it benefits from a very low neighbour on the south side, towards which the house has openings. The building is composed according to Le Corbusier’s Five Points of Architecture: construction on pilotis (here, only the south column), roof garden, horizontal windows, and free plan and façades. The ground floor is divided in two bays: one providing a ramp

leading to a basement garage, the other showing a carriageway leading to the garden and the entrance. It opens into a hall with sanitary facilities, the staircase, a kitchen, and a dumbwaiter. The first and second floors are treated as a duplex that opens to the street through a large double-height bay lined with a balcony. The first floor accommodates a dining room to the rear and a living room in the double height. On the second floor, there is a study on the mezzanine, separated by a movable partition from a bedroom and its adjoining bathroom. The third floor is divided equally between a solar­ ium on the street side and three small rooms: two bedrooms and an office. The interior is sober and decorated with materials such as terrazzo and black-­and-­white mosaics. The white façades are perforated with large rectangular bays: these are entirely open in the solarium; alternating clear glass panels and glass bricks on the street façade; and showing an entire glass-brick façade to the back, interrupted on each floor by a horizontal band of clear glass.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

193

Façade 1:500

Cross-section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

194

51  Résidence Léopold COMPLETION: 1937 ARCHITECT: Jean-Jules Eggerickx, Raphaël Ver-

wilghen ADDR ESS: de Meeûssquare 22–22b square de Meeûs, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 62 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 94 m2 + terrace 5 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

The building stands on the east side of de Meeus Square in the Léopold district. Together with its twin, the Résidence Albert, they create a gateway to the Rue du Luxembourg. The two luxury buildings have an L-shaped plan facing each other, each consisting of an eight-storey base volume above which rises a seven-storey tower, unobstructed on its four façades. Each building has three entrances:

two for the eight-storey volume and one for the tower. The building was innovative in its construction and offered unparalleled comfort for its time. In addition to cellars and private garages, the ­basement includes a central steam-heating system and a transformer cabin to supply electricity to the entire building. On each level, the concrete frame structure is designed to allow as much freedom as pos­sible in terms of layout. The vertical circulations serve two apartments per floor, which are organised into living rooms on the square side, halls and bathrooms in the central part, and bedrooms and kitchen to the rear. They are complemented by ­terraces at the front and rear. The façades of the buildings show a strong horizontal composition, reinforced by the elongated windows and balconies. The latter, placed at the corners of the towers, make them lighter. The façade is covered with ­vibrated concrete slabs made of white cement and quartz.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

195

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

196

52  Résidence de la Cambre COMPLETION: 1939 ARCHITECT: Marcel Peeters ADDR ESS: Generaal Jacqueslaan 20–20b boulevard Géneral Jacques, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 44 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 93 m2 + 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This apartment building is located on the 19th-century ring of boulevards designed by Victor Besme. Taking advantage of the open space offered by the boulevard’s great width, the block is an 18-level-­ high tower, one of the first in Brussels. The building is aligned with the houses on the boulevard, and set back behind two flowerbeds and a low metal

gate. It has a frontal pedestrian access and a car drive-through. The wide axial entrance hall opens onto two vertical cores that serve the floors. On the ground floor, there is a caretaker’s apartment, maid’s rooms, and a passage leading to nine gar­ ages at the rear of the plot. The building’s volume ­features successive steps, offering three dwellings per floor from the 1st to the 12th floor, two on the 13th and 14th floors and one apartment per floor for the 15th to 17th floors. Explicitly inspired by North American Art Deco skyscrapers, the concrete-framed building is adorned with orange bricks and vertical bands of white stone, with sculpted pinnacles at the level of the vertical recesses. Its façades are pierced by identical windows, each with three bays. The ground floor and the lateral bays of the first three floors are clad in blue limestone. The recessed ground floor, with a granite-framed door, is topped by a flat roof.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

197

Fifteenth floor plan 1:500

Seventh floor plan 1:500

Façade 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

198

53  Churchill 126 COMPLETION: 1949 ARCHITECT: Jean-Florian Collin (Etrimo) ADDR ESS: Winston Churchilllaan 126 avenue ­Winston Churchill, 1180 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 14 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 134 m2 + terrace 3 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This apartment building is located on the 19th-century ring of boulevards designed by Victor Besme. It was erected by Etrimo, one of the largest housing developers in Brussels, and is typical of the group’s interwar production: modernist architecture tinged with classicism. Located on a large 23 m by 77 m plot, the building is set back from the avenue. ­Initially, a tennis court and a swimming pool were

planned for the back of the plot. The building accommodates two apartments per floor. The stand­ ard floors are divided into three longitudinal bays parallel to the street: the first bay includes the living areas and a bedroom, the central one contains the halls and bathrooms, and the rear one includes the bedrooms and kitchens. While bay-windows extend the living rooms on the avenue side, ter­races are located at the rear in the extension of the ­kitchens. The ground floor houses a caretaker’s apartment and storage spaces for inhabitants. It also includes a passageway leading to the garages located in the interior of the block. The top floor features a setback, which allows for a continuous terrace on the avenue. The nine-storey building has a symmetrical façade composed of reconstituted white stone (ground floor, window sills, and ­c­entral body) on a blue-limestone sub-basement and red papesteen brick.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

199

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Seventh floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

200

54  De Roovere 14–16 COMPLETION: 1957 ARCHITECT: Henri Van Damme ADDR ESS: De Rooverelaan 14–16 avenue de ­Roovere, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 63 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 66 m2 + terraces 4 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This building is part of a social-housing complex located on the Avenue de Roovere opposite the Parc Marie-Josée in Molenbeek. All the buildings are set back from the street and their plots extend as far as the railway tracks, against which garages can be found. The building has two wide entrances that surround a caretaker’s apartment in the centre. The shared vestibules are very large and receive

light from both façades. These entrances serve three vertical cores that, in turn, serve two apartments per floor. The apartments are all similar, with pass-through living spaces (a living room to the front and a kitchen to the rear) and two bedrooms. Given the narrowness of the building – 10 m – every room, including the bathrooms, has a window to the outside. Each unit has two outdoor spaces: a bal­ cony on the avenue side, adjoining that of the neighbouring apartment, and a terrace at the rear, in connection with the kitchen, the bathroom, and the toilet. The dwellings have roof-level storage spaces and drying rooms. The structure of this 12-storey-high building consists of concrete. The façades are made of prefabricated concrete cladding on a blue-stone plinth. Coloured glazed ceramic tiles enliven the balconies at the front, while large circular concrete canopies indicate the entrances.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

201

Roof floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

202

55  Cité Modèle

Master plan 1:3000

203

HOUSING ATL AS   II

0

150 m

204

55  Cité Modèle 3 COMPLETION: 1958 ARCHITECT: Renaat Braem, Victor Coolens, Jean Van Doosselaere, Raymond Stenier, Émile Parent, René Panis ADDR ESS: Modelwijksquare 3 square de la Cité Modèle, 1020 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 96 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 48 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

The Cité Modèle 3 in Laeken, built at the time of the 1958 Universal Exhibition, was designed to demonstrate Belgium’s modernity in terms of housing. To achieve this, six architects were brought together – two Flemings, two Walloons, and two from Brussels – to design an entire neighbourhood

based on the Athens Charter principles on a site of almost 17 hectares. Arranged on a rectangular grid, the buildings are free-standing in the middle of a large park. Within the estate, car and pedestrian traffic are separated. In addition, a series of collective ­facilities were planned, such as schools, shops, a community hall, playground, and chapel, allowing it to function in a self-sufficient manner. A square was built at the highest point of the settlement. It is bordered by three 20-storey-high towers standing on 6- to 8-m-high pilotis. Each tower is served by a vertical core at one end. On each floor, six flats are accessed from an exterior circulation gallery, with four one-­bedroom units bookended by two three-­bedroom units. Storage rooms for the dwellings are found on the first and top floors. There is a laundry and ­drying room adjacent to a roof terrace. The façades of the building are made of curtain walls between prefabricated-concrete vertical edges.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

205

Roof floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

206

56  Cité Modèle 6 COMPLETION: 1958 ARCHITECT: Renaat Braem, Victor Coolens, Jean Van Doosselaere, Raymond Stenier, Émile Parent, René Panis ADDR ESS: Amethiststraat 6 rue de l’Améthyste, 1020 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 46 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 86 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

The Cité Modèle in Laeken, a social-housing estate comprising almost 17 hectares, was started in 1956. The building are numbered 1–12, and more than ten architects contributed to the project, with the most recent additions dating to 2005. To the east of the Cité Modèle 3 in Laeken lies an elongated volume more than 300 m long, the Cité Modèle 6. The architects’ intention was to make the entire Cité Modèle

a self-sufficient project, and to create with this ­particular volume a real barrier to the “chaotic nature of the traditional city”. In its centre, a very long ramp divides the volume in two and provides a monumental pedestrian entrance to the Cité. The volume itself is composed of several modules. The one to the north of the pedestrian ramp is built on stilts, allowing car traffic to pass on the ground floor. Two floors above, at pedestrian level, a long, covered street runs along the west side of the building. It is complemented two and four storeys up by two exterior circulation galleries, served by vertical circulation cores at the ends of the building. The covered street and the first gallery serve three-bedroom duplex apartments. The upper gallery serves flats with only one very small bedroom, while simplex apartments can be found around the communal stairwells. Storage rooms for the dwellings are located on the first and top floors. The façades of the building are made of curtain walls between prefabricated-concrete vertical edges.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

207

Sixth floor plan 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

208

57  Ieder Zijn Huis COMPLETION: 1958 ARCHITECT: Willy Van der Meeren ADDR ESS: Cicerolaan 120–122 avenue Cicéron, 1140 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 107 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 87 m2 + terrace 5 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This free-standing high-rise slab (see also p. 129) of 14 storeys is located in Evere, on the northern outskirts of Brussels. Built for the social-housing company Ieder Zijn Huis (A Home for Everyone), it is one of the housing buildings that best represents the modernist ideals adopted in the post-war period. The ground floor consists of pilotis, clearing the level for public purposes. Using a concrete structure and prefabricated elements for the façades,

Willy Van der Meeren designed a very high (41 m high) and slender building (9 m wide). Every other floor, the circulation space is treated as a genuine public space throughout the building. It is very wide (more than 2 m) and features the same 30 cm by 30 cm concrete tiles as a standard Brussels ­sidewalk. The typical plan has a circulation gallery with three types of apartments: single-floor apartments and duplexes leading alternately to the floor above or the floor below. For each apartment type, the structure allows flexible arrangements with movable partitions and furniture. Due to the typological scheme, the stairwell consists of elegant three-storey-high landings where the entire height of the building is visible. Moreover, generous ­collective amenities are included in the project, such as common spaces on the ground floor, a ­theatre, a mortuary, a laundry room, an atelier, and a rooftop terrace. The façades of the building are made of prefabricated-concrete elements.

Cross section 1:500

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

209

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Roof floor plan 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

210

58  Maison Volckrick COMPLETION: 1958 ARCHITECT: Georges Volckrick ADDR ESS: Jagersveld 13 avenue Jagersveld, 1170 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 457 m2 + terraces 26 m2, ­garden 172 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached house

This house was the home and office of the architect Georges Volckrick. It is situated on a corner plot, which allows the building to have several orientations. Entrance is through a garden located on the street side. The vestibule leads to the right to the architect’s office, which is adjacent to a garage. This entire ground floor is one level lower than the rear garden. The black concrete staircase, located

to the left as you enter the house, leads to the ­ omestic areas of the dwelling, which are level with d the rear garden. On this floor, there is a kitchen and two large spaces – dining room and living room – ­articulated around an open fire. A long concrete ­balcony lines the front of the house, while a larger terrace lies between the garden and the dining room. On the second floor, there are four bedrooms and a bathroom, while a large attic is shown under the roof. The interior materials of the house are simple: bricks (painted in the domestic areas, and kept untouched in the studio), ceramic tiles, and grey concrete. The façades of the house are made of exposed washed concrete, red brick, and white render. Large wooden frames integrate storage elements, particularly in the architect’s office, while glass bricks bring light to the kitchens, bathrooms, and corridors. The roofs are made of natural slate.

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Third floor/attic plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

211

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

212

59  Maison Verhaegen COMPLETION: 1960 ARCHITECT: Willy Van der Meeren, Léon Palm ADDR ESS: Pater de Dekenstraat 38 rue Père de Deken, 1040 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 496 m2 + terrace 73 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached house

This corner house was built for a lawyer and his family. It is a V-shaped volume that follows the geom­ etry of the two adjacent streets and encloses a small courtyard that brings additional light into the heart of the building. On the ground floor, leaving a gar­ age to the left, the entrance opens onto a large hall serving two offices. The hall leads to a staircase with floating steps set into the side walls. The first

floor contains the family’s living quarters: a kitchen and dining room on the east side and a cloakroom and large living room in the west wing. Part of this space is double-height – allowing for a visual connection with the second floor, where the bedrooms are located. Organised around a central landing, there is a master bedroom and bathroom to the west and a children’s wing to the east. The latter is organised into four small bedrooms which extend via movable partitions into a large corridor-playroom. The third floor accommodates a central workroom with two adjacent bedrooms and a large terrace. As in many of his projects, the furniture was designed by the architect himself. The building ­features a concrete structure with various infills combining red and glass bricks and frame elements. The flat concrete roof is extended by a triangular canopy supported by a pillar adjoining a small garden on the corner of the plot.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

213

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

214

60  Villas Parc Albert I COMPLETION: 1960 ARCHITECT: Frans Draps (Etrimo) ADDR ESS: Tachtig Beukenlaan 1 avenue des ­Quatre-vingts Hêtres, 1083 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 242 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 332 m2 + terrace 30 m2, ­garden 252 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Semi-detached house

At the end of the Second World War, the Etrimo Group developed three types of housing projects in Brussels (mostly addressing a middle-class audience): bungalows, apartment buildings in a park, and villas. This project is an example of the lastnamed category. Built on the former estate of the Counts de Villegas, this complex accommodates 242 single-­family villas in a wooded environment. Organised around a local traffic loop road, the

­project offers a pragmatic reinterpretation of garden cities without the latter’s communal facilities and alleyways. Built at a time of exploding car ­ownership in the city, most of the houses are organised above a garage, coupled with an office and service spaces. Exterior steps lead to the main ­entrance, located on the raised ground floor. The vestibule leads to a very simple plan with a ­central staircase coupled with a fireplace. The kit­chen, ­living room, and dining room are organised around this central element. These living spaces are extended outward by a terrace and a garden. The first floor offers four bedrooms and a bathroom. The ­attics were designed to be able to ­accommodate additional bedrooms if needed. The units also ­include a 100 m2 garage/pantry (with a series of ­openings towards the north-east) that could be ­adjusted for living in. The façades combine white-­ rendered brick, rubble stone, and dark wood ­cladding. The sloping roofs are covered with artificial slate.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

215

Cross section 1:500

Second floor /attic plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

216

61 Centre ­International Rogier COMPLETION: 1961 DEMOLITION: 2001 ARCHITECT: Jacques Cuisinier, Serge Lebrun ADDR ESS: Karel Rogierplein 10–15 place Charles Rogier, 1210 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 120 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 57 m2 + terrace 11 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Multi-use apartment building

Also known as the Martini Tower after the bar it housed on its top floor, this building was undoubtedly one of the most emblematic examples of ­post-war modernism in Brussels. Located on Place Rogier, one of the main squares on the city’s inner ring road, the tower was built on the site of the former Gare du Nord, which was moved a few hundred

metres further north. The volume of the building developed in three stages: a two-storey-high gallery and a four-storey base topped by a 22-storey tower. With its eclectic programme, the more than 60,000 m2 building was a real city within the city: it accommodated shops, exhibition and conference rooms, offices, and housing, as well as two perform­ ance halls for the Théâtre National. On the ground floor, a Y-shaped gallery ran through the building. In addition to serving shops, this gallery also gave access to the apartments found in the rear part of the tower. These dwellings were organised in pairs around the vertical cores. Benefiting from balconies running continuously along the front and rear façades, the apartments were organised along two poles: bedrooms to the west and living rooms linked to the kitchens to the east. In terms of façades, the building’s load-bearing concrete structure was fitted with glass-and-aluminium curtain walls.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

217

Cross section 1:500

0

25 m

218

Second floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

219

HOUSING ATL AS   II

Typical floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

220

62  Van Overbeke 243 COMPLETION: 1961 ARCHITECT: Albert Vanden Bossche ADDR ESS: Van Overbekelaan 243 avenue Van Overbeke, 1083 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 104 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 78 m2 + terraces 5 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

In the north of Brussels, the Villas de Ganshoren form a group of free-standing high-rise buildings built over several decades (1957–1978). The five 20-­storey-high cruciform towers at 243 avenue Van Overbeke are among the oldest. They feature a ­vertical triangular circulation core with a staircase, two lifts, and a central hall with a central atrium that runs the full height of the tower. On the ground floor, three pass-through entrance halls serve a

double-height vestibule, in the centre of which there is a fountain. Two duplex apartments are ­located at this level: the caretaker’s apartment and a second one coupled with a shop. On the standard levels, each arm of the tripod tower is divided into two longitudinal bays, featuring back-to-back apartments; the largest ones have an additional room on the far side of this division. The standard floor comprises six apartments, ranging from studios to three-bedroom dwellings. All the dwellings have a core of wet rooms close to the entrance and a ­terrace in the angles of the tripod. The south-facing units have an extra terrace. In addition, the dwellings benefit from storage rooms on the first two floors, and laundry and drying rooms and large communal terraces with canopies on the top floor. The façades are treated in different registers: r­ ubble-­ stone walls on the first two levels, white bricks and shock-treated concrete for the other levels. The walls of the terraces are painted light blue.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

221

Roof floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

222

63  La Magnanerie COMPLETION: Two phases (1957 and 1961) ARCHITECT: Jacques Cuisinier, Claude Laurens ADDR ESS: Minervalaan 3–39 avenue Minerve, 1190

Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 341 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 108 m2 + terraces 22 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This modernist building is located in a park of almost 2 hectares in upper Forest commune. Its boomerang shape was designed to provide the dwellings with the best possible sunlight and views. At the rear of the building there are 170 garages and a petrol station. On the park side, the building has a ­double-­­ height walkway, extended westwards by a sculp­ tural staircase leading to the avenue below. This

Unit plan 1:100

0

gallery serves 14 shops and 10 residential ­entrances, each leading to 32 apartments. The first floor ­includes general service rooms and flats attached to the shops. The 18-floor building comprises 341 units, divided into 14 different types, from one-­bedroom apartments to duplexes with double-­ height living rooms, four bedrooms, and large terraces on the top floors. All dwellings have b ­ alconies in front of each main room. The standard apartment has a large living room extended by a full-width terrace with a broad view to the city. To the rear, two bedrooms and a kitchen are shown, also with their own terraces. A central core accommodates a toilet and a bathroom. The differences between façades to the east – made of a light concrete frame – and the west – featuring horizontal balconies – indicate it was constructed in two phases. The colours range from white to light yellow, and the gable walls are covered with natural stone slabs.

5m

Cross section 1:500

HOUSING ATL AS   II

223

Roof floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

224

64  Europa II COMPLETION: 1962 ARCHITECT: Josse Franssen ADDR ESS: Gabriel Emile Lebonlaan 49–53 avenue Gabriel Emile Lebon, 1160 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 186 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 105 m2 + terraces 15 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

Located on a 1-hectare plot surrounded by four roads, this building is a long, free-standing slab, perfectly oriented north–south. The 13-storey-high volume stands on two underground levels that accommodate private cellars, technical rooms, and garages. The building’s collective spaces are particularly generous. Situated on the ground and top

floors, they include a caretaker’s flat, a meeting room, ten spare rooms for the residents, two ­commercial spaces, a games room, four solariums, and two ­laundry and drying rooms. The ground floor features four large halls, two on each side of the building, leading to a wide central vestibule. This vestibule serves five vertical circulation cores. On the upper floors, each core provides access to between two and four apartments. The two-bedroom dwellings have a double exposure, with a ­living-dining room and kitchen on the west side and two bedrooms on the east side. Both sides are bordered by a terrace that widens in front of the kit­ chen and the small bedroom. The sanitary facilities are accommodated in the centre of the apartment. The façade of the building is highlighted by the ­horizontal bands of balconies with glass-and-metalrailings. The first two floors are clad in blue stone.

Unit plan 1:100

Cross section 1:500 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

225

Roof floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

226

65  Peterbos 6 COMPLETION: 1964 ARCHITECT: Groupe Structure ADDR ESS: Peterbospark 6 parc du Peterbos, 1070 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 48 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 76 m2 + terraces 4 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

The building is part of the Parc Peterbos, one of Brussels largest social-housing estates. It belongs to a sub-set of four buildings erected according to the same principles in four different volumes. This building is a narrow-elongated slab – 9 m by 84 m – oriented east–west. It stands on pilotis and is seven storeys high, with a flat roof. Its main entrance is on the west side, with a collective storage

area to its right. On the other side is an emergency staircase, contiguous to a technical room. The two vertical cores serve two circulation galleries on the second and fifth floors that give access to various types of apartments: one- and two-bedroom simplexes on the gallery levels, and duplexes leading alternately to the floor above or the floor ­below. The duplexes have two or three bedrooms for the dwellings at the end of the building. They all have a pass-through living room opening onto a terrace on the south side. To the north, this space is linked to the kitchen, which accesses a second terrace via the bathroom. In the centre, a corridor leads to two or three bedrooms. Individual storage spaces are located near the staircases, on the ­gallery-free levels. The building’s façades are very sober, with different kinds of concrete finishing such as cast in situ, prefabricated, or acid-etched.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

227

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

228

66  Résidence Parc ­Albert I COMPLETION: 1964 ARCHITECT: Groupe Urbanisme – Etrimo ADDR ESS: Kasteeldreef 75–77 drève du Château, 1083 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 104 per building (416 altogether) UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 74 m2 + terraces 15 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

At the end of the Second World War, Etrimo developed three types of housing projects in Brussels: bungalows, villas, and apartment buildings in a park. This project is an example of the last-named. Built on the former Counts de Villegas estate, the project accommodates 416 dwellings in four buildings set in a 2.5-hectare park offering grassy and planted areas, a playground, and a small childcare

facility. Each building shows the same composition: a 14-storey slab block set on a basement that comprises ­garages and private cellars. The buildings duplicate an identical module – called pavilion by Etrimo– that was eventually repeated by the company more than 100 times across Brussels. The ­pavilion is organised around a central core with two lifts and a spiral staircase, with a porter’s lodge on the ground floor. The upper floors accommodate four apartments, oriented to either side of the building. From the entrance, the standard dwellings feature successively a kitchen, living room, and two bedrooms. All these spaces open onto a continuous 1.4-m-wide terrace, while the bathrooms and toilets are in the centre of the building. The recessed top floor provides a communal drying area for the ­residents. The façades are clad with panels of Quartzolith and shale, decorative pebble, or colour­ed mosaics on the ground floor. The long balconies with their light-blue ceilings are fitted with glass railings. The entrance halls and lifts have enamelled panels typical of post-war Etrimo buildings.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

229

Roof floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

230

67 Brusilia COMPLETION: 1970 ARCHITECT: Jacques Cuisinier ADDR ESS: Louis Bertrandlaan 98–104 avenue Louis Bertrand, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 204 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 105 m2 + terraces 9 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

For years, this 36-storey building (see also p. 128) was the highest residential tower in Belgium. It has a radial plan arranged in seven bays which were supposed to be complemented by another six. To the rear, the ­tower is extended by a supermarket, a shop, and a petrol station, above which lies a car park. The whole complex rests on a three-storeyhigh basement with private storage and garages. The entrance to the building starts with large exterior steps leading to three double-height passthrough entrance halls clad in black stone on the floor and exterior walls, and white stone on the interior walls. The ground floor also accommodates commercial and office spaces. The vestibules lead to three vertical circulation cores that serve two through apartments per floor, ranging from one to four bedrooms. They systematically feature large

living rooms towards the Parc Josaphat, bedrooms at the back, and wet rooms in the centre. The two-bedroom apartments have kitchens that extend backwards to a breakfast nook. In the sixth bay, the dwellings have additional bedrooms at the back of technical spaces. The ­r­einforced-­concrete-­ framed tower is clad with prefabricated washed flint elements. Apart from the ­technical bay, the other six bays are entirely glazed on the park side and have continuous balconies lined with aluminium railings. The rear façade is simply pierced with white sandwich-panel windows.

Unit plan 1:100

Cross section 1:500 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

231

Typical floor plan 1:500

Mezzanine floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

232

68  La Mémé COMPLETION: 1976 ARCHITECT: Simone & Lucien Kroll ADDR ESS: Martinus V-straat 1–9 rue Martin V, 1200 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 135 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 10–13 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This building (see also p. 130) is part of larger 4-hectare project built on the UCLouvain campus in Woluwe-Saint-­Lambert including gardens, a school, a university restaurant, an ecumenical building, and a metro station. Following May 1968, students asked to be given an active role in the design, and the Kroll ­studio consulted them. La Mémé – short for maison médicale, housing medical students – is organised in two layers. The first three levels comprise collective spaces such as community rooms or

shops. On the upper floors, served by a central vertical circulation core, student housing is organised according to d ­ ifferent typologies: single rooms in the so-called “fascist” part (a term coined by the architects ­themselves as they were forced by the university to design rather “conventional” student rooms), community apartments with six to eight rooms located in the main body of the building, and “attic” ­apartments on the last three levels. In addition to these types, there are also studios and flats for ­couples. Apart from the “fascist”, all the rooms are different. To enable this variety, Kroll implemented a thick concrete slab without beams, which allows for random placement and easy relocation of the partition walls. A similar system was devised for the façades, where modular windows are interchangeable, giving the untidy appearance of self-construction. It contrasts with the regular structure and fully glazed façades of the “fascist” part. In terms of ­materials, the façades combine Eternit roofs, pine frames, bricks, and breeze blocks.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

233

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

234

69  Les Venelles COMPLETION: 1977 ARCHITECT: Groupe Ausia ADDR ESS: Speeltuindreveken – venelle aux Jeux, 1150 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 364 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 126 m2 + terraces 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project (see also p. 131) consists of 17 buildings organised on a 4-hectare site, which is surrounded by streets lined with older houses. Based on a re­ interpretation of the village street, it features varied and winding routes bordered by adjoining buildings. The general height of the buildings is limited to two to five storeys, giving the ensemble the ­appearance of a hamlet. This feature is reinforced

by the entirely pedestrian character of the estate, reflected in the name of the project: venelle (narrow street). The complex is based on the natural topography of the site, which rises over more than 20 m, distinguishing the pedestrian network from that of cars, located underground. Above ground, there are large exterior galleries, functioning like village alleys, where all the entrance doors of the dwellings are found. The project has a large variety of dwellings, ranging from one- to four-bedroom apartments organised in simplexes or duplexes. All of them have their own small garden or terrace. The typological variety of Les Venelles is home to a very ­heterogeneous social fabric that brings together families, elderly people, and singles. The materials of the façades include ochre bricks, exposed concrete, and pink and grey cement slates on walls and sloping roofs.

Third floor plan 1:500 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

235

Unit plan 1:100

0

25 m

236

70  Laeken 95–121 COMPLETION: 1995 ARCHITECT: J. Altuna and M.-L. Petit; S. Assassin, B. Dumons, P. Gisclard, and N. Prat; V. Gevers, M. Heene, M. Leloup, and G. Somssich; J. Cenica-­ Celaya and I. Salona; M. Gaiani and G. Tagliaventi, J.-Ph. Garric, and V. Nègre; L. O’Connor – J. Robins (unit); Atlante ADDR ESS: Lakensestraat 95–121 rue de Laeken, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 37 (5 single-family houses and 7 apartment buildings with 4 to 8 apartments per building, 32 apartments altogether) UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 327 m2 + garden 60 m2 (Single-­ family house) HOUSING T YPE: Terraced houses – Apartment buildings

This project is part of an entire city block redevelopment carried out by an insurance company. In the 1960s, a large part of the block was demolished

to make way for a large car park and an eleven-storey office tower. Just 25 years later, it was decided to demolish the tower and reorganise the block into offices and housing. On the north-east side, there is an L-shaped office building of six storeys, while the other streets are devoted to housing. The constructions surround a garden installed on an underground parking garage. For the housing part, an international competition was organised in 1989 with the ambition of rebuilding townhouses and renovating the few remaining houses on the site. Seven projects were selected to be built from 1990 onwards. Each architecture office was commissioned for one apartment building and one ­single-family house. On the ground floor, the buildings accommodate commercial spaces and accesses to the housing. The dwellings are very generous both in terms of space (size of the flats, ceiling heights, etc.) and in terms of materials, which are very robust. The façades of the buildings share a classicising language  – with elements such as bands, arches, pediments, columns, and sloping roofs –  which resonates with the surrounding architecture.

Unit plan 1:100 (Single-family house)

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   II

237

Façade 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

239

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Alessandro Porotto

The Search for Quality Housing: From 2000 onwards Envisioning Brussels in the 21st Century Over the past two decades, housing has once again become a matter of urgent debate. Challenges brought about by a series of crises and changes that began in the 20th century have required the development and implementation of new strategies. This is the situation that any innovative housing agenda must face as we transition into the 21st century.1

Issues Inherited from the 20th Century Fragmented government meant 20th-century Brussels lacked coherent urban-planning pol­ icies. Planning, even for such sizeable sites as the European Quarter and the Northern Quarter, responded to local development opportunities rather than following any overall structural plan. While some post-war housing is remarkable, the post-war period nevertheless left a complex legacy at the beginning of the 2000s that must be taken into account. From an urban point of view, a typological genealogy of overlapping housing types resulted in an extremely fragmented built environment. Indeed, from the 1950s onwards the state strongly encouraged Belgians to leave the city, promoting suburbanisation and the building of so-called ­pavillionaires – groups of detached houses in ­suburban settings. The resulting urban sprawl turned the Brussels-Capital Region into a “horizontal metropolis”, a concept defining extended urban spaces characterised by complementarity, loose hierarchies, and territorial synergies.2 In

< A city of invention and urban renewal (Parkdreef – drève du Parc)

terms of the built environment, housing in this metropolis extended across administrative boundaries, creating on the one hand the compact city described in this book, and on the other the surrounding Brussels hinterland. From a social point of view, this suburbanisation generated a massive exodus, so that while the population in the urban agglomeration continued to grow from 1965 onwards, this ­ growth was outside the Brussels region.3 International immigration, meanwhile, was unable to compensate for internal emigration, bringing about a slow yet persistent population decline. This trend was reversed in the Brussels-Capital ­Region from 1995 onwards, and the population is expected to increase progressively into the 21st century.4 Furthermore, new types of households emerged in the 2000s as the result of demographic evolution and migration;5 these took their place alongside the nuclear family, which had been the central model for post-war initiatives. From an economic point of view, housing became very expensive for the middle class in the years leading up to 2000, while social-housing production was drastically reduced after the 1970s.6 In particular, the establishment of the Capital Region’s borders initiated residential relocation away from Brussels, forcing many young families to migrate in order to reduce their cost of living. In terms of affordability, therefore, housing alternatives were required to provide a larger, higher-quality housing offer that also accommodated new social structures. New housing policies needed tools that could establish conditions allowing denser occupancy in quality urban homes. In essence, they were forced to answer the question: how can people live in the city today?

1  Porotto, Alessandro and Gérald Ledent. “Crisis and Transition: Forms of Collective Housing in Brussels.” Buildings, vol. 11, no. 4, 162, 2021, pp. 1–31.    2  The concept of “horizontal metropolis” as defined by Studio Bernardo Secchi and Paola Viganò emerged in the study Brussels 2040. Dejemeppe, Pierre and Benoit Périlleux. Bruxelles 2040. Brussels, Region de Bruxelles-Capitale, 2012.   3  Deboosere, Patrick et al. “The Population of Brussels: A Demographic Overview.” Brussels Studies, no. 3, 2009, pp. 1–16; Dehaibe, Xavier et al. “Projections démographiques communales bruxelloises 2015–2025.” Les Cahiers de l’IBSA, Institut Bruxellois de Statistique et d’Analyse (IBSA), 2016.   4 Berns, Hannah et al. “Towards a paradigm shift in the residential appeal policy of the Brussels-Capital Region.” Brussels Studies, no. 172, 2022, pp. 1–31; Dehaibe, Xavier et al. “Projections démographiques communales bruxelloises 2015–2025.” Les Cahiers de l’IBSA, Institut Bruxellois de Statistique et d’Analyse (IBSA), 2016.    5  Casier, Charlotte. “The transformation of demographic structures and the geography of Europeans in Brussels between 2000 and 2018.” Brussels Studies, no. 138, 2019, pp. 1–16; Deboosere, Patrick et al. “The Population of Brussels: A Demographic Overview.” Ibid. no. 3, 2009.   6  Dessouroux, Christian et al. “Housing in Brussels: Diagnosis and Challenges.” Brussels Studies no. 99, 2016, pp. 1–31.  

240

New Administrative, G ­ overnance, and Legislative Instruments Brussels-Capital was acknowledged as a fully-­ fledg­ed region in 1989, and was immediately com­ pelled to develop a policy addressing new urban challenges linked to housing.7 Three primary transformations were undertaken in order to define a suitable context for new urban initiatives. First, the region created the office of Brussels Government Architect (BMA Bouwmeester/ Maître Architecte) in 2009.8 The Government Archi­tect operates independently with a transverse approach on urban planning and architectural policies, and organises competition procedures for public and private projects. Principal tasks are to guarantee a constructive background for interactions among multiple actors; advocate for the quality of the built environment; and test for this quality in proposals concerning architectural design, urban planning, and public space, with­out regard for economic and political interests. Second, the administration was reorganised in order to deal with project actors, manage pro­ jects in a simplified way, and transcend m ­ unicipal boundaries. A new platform was created, bringing together three public institutions: Perspective. brussels, proposing solutions and perspectives for territorial planning; the Urban Development Corporation (sau-msi.brussels), carrying out ­major urban development of strategic significance; and Urban.brussels, granting construction permits and managing historical patrimony. Third, the regional government focused on regional development in legislative terms. Reform of the Brussels Urban Planning Code (CoBAT) and Environmental Permits (OEP) entered into force in September 2019, simplifying and streamlining urban-planning and environmental-permitting processes. These changes at governance level demonstrated an evolution in the Brussels-Capital Region’s vision and policy. The result is a system designed to advocate for and enhance spatial quality in urban projects, envision urban transformations at the regional scale, and adopt a ser­ ies of coherent tools to fulfil these goals.

Demographic Dynamics Several studies over the last two decades have highlighted the priorities and actions that need

to be implemented within Brussels-Capital R ­ egion 9 to establish sustainable urban strategies. Their analyses and outcomes are based on demo­ graphic growth as predicted from 2000 onwards. ­Although these predictions have recently been revised,10 housing remains a crucial issue for u ­ rban planning. Indeed, while the demand for housing has increased, affordability of real estate has ­dramatically reduced, affecting the middle and lower classes. The globalised economy, the city’s internationalisation, changes to the job market, and the city’s role as a cultural catalyst led to two phenomena: the gentrification of some neighbourhoods and the impoverishment of others. At a metropolitan scale, the role of migratory processes may be summarised in a few key features.11 First, a significant proportion of inhab­ itants left poor areas of the city, especially during the years 1960–1980. Second, immigration of a better-off population has been concentrated in the fashionable parts of the city located in the south-east quadrant.12 Third, the arrival of new middle-class inhabitants into disadvantaged neigh­­ bourhoods has produced gentrification, leading to a rise in the cost of housing and spawning new “trendy” areas.13

New Housing Initiatives Contemporary housing projects in Brussels face four main challenges: 1. Addressing demographic changes Housing projects must consider recent changes in demographic trends, such as reduced family size, an ageing population, and increasing household diversity. This demands a new model, one in which accessibility and affordability are compatible with new household structures and diverse populations. 2. Creating sustainable buildings Several surveys show the growing importance of energy and material economy in recent Brussels schemes: first, housing projects have been obliged since 2015 to incorporate passive building techniques; second, projects are increasing asked to adopt recycling and reuse, with an eye towards developing suitable living environments. 3. Conceiving new forms of collectivity Over the last decade, projects across Europe have aimed to develop new forms of collective housing. Brussels is unique in terms of the var­

7  Demographic growth, multiculturalism and social changes, mobility and urban developments, as well as a lack of public services. The ­existence of multiple other administrative structures in addition to the Region (including the federal government, 19 municipalities, and 2 linguistic communities with related institutions) made the situation more complex.   8  This new position follows the examples of the Flemish Government Architect and the City Architect in Antwerp.   9  Dejemeppe, Pierre and Périlleux, Benoit. Bruxelles 2040. Bruxelles, Region de Bruxelles-Capitale, 2012; T’Jonck, Pieter. “Quelle métropole en 2040?” A+, no. 235, 2012, pp. 44–50.   10  Growth seems to have plateaued in 2020 due to the COVID-19 outbreak. Hermia, Jean-Pierre. “Baromètre démographique 2021 de la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale.” Focus, Institut Bruxellois de Statistique et d’Analyse (IBSA), 2021, pp. 1–8.   11  De Laet, Sarah. “The Working Classes are also Leaving Brussels. An Analysis of the Suburbanisation of Low-Income Populations.” Brussels Studies, no. 121, 2018, pp. 1–24.   12  For instance, the most popular neighbourhoods are Ixelles, Saint-Gilles, Etterbeek, Woluwé-Saint-Pierre, and Woluwé-Saint-Lambert.   13 Van Criekingen, Mathieu. “What is Happening to Brussels’ Inner-city Neighbourhoods? : Selective Migration from Areas Undergoing Gentrification.” Brussels Studies, no. 1, 2006, pp. 1–21.  

241

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Example of horizontal inversion of the traditional spatial hierarchy. While the 19th-century maison bruxelloise privileged the rooms on the street side, today the spatial hierarchy locates living spaces towards the back, where they have access to the garden (AHA – Aurélie Hachez Architecte, single-family house renovation Oriel, 2014).

iety of housing-initiative strategies adopted. New forms of collectivity can foster contact amongst residents. 4. Experimenting with space The city may be considered a laboratory for testing different types of spatialisation and challenging accepted paradigms. This applies to a variety of projects and housing typologies.

Brussels Initiatives Responding to Contemporary Housing Questions Recent housing projects have transformed the city of Brussels according to various strategies that respond in diverse ways to the four main axes highlighted above. Contemporary housing initiatives in Brussels can be categorised according to eight themes. The order in which the strategies are presented ranges from those most closely resembling the dominant type to those with more innovative and experimental forms.

Re-inventing the maison ­bruxelloise: Variations on a House The maison bruxelloise currently constitutes ­approximately one third of Brussels’ housing stock.14 The flexible arrangement and dimension of domestic spaces as well as the compact circulation characterising this dominant type allow small-scale projects such as splitting existing homes or merging terraced houses to create apartments. Indeed, a maison bruxelloise will in many cases have lost its individual character. The buildings are too spacious for smaller contempor­ ary Brussels households and their evolving lifestyles. The renovation of these terraced houses to suit new norms and needs nevertheless offers an opportunity to test their relevance within the framework of contemporary challenges. In particular, the traditional three-room-in-a-row layout was banned under the 1979 Building Regulations of the Agglomeration, which require all living spaces to have a direct opening to the outdoors.15 Even though these projects are based on the conditions specific to each case, we can never­ theless highlight several tendencies revealing a wide range of design complexity. One of the most recurrent mutations is the inversion of the traditional spatial hierarchy, which occurs both horizontally or vertically. First, the garden, considered a leftover space in the 19th century, has gained interest, modify-

14  Ledent, Gérald. “Potentiels Relationnels: L’aptitude des dispositifs physiques de l’habitat à soutenir la sociabilité: Bruxelles, le cas des immeubles élevés et isolés de logement.” PhD Dissertation, Université catholique de Louvain, 2014.    15  Eloy, Marc et al. Influence de la législation sur les façades bruxelloises. Brussels, C.A.R.A./C.F.C., 1985.  

242

ing the hierarchy of the house by placing the most important living spaces towards the back. New spatial configurations designed to create more intimate domesticity and adaptable spaces for new daily uses therefore occur on the ground floor (House William, pp. 312–313; Charme 9, pp. 310– 311). Second, the verticality dominating daily life inside these typical buildings has been revalued. While the space under the roof was originally considered a technical space reserved for servants, nowadays it is transformed into living space. A great number of projects add new storeys, offering more living surface as well as novel perspectives, both looking away from the house ­towards the city and towards the house from the street (Népomucène 15, pp. 304–305). Innovative re-inventions are also driven by social changes. Large families living in a maison bruxelloise have progressively disappeared, but new forms of co-living requiring specific characteristics in terms of spatial flexibility – i.e. housing an elderly family member (maison kangourou) – have appeared (Dumont 5, pp. 314–315). Projects in this category share some common features. The first is increasing spatial adaptability/polyvalence to meet contemporary domestic needs and ways of living. Indeed, the original rooms’ flexibility lends itself to potential evolution. Second, staircases and vertical circulation are emphasised as an architectural element representing new domestic structures. Third, the garden and terraces connected to the living spaces play a significant role in the layout. ­ Fourth, the original façade on the street side is preserved, while a new façade is designed on the garden side.

Reviving Urban Blocks: The Fabric Condition In some Brussels neighbourhoods, the historic urban fabric faced neglect and became degraded in the post-war period because of anti-urban modernist initiatives and the departure of middle-class residents. Since the beginning of the 1990s, Brussels-­ Capital Region policies have favoured initiatives in these underprivileged territories of the city. So-called “Neighbourhood Contracts” became one of the most powerful among these urban-­ policy tools for improving resident households’ living conditions, reinforcing the attractiveness of the living environment, and curbing social in-

Example of vertical inversion of the traditional spatial hierarchy. While the space under the roof was originally reserved for servants, nowadays many projects transform and enlarge the volume for living space (Hé! Architectuur, rooftop extension Karper, 2021).

equality.16 In particular, they establish a framework for a series of complementary projects at the neighbourhood scale: new constructions and renovation of housing, renewal of public spaces, new public infrastructures and facilities, initiatives to foster social cohesiveness.17 These public policies aim to encourage and increase the social mix in these neighbourhoods.18 Indeed, working-class households have a demographic profile similar to that of the middle classes: households with young children.19

16  Ananian, Priscilla. “Housing Production in Brussels: The Neighbourhood City to Stand the Test of Urban Densification.” Brussels Studies, no. 107, 2016, pp. 1–18; Lenel, Emmanuelle. “Social Mix in Public Urban Action in Brussels: Project or Political Language?” Brussels Studies, no. 65, 2013, pp. 1–12.   17  Berger, Mathieu. Le temps d’une politique: Chroniques des Contrats de quartier bruxellois. Brussels, CIVA, 2019; ­Cohen, Maurizio. À Bruxelles, près de chez nous: L’architecture dans les contrats de quartier. Brussels, Ministère de la Région Bruxelles-Capitale, 2007.  18  Ananian, Priscilla. “Housing Production in Brussels: The Neighbourhood City to Stand the Test of Urban Densification.” Brussels Studies, no. 107, 2016, pp. 1–18; De Laet, Sarah. “The Working Classes are Also Leaving Brussels: An Analysis of the Suburbanisation of Low-income Populations.” Brussels Studies, no. 121, 2018, pp. 1–24; Van Criekingen, Mathieu. “What is Happening to Brussels’ Inner-city Neighbourhoods?: ­Selective Migration from Areas Undergoing Gentrification.” Brussels Studies, no. 1, 2006, pp. 1–21; Van Hamme, Gilles et al. “Migratory Movements and Dynamics of Neighbourhoods in Brussels.” Brussels Studies, no. 97, 2013, pp. 1–13.   19  De Laet, Sarah. “The Working Classes are Also Leaving Brussels: An Analysis of the Suburbanisation of Low-income Populations.” Brussels Studies, no. 121, 2018, pp. 1–24.  

243

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Single-family terraced houses are increasingly rare in Brussels. They are redesigned as collective housing consisting of apartments, adapted to the size of pre-existing plots (Ledroit Pierret Polet Architectes, collective housing Jourdan, 2017).

While contemporary projects reviving urban blocks deal with the typical city structure, they also negotiate the fragmented skyline of the street front (AgwA, collective housing Elisabeth, 2014).

In this context, contemporary initiatives to revive urban blocks are made up of small-scale pro­ jects characterised by their direct confrontation with the typical built environment of the maison bruxelloise. Three categories have been identified according to their morphological features. In the first category are housing projects dealing with the typical urban block structure. While single-family terraced houses are increasingly rare in Brussels (Claes 36, pp. 294–295), new collective housing consisting of apartments is designed to adapt to the typical size of pre-existing plots and negotiate the fragmented skyline of the street fronts. In addition to typological inventions to accommodate apartments in limited dimensions, these projects often include collective gardens shared by residents (Fin 15, pp. 290–291) or open to the neighbourhood (Mexico 15, pp. 322–323). Due to their atypical setting, corner plots can be considered unusual elements of Brussels ­urban blocks since they usually have little access to the block interior. This second category has thus developed innovative typological solutions opening only towards public space. Corner buildings can combine a set of spatial features similar to the maison bruxelloise with public facilities ­(Palais 95, pp. 292–293) and adopt a qualitative

overlapping of diverse apartment types for social housing, such as large one-floor apartments and duplexes (Portaels 158, pp. 308–309; Navez 111, pp. 306–307). These corner projects tend to be designed as sculptural volumes highlighted by abstract variations on traditional decorated street fronts such as bright colour or motif textures. Furthermore, corner buildings address cohesion between typology, sculptural shapes, and pre-­exist­ ing houses in order to create an appealing design. Despite their successful architectural r­ esults, recent temporary housing projects nevertheless encourage a city built for consumption as opposed to housing designed for permanent residents. The third category consists of projects addressing the morphological issues characteristic of already fragmented urban blocks. In this context, large double-aspect apartments are combined with modernist features in layout and façade (Helihavenlaan 7, pp. 276–277); other projects use the block interior to densify the neighbourhood. They integrate pre-existing buildings (Savonnerie Heymans, pp. 288–289) or new public facilities (Cygnes Digue, pp. 298–299) into the ­fabric of a single urban block. In this case, the resulting complexity is used to differentiate apartment types within the block. This complexity becomes more relevant when housing pro­

244

Despite the appealing design, temporary housing projects can contribute to a city built for consumption (LOW Architecten, AirBnB house project Teddy Picker, 2013).

jects accommodate specific uses, for instance collective spaces. In general terms, initiatives to revive urban blocks develop as polyvalent tools for creating new pieces of city. For economic reasons, most of these projects are designed as apartment buildings, rarely as single-family houses; they nonetheless share several characteristics with the standard housing type. Typological overlapping is thus adopted in order to deal with the existing variety of the built environment. Alongside the dominant maison bruxelloise (i.e. the terraced house), these interventions reinvent the traditional mix of the Brussels block to house a great variety of functions. Furthermore, morphological features characterising urban blocks (such as building height, block alignments, and building-coverage ratio) are taken into account as part of the design. New interpretations can also be seen on the façades: on the one hand new materials and textures emerge from the variety of the street front, on the other they stress the difference ­between the public, street-side façade and the domestic one on the block side.

Re-using Types: No City for Old Housing Projects from the post-war period constitute critical elements in the city in terms of neighbourhood location, surface area, and u ­ rban density. Today, post-war buildings are ­ outdated, abandoned, and often negatively perceived by inhabitants as icons of the demolitions undertaken as part of “Bruxellisation”. To deal with these buildings, two rehabilitation trends have emerged.

Collective spaces are placed on the block side and bedrooms are positioned on the street side, shaping a longer and articulated façade within a limited length (51N4E, permanent home for the disabled De Lork, 2016).

Rehabilitation of Post-War Housing Slabs

Housing slabs built after the Second World War face three crises. First, social changes trans­ formed the nuclear family structure around which these projects were designed. Second, due to their construction, these slabs are energy-­ consuming and provide inadequate thermal ­per­formance. Third, the materials used in the façades are now outdated. Post-war housing must accommodate new household structures, environmental requirements, and technologies. At the same time, contemporary projects meet these requirements by transforming the spatial configuration of apartments. While post-war units were designed according to the modernist precepts of the “minimum dwelling” and normative standards, today they need to provide appropriate spatial conditions for contemporary ways of living. Three design approaches have emerged in response to this need. First, more and more projects transform the modernist façades of post-war slabs. Prefabricated concrete façades and steel-framed windows need to be updated to meet contemporary low-­ energy standards. In these cases, the façade is entirely wrapped with thermal insulation and then covered again with a new layer of prefabricated elements in order to preserve and reinterpret the decorative qualities of the original façade. In the second approach, a new, independent structure is positioned in front the original façades as a “second skin”, providing each apartment with additional surface area, for example in the form of loggias or winter gardens (Peterbos 9, pp. 342–343). While this approach works by simple addition to the pre-existing building, the third approach

245

PROJET FLORAIR II ET III - JETTE - 09/09/2014

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Today, the façades of post-war apartment slabs need to be renovated to meet contemporary low-energy standards (Atelier Kempe Thill, refurbishment of two post-war apartment slabs, Florair, 2014).

FLORAIR II - COUPE / AXONOMETRIE

generates typological mutations. Attaching a new structure to the façade to provide more surface can enlarge the size of bedrooms, today considered too small by unit residents (Tilleuls, pp. 340– pp. 340– 341). Domestic configuration is consequently transformed, producing novel unit types such as duplex apartments and more typological variety than allowed by the original repetition of standstand­ ardised units. For all three approaches, the rehabilitation of post-war housing slabs usually consists of interventions such as the renovation of façades, technical equipment, stairwells, and common spaces in order to improve energy performance while the new designs consider the spatial configuration as well. In particular, both closed or open galleries along façades provide additional domestic space that residents can use according to their lifestyles. New unit configurations foster a typological diversity accommodating a variety of households, which was not provided for by the standardised post-war design.

Conversion of Non-Residential Buildings into Housing

Before the First World War, Brussels was the most important industrial city in Belgium, with large industrial sites and warehouses, especially along the Brussels Canal. After the Second World War, Brussels’ economy was increasingly outsourced, resulting in a sharp increase in nonnon-­ residential spaces, in particular office buildings.20 Today, the city has a large amount of unoccupied commercial and office space, and the trend is the conversion of these buildings into housing.21 Several decades of deindustrialisation produced a large reserve of abandoned warehouses and small office buildings, especially in districts like the centre, Molenbeek, and Anderlecht, where the housing market was under pressure. Many non-residential buildings were converted through private-sector and residents’ initiatives. The spaces’ generous volumes and surfaces accommodate lofts of diverse configuration, combining living and working spaces. These new typologies ­typologies often revolve around a collective environment in the form of a common garden courtyard (P.NT 2, pp. 282–283). pp. 282–283

­2 0  Dessouroux, Christian. “Les bureaux à Bruxelles: un état des lieux.” Bruxelles: Ses bureaux: Ses employés, edited by Michel De Beule andDessouroux, Christian Dessouroux, Brussels, Rossel, 2009, pp. un 14–25.   Borret, Kristiaan. Stay or Should I Go?” no. 270, 2018, 20 Christian. “Les bureaux à Bruxelles: état des21  lieux.” Bruxelles: Ses “Should bureaux: ISes employés, edited by A+, Michel De Beule pp. 60–63; Dessouroux, Christian. “Fifty Years of Office Building Production Brussels: A Geographical Brussels and Christian Dessouroux, Brussels, Rossel, 2009, pp. 14–25. 21 Borret, in Kristiaan. “Should I Stay or Analysis.” Should I Go?” A+,Studies, no. 270,no. 35, 2018, 2010, pp. 1–14.   pp. 60–63; Dessouroux, Christian. “Fifty Years of Office Building Production in Brussels: A Geographical Analysis.” Brussels Studies, no. 35, 2010, pp. 1–14.

246

Vacant office buildings from the post-war period are converted into large-scale residential or mixed-use buildings. In blue colour: apartment units; in green colour: hotel rooms; in red colour: space for offices (51N4E, office conversion to mixed-use building with housing, ZIN, 2023).

247

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Collective urban villas are usually located in green areas with a minimised building-coverage ratio (MDW Architecture, collective urban villas Renoir, 2024).

The trend of converting office buildings is also used to foster housing and urban quality in business districts. By preserving the original concrete structure, these projects offer freely adaptable plans. Due to their width and preservation of the original circulation spaces, they can be turned mostly into single-aspect small units such as studios and one-bedroom flats – and, less frequently, into large apartments based on modular dimensions. For good-quality housing, exterior open spaces must be provided, often through the addition of balconies along the façades (The Cosmopolitan, pp. 320–321). The pre-existing vertical orientation makes efficient use of the building footprint and promotes the compactness envisioned for the city, by encouraging mixed use and space flexibility. The re-use of unoccupied and abandoned office buildings forces housing design to deal with pre-existing volumes. It reduces the amount of energy and construction waste generated by demolition and new building. Calculations have demonstrated that preventing massive demolitions means lower construction costs and CO2 emissions. Furthermore, the pre-existing structure of non-residential buildings allows free unit plans and typological variations. The adoption of mixed uses results in a hybridisation that reverses post-war monofunctional zoning.22

Modern Urban Villas: The Importance of Being Free-Standing Many Belgians aspire to live in detached houses in the suburbs or countryside. Green open spaces and nature around the city are especially valued by families with children, who often flee the city in search of more affordable homes. The green areas in Brussels’ 20th-century belt constitute an opportunity for new free-standing projects. Alongside such large, dense housing sites as interwar garden cities, the low-rise urban villa is one of the most significant models adopted for contemporary use. First, there are individual ­urban villas in private ownership (Maison Krantz-­ Fontaine, pp. 278–279). The second, relatively recent type is collective urban villas. Since such projects are usually located in green areas, their building-coverage ratio is minimised. They experiment with new spatial connections between typology and nature: while apartments with a winter garden or terraces ­allowing different interior configurations can produce unexpected perspectives on the landscape (Vervloet – ­Villa Nord, pp. 344–345), collective spaces combined with the natural environment can create a continuous polyvalent zone for residents. Recent urban-villa projects therefore respond to the Belgian aspiration to live near nature with innovation in urban-housing typology. They strive to increase connections with surrounding greenery on two levels. First, a compact, free-­stand­ing

22  Lasserre, Christian. “Des bureaux pour toujours? Reconversions au long cours.” Bruxelles: Ses bureaux: Ses employés, edited by Michel De Beule and Christian Dessouroux, Brussels, Rossel, 2009, pp. 111–119.  

248

volume only occupies a low percentage of the green area. Second, the ground floor often features an organic configuration (for an individual urban villa), while it accommodates spaces for community life in a collective urban villa.

New Forms of Communal Housing: Close Encounters with the Neighbours Two key facts have driven grassroots initiatives in Brussels. First, property prices have doubled over the last decade, and real-estate market inventory has failed to keep up with population growth, diversity of demand, and average incomes. The affordable housing crisis is particularly acute in dense working-class neighbourhoods along the canal.23 Second, demographic changes such as reduced family size and the diversity of households require a built environment able to accommodate a diverse population. These grassroots projects evolved in the last two decades into various forms of communal housing projects. At the beginning of the 2000s, “bourses d’achat collectives” brought together groups of non-professional buyers looking for small or medium-sized dwellings with a view to the collective acquisition of large vacant buildings. The purchase and basic renovation work were organised collectively by these groups. More recently, innovative forms of co-housing – habitat groupés – have emerged, though their numbers remain ­limited.24 The term “co-housing” refers to housing forms characterised by the sharing of certain living spaces and a partici­ patory dimension. The non-speculative nature of

co-housing projects allows residents to be involved through self-management, promotes pooling of resources and ­collaboration, and accommodates both mixed-use and mixed-income configurations.25 Furthermore, co-housing aims to achieve social cohesion and inclusion, caring for an aging population, organising the community, and providing gender- and child-friendly environments. Four types of co-housing can be distinguished. The first is the bourses d’achat collectif, which initially involved the conversion of pre-existing industrial sites. These buildings were usually transformed with a casco (i.e. structure, windows, and heating only but no finishing) configuration, which means that loft units were designed ­according to the available space and then each private apartment was customised by its residents. While these pre-existing constructions can vary from a corner block (CôtéKanal, pp. 272– 273) to large industrial buildings (Nimifi, pp. 274– 275; La Tréfilerie, pp. 284–285), they all include collective spaces such as courtyards and gardens; ­private open spaces such as balconies, loggias, verandas, and terraces are added to the original structure. New housing volumes can also be combined with the pre-existing building, in particular to accommodate atypical dwellings such as duplex types, artists residences, etc. (Cheval Noir, pp. 286–287). The second is private initiatives; these also aim at affordable co-housing. Co-housing can ­result in empowerment, for instance by enabling disadvantaged families to privately own duplex apartments through participatory practices (L’Espoir, pp. 280–281). In addition to a typological com­­bination of dwellings, spaces for community life – like common gardens, shared spaces,

Community Land Trust Brussels (CLTB) creates affordable housing for low-income residents, offering the opportunity to buy a dwelling without buying the land (Stekke + Fraas and Atelier 229, CLTB project Vandenpeereboom – Arc-en-ciel, 2020).

23 Lenel, Emmanuelle et al. “Contemporary Co-housing Experiments in the Brussels-Capital Region.” Brussels Studies, no. 142, 2020, pp. 1–19.  24 Ibid.   25  Tummers, Lidewij. “Understanding Co-housing from a Planning Perspective: Why and How?” Urban Research & Practice, vol. 8, no. 1, 2015, pp. 64–78.  

249

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Communal-living projects can encourage contact between neighbours and social cohesion (Urban Platform, CLTB intergenerational project CALICO, 2021).

and collective amenities – are often incorporated, usually on the ground floor (Brutopia, pp. 300– 301). While these projects are mainly “self-managed” cluster housing units initiated by the residents themselves, the two remaining types are chiefly promoted and regulated by public authorities. In the concept of Community Land Trust (CLT), which is behind the third type, “affordable” is not limited to the development of housing for low-income residents, but also extends to the opportunity to buy a home without buying the land. This concept has been experimented with by the private initiatives of co-housing (Habitat groupé Tivoli, pp. 324–325) and by the ­creation of the Community Land Trust Brussels (CLTB) to offer low-income Brussels residents affordable and sustainable quality homes. By involving residents in the design and management, these projects aim to generate a sense of community within the project. The fourth, a new co-housing and communal living trend, embodies the idea of community through housing design. In this case, co-housing is to foster social cohesion through a balance of unit types and collective spaces. For instance, housing projects for the elderly or the disabled consist of minimum-sized dwellings enriched by large circulation areas to encourage social interaction, such as a large gallery (Engelenbergstraat 21, pp. 332–333) or a corridor provided by common spaces (Villa Pilifs, pp. 302–303) alongside

gardens and equipment. One of the most recent trends is represented by CLTB projects mixing unit types for both an intergenerational and an intercultural purpose with a focus on gender, while providing housing for low-income families. Despite their great variety, new forms of co-housing nevertheless share several features. First, co-housing projects display a wide degree of design versatility, from self-managed converted buildings and new constructions to initiatives by public and social institutions. Therefore, the goal behind the architecture – to create a collective and community environment – is some­times more important than the typologies themselves. Second, they involve an inclusive and participative approach allowing both architects and residents to take part in pivotal decisions.26 On the one hand, the general design scheme and collective spaces are discussed and decided jointly by residents. On the other hand, each household works with a specific architect on their domestic space. As a result, this process reinforces, in a dynamic way, residents’ collaborative involvement in project design. Third, units are designed to suit the specific domestic needs of their users. Projects consist of a combination of unit types, which reinterprets the typological and social diversity characterising a traditional Brussels block. Fourth, collective amenities, circulation, and open spaces are not considered merely complementary to dwellings, but valued as indispensable to the collective intentions of the project design. Fifth, multi-purpose spaces and public faci­l­ ities prompt neighbourhood dynamics. Their small scale contributes actively to the local economy and promotes social interaction, creating a sustainable environment for further urban ­developments.

Large-Scale Projects: Canal Landscape with a Tower In addition to small-scale dynamics, the Brussels-Capital Region had political ambitions to work on large-scale projects across municipal borders. To this end, the government prioritised the formerly industrial Canal Area and also launched ten new strategic development sites27 requiring a global and transversal strategy. In 2013, a new urban master plan for the 14-kmlong stretch of canal structuring the city from south to north28 was implemented. At the core of this development is a mix of urban functions and economic strengthening, with a potential 25,000

26  Ledent, Gérald and Salembier, Chloé. “Co-Housing to Ease and Share Household Chores? Spatial Visibility and Collective Deliberation as Levers for Gender Equality.” Buildings, vol. 11, no. 5, 189, 2021, pp. 1–23.   27  Schaerbeek-Formation and Tour & Taxis sites, which are complementary to the development of the Canal Zone, Heysel, Reyers, Southern Quarter, West Station site, Josaphat, Delta-Vorstlaan, the barracks sites in Etterbeek and Ixelles, the prison sites in Saint-Gilles and F ­ orest, Avenue Leopold III, and the NATO site.   28  Région de Bruxelles-Capitale and Alexandre Chemetoff. Plan-Canal/Kanaalplan. G ­ entilly, Les éditions du bureau des paysages, 2014.   

250

The density of residual industrial areas along the Brussels Canal is increased with open urban blocks consisting of groups of detached apartment buildings designed to create a new urban fabric ­(architectesassoc+, residential buildings RIVA, 2021).

housing units to meet domestic demand. This framework envisions large-scale housing projects to reactivate brownfield sites. Due to their former industrial use, the available large plots operate as catalysts for transforming the Canal Area, often in conflict with the current, lower-income population. In recent years, the results have been reflected in the dynamics promoted by private developers and investors in particular. Two complementary and sometimes interwoven trends can be seen along the Brussels Canal. First, proposals were made to clear the re­ sidual industrial fabric and densify the city through open urban blocks.29 This urban layout would allow for a group of apartment buildings designed to create urban conditions ex nihilo. Each building is designed by a different architectural firm, thus stressing its architectural autonomy. On the one hand, an open urban block can consist of apartment buildings perpendicular (Akenkaai 36, pp. 316–317) and parallel (Willebroekkaai 22, pp. 318–319) to the canal sharing a common garden; on the other, project layouts generate a fragmented urban environment unified only by proximity on a shared plot (Mansion Block, pp. 328–329). All privately built developments combine standard apartments with limited typological variations with generous open spaces such as balconies, loggias, and terraces.

By contrast, in projects by public clients, the open urban block incorporates neighbourhood facilities (Rempart des Moines – Southern Block, pp. 330–331). A second trend in these large-scale initiatives is projects changing the urban skyline. Recent schemes by private developers use tower-type housing as a tool to build the 21st century metropolis. The Canal is already the site of the highest residential skyscraper in Belgium (Up-Site Tower, pp. 296–297), and a series of high-rise buildings are ­expected to establish a new urban landscape. These projects propose mixed-use configurations adopting a standard set of spatial and distribution features (Havenlaan 12, pp. 334–335), occasionally introduce collective amenities for the residents (Dockside, pp. 338–339) and in a number of cases reinterpret elements of the Art Deco towers built in the 1930s in their vertical development and circulation spaces (Dayton, pp. 326–327). Common aspects emerge from a comparison of these trends. First, the large dimensions of brownfield sites lend themselves to large-scale developments over the division of the space into smaller plots.30 Second, the open-block model increases urban porosity by including green surfaces, but this does not match the existing fabric of Brussels. The resulting free layouts could be executed in any city. The city envisioned by these

29  The “open block” concept was defined and adopted for architectural design by Christian de Portzamparc in the 1980s. Accorsi, Florence. L’îlot ouvert/The Open Block: Christian Portzamparc. Brussels, AAM, 2010).   30  Le Fort, Barbara and Jean-Philippe De Visscher. “Typo-­ morphological Diversity and Urban Resilience: A Comparative Study of Three Heterogeneous Blocks in Brussels.” Urban Morphology, vol. 24, no. 1, 2020, pp. 70–94.  

251

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Housing, public facilities, and productive activities are merged in projects for a new urban district aiming to redevelop former industrial sites (noArchitecten, Sergison Bates architects, Korteknie Stuhlmacher Architecten, Aurélie Hachez Architecte, and Elseline Bazin – mixed urban development City Gate II/Petite Île, 2028).

projects is a “global” metropolis, appealing to an international audience. Third, the unit plans are usually guided by pragmatic concerns, in particu­ lar in the private sector. Compared with the referential housing type, characterised by a standard ratio and flexible spaces, these projects propose conventional schemes with standard sizes and few innovations. Fourth, outdoor spaces are fundamental elements in the spatial configuration of each dwelling. In the end, despite the need for affordable homes, also for larger families, developers have systematically chosen to build chiefly small one- and two-bedroom apartments – a typology that delivers the highest profit per square metre – aimed at the upper middle classes, foreigners, and investors.

Living and Producing: Workers Leaving the Factory Brussels, historically the largest industrialised city in Belgium, experienced a process of de-industrialisation in the post-war period.31 This produced empty urban areas and disused industrial sites. One of the Brussels-Capital Region’s goals is to retain and expand light industry.32 Contemporary projects connecting workplace and housing engage with sustainable issues such as urban mobility, housing affordability, and social cohesion. To meet these goals, a brand-new trend has emerged in Brussels for projects combining, in a liveable way, productive activities with housing. New typological configurations are needed to deal with these mixed uses. The southern sector of the Canal Area, which is currently not very accessible, has been identified as an area for urban development. Two design approaches can be identified: First, mixed-use projects propose a new urban block

+14

+2

+1

0

apartments garden parking productive activities

A project for hybrid urban blocks superposes a programme of ­productive activities and housing with an intermediate layer of parking spaces (XDGA Xaveer De Geyter Architects, hybrid urban block City Dox, 2024).

31  De Boeck, Sarah and Michael Ryckewaert. “The Preservation of Productive Activities in Brussels: The Interplay between Zoning and ­Industrial Gentrification.” Urban Planning, vol. 5, no. 3, 2020, pp. 351–363.   32  Borret, Kristiaan. “Brussels Productive City.” Perspective – Bureau bruxellois de la planification, 2019.  

252

Transformation of office space into single-room occupancies supported by a multitude of shared ­facilities and working spaces (Dogma, transformation of office space into housing, Pretty Vacant, 2014).

consisting of a podium occupying the entire plot and a vertical development with specific purposes at each level: the podium accommodates productive activities; shared gardens and col­lective open space (Making a/+ Living — Northern Tower, pp. 336–337) or a car park are located on the roof of the podium; and apartments of diverse typologies are located in towers. Projects of the second type do not have a large podium but create a new urban district with a focus on the redevelopment of industrial sites, now open to and continuous with the city. This transformation offers a lower-density and mixeduse combination of affordable homes, light industrial and commercial facilities, and neighbourhood public services. Both design approaches share the goal of building “a city in a city” in which the proximity principle – with the combination of living and working, production and consumption – defines a sustainable concept of a compact city for Brussels. These projects stand for a kind of design hybridisation that accommodates the different scales demanded by light industry and housing. Thus, both high-rise and low-rise housing include flexible spaces for mixed use and apartments enhanced by collective spaces.

33 Dogma. Living and Working. Cambridge, Mass., MIT Press, 2022.

Housing Manifestos: Prototypes as Inspiration During the 2010s, several incisive studies and non-built design proposals alerted architects, clients, and the government to urgent urban-housing issues. These projects can be considered mani­ festos offering a sustainable vision of the city. For instance, in the post-war period large portions of the city – such as the European quarter, where most of the European institutions are located – were completely transformed into ­ mono­functional office clusters. A gradual transformation of office buildings was proposed to combine affordable housing and work space in a hybrid urban block as part of the same productive stream. The proposal also drew attention to the typological evolution of Brussels housing, as the site was occupied by a typical Leopold-era urban block before these post-war transformations.33 Recent years have brought forth new visions that attempt to intercept the transitions occurring in contemporary housing, which is to accommodate all seasons of life – youth, adulthood, old age – rather than hypostatise family living as a timeless norm. The CLTB experiments with new layouts and adaptable construction to translate the concept of “evolutive housing” into living spaces that respect as much as possible the transient nature of family living over the years and

253

THE SEARCH FOR QUALIT Y HOUSING

Temporary occupation of pre-existing spaces has become a housing practice recognised by the authorities (Squat 123, temporary use in agreement with the owner Wallonia Region, 2007–2018).

decades (Do you see me when we pass?, pp. 346–347). The attitude appears to be a continuation of the utopian projects such as Le Nouveau Bruxelles by Victor Bourgeois (1930) and Ville linéaire by Renaat Braem (1934). Several grassroots initiatives spreading in Brussels in response to the lack of affordable housing are also manifestos in their own right. The temporary occupation of pre-existing ­spaces in transition, such as squats, has become a recognised practice and more recently a strategy legalised by the authorities. People – such as the homeless, undocumented families, activists, refugees, precarious workers, artists, students – who enter an abandoned building without authorisation can sign a temporary occupation agreement with the owner. This allows them to remain for an indefinite period, with six months’ notice, providing stability for the development of self-management and solidarity housing. This form of housing raises questions about the temporary occupation of sites or buildings as a tool for increasing the density of the city and offers a model of social organisation prefiguring a new, sustainable life cycle for urban spaces. These manifesto projects as well as squatting models form prototypes defining the conceptual framework and operational tools for their development. They propose forms of collective living that critically inspire housing production in the Brussels-Capital Region.

Contemporary Housing Agencies Over the last two decades, housing development has experienced a shift in Brussels thanks to a renewed momentum and vision by its regional

authorities, as well as local initiatives such as the contrats de quartier, bourses d’achats collectifs, temporary occupations, self-managed initiatives etc. While they were limited to the Brussels-Capital Region, they also had some impact on the city’s hinterland, i.e. the two Brabant provinces, forming a metropolitan area of more than 2 million inhabitants, twice the population of the city ­itself. From 2000 on, urban housing in Brussels has been engaged in a transition process to make city living sustainable for and attractive to its inhab­ itants in the 21st-century city. The result is a dense city designed to provide a variety of dwelling types corresponding to an increasingly diverse population. In addition, this typological variety is complemented by new forms of management and alternative forms of tenure – such as housing cooperatives and the Community Land Trust Brussels (CLTB) – which offer effective solutions to current economic and social challenges. There is nevertheless a need to expand contemporary housing initiatives as current housing policies are insufficient to meet demand. A growing proportion of households do not have the necessary financial resources for housing, and the market in Brussels does not address the growing inequalities of access to housing. In fact, many families with children and ­disadvantaged people prefer to leave Brussels in order to escape the high prices. Furthermore, 47 % of current Brussels households consist of a single person and 23 % of two people. This demographic trend encourages standardised concepts for domestic spaces following the rules of the market. At the end of this chapter, once again the question emerges: how can people live in the city today? Affordable housing and diversified dwelling types are crucial to create the conditions for a liveable city. The contemporary housing dynamics highlight the wealth of built solutions in terms of design. Nevertheless, there is still a need for innovation and experiments in architectural ­design, typology, public investments, stakeholder collaborations, and land-use regulation. New housing projects will need to meet ongoing and future issues, such as climate change, co-living, gender equality, migrations, and working–livingcombinations – all emphasised by the recent COVID-19 outbreak. The contemporary city is built continuously on a palimpsest, the stratifications of earlier built fabric and new visions. Like the dominant maison bruxelloise and the other forms of housing that have emerged up to the 21st century, contemporary housing must add to these past layers to strengthen and continue the urban and socio-cultural identity of the ­Brussels-Capital Region.

254

Re-inventing the maison bruxelloise: the role of roofs and gardens Voorzittersstraat 45 rue du président House William, pp. 312–313

255

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

256

Reviving the 19th-century city blocks Helihavenlaan 7, pp. 276–277 Mexico 15, pp. 322–323

257

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

258

Reviving the 19th-century city blocks Navez 111, pp. 306–307 Portaels 158, pp. 308–309

259

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

260

Transforming non-residential buildings into housing P.NT 2, pp. 282–283 The Cosmopolitan, pp. 320–321

261

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

262

Co-housing and new forms of communal housing CôtéKanal, pp. 272–273 Brutopia, pp. 300–301

263

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

264

The open block and the creation of new neighbourhoods Tour & Taxis, pp. 326–329

265

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

266

Combining housing and productive spaces Marguerite Bervoetsstraat – rue Marguerite Bervoets Abattoirs of Anderlecht

267

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

268

Housing manifestos between temporary occupation and prototypes City Gate II/Petite Île (Entrakt) Sorocité – accommodation for homeless women (Communa)

269

BRUSSELS CIT YSCAPES   III

Housing Atlas III 71. CôtéKanal 72. Nimifi 73. Helihavenlaan 7 74. Maison Krantz-Fontaine 75. L’Espoir 76. P.NT 2 77. La Tréfilerie 78. Cheval Noir 79. Savonnerie Heymans 80. Fin 15 81. Palais 95 82. Claes 36 83. Up-Site Tower 84. Cygnes Digue 85. Brutopia 86. Villa Pilifs 87. Népomucène 15 88. Navez 111 89. Portaels 158 90. Charme 9 91. House William 92. Dumont 5 93. Akenkaai 36 94. Willebroekkaai 22 95. The Cosmopolitan 96. Mexico 15 97. Habitat groupé Tivoli 98. Dayton 99. Mansion Block 100. Rempart des Moines – Southern Block 101. Engelenbergstraat 21 102. Havenlaan 12 – Southern Tower 103. Making a/+ Living – Northern Tower 104. Dockside 105. Tilleuls 106. Peterbos 9 107. Vervloet — Villa Nord 108. Do you see me when we pass?

Landmarks A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. L.

Brussels Canal National Basilica of the Sacred Heart Atomium Palace of Laeken Brussels-South railway station Palace of Justice of Brussels Brussels Town Hall Cathedral of St. Michael and St. Gudula Royal Palace of Brussels European Parliament Cinquantenaire Arcade and Parc du Cinquantenaire Bois de la Cambre and Sonian Forest

HOUSING ATL AS   III

86 C

D

89 88

77 97

99

B

98 102 101

93 94

96

83

104 73 87 95

80 78 72 75 71 100

H

G

106

76

81

79

I K

108 F

E

103

J

82 92

84

85 91 90

A

105

L

107

74

272

71 CôtéKanal COMPLETION: 1998 ARCHITECT: Metamorphose Project Team, Marcel Rijdams ADDR ESS: Hopstraat 71 rue du Houblon, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 17 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 139 m2 + terrace 28 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This building (whose original architect is unknown) is one of the oldest co-housing projects in Brussels (see also p. 262). It was initiated in the framework of the “bourses d’achats collectives”, a programme undertaken by the City of Brussels in the 1990s to reoccupy abandoned industrial buildings through their collective purchase by a group of buyers

brought together by the municipality. This project is located next to the Brussels Canal, an area that has been redeveloped since the 1990s, in the buildings of a former brewery that had been abandoned. It encompasses 17 dwellings, 5 parking spaces, 2 offices, and a common space open to neighbourhood activities. The heart of the project is a large –  8 by 24 m – light well in the centre of the building, which gives air and light to the dwellings. The external circulation serving the dwellings is organised in terraces around this space. On the roof, large communal terraces provide a view of the whole city. The interior design of each apartment was done individually by each co-owner. This principle, ­coupled with the fact that the dwellings are located in a building that was not originally intended for housing, produces a great diversity of ­housing types, almost all of which have a terrace.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

273

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

274

72 Nimifi COMPLETION: 1999 ARCHITECT: Atelier Gigogne, Ravenstein III (original architects: G. Chambon & J.F. Colin) ADDR ESS: Hopstraat 47 rue du Houblon, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 20 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 246 m2 + terrace 35 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This housing project was implemented in the buildings of the former printing house of the newspaper

L’Écho de la Bourse, built in the 1930s. It was initi­ ated in the framework of the “bourses d’achats ­collectives”, a programme by the City of Brussels allowing a group of 20 households to buy the buildings together. The programme includes 20 dwellings, offices, a multi-purpose room, and 15 garages. The non-residential spaces are located in the parts that were least suitable for housing, such as the printing-press room, which is used as a collective space. The project includes two volumes: a building around a concrete courtyard and an elongated building opening onto a communal garden, at the end of which there is access for cars. Given the ­industrial nature of the buildings, the dwellings

have a loft-type character, with high ceilings, large windows, and open interior spaces. The dwellings show minimal partitioning based on the residents’ individual approaches. Private terraces are attached to the dwellings while a communal terrace is found on the flat roof, lined with galvanised-steel balustrades and stainless-steel cables. The main façade has not been significantly modified, with a white Granilis coating on a granite plinth and a series of arcades on the ground floor. Most of the old concrete and the steel windows have been restored and repainted, while the new windows are fitted with metal frames.

Cross section 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

275

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

276

73  Helihavenlaan 7 COMPLETION: 2005 ARCHITECT: Eugeen Liebaut ADDR ESS: Helihavenlaan 7 rue Heliport, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 24 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 131 m2 + terrace 21 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

Close to Brussels’ Quartier Nord, this project (see also p. 256) is ­located in a heterogeneous built environment that includes several housing towers, a fire station, and an educational farm. It was built simultaneously with the refurbishment of an office ­building on the other site of the block with which it shares a garden, designed by Erik Dhont, set on the roof of a semi-­buried garage. The five-storey-high

building offers different apartment typologies of one, two, or three bedrooms. Above this volume, two rooftop apartments, a simplex and a duplex, are designed as autonomous glass boxes. The ground floor is raised 1.1 m above the pavement to enhance the dwellings’ privacy. Each floor – with the exception of the first floor, which comprises six dwellings – accommodates four apartments, grouped two by two around two vertical circulation cores. The standard dwellings include a through living room, with two bedrooms at the rear, one bedroom at the front, and a central core of wet rooms. The apartments are fully glazed and have continuous, narrow – 50 cm – concrete ­balconies. They become wider on the garden side in front of the living rooms. A thin, galvanised-steel structure holds the railings and colourful vertical panes used to separate terraces.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

277

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Sixth floor/roof plan 1:500

Fifth floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

278

74 Maison Krantz-Fontaine COMPLETION: 2006 ARCHITECT: Atelier d’architecture Pierre Hebbelinck ADDR ESS: Pijnboslaan 5 avenue de la Pinède, 1180 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 317 m2 + garden 1217 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Detached house

This individual house (the original architect is unknown) is located in a 1950s allotment in Uccle. Originally, the sloping site accommodated a cottage-style brick house with a gable roof. This house

was only partially preserved by the new project, which retained the cellar level for storage spaces and garage, and some of the walls and the fireplace on the ground floor. These latter elements delineate the dining and living rooms on the ground floor. They are complemented by a kitchen to the south and four bedrooms and their bathrooms to the east. All these spaces, old and new, are surrounded by a modern envelope that unites them and allows new circulations, generating the house’s contemporary façade in the shape of an irregular polygon. This envelope is made entirely of aluminium, from the perforated sheets of metal for the exterior walls to the window frames and the ceiling’s corrugated sheets. Inside, the walls and openings of the original house have two kinds of finishes: white render ­towards the interior of the living spaces and sandblasted bricks and concrete around the perimeter.

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

279

HOUSING ATL AS   III

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

280

75 L’Espoir COMPLETION: 2007 ARCHITECT: Carnoy-Crayon ADDR ESS: Finstraat 11 rue Fin, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 14 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 129 m2 + terrace 13 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This participatory project was created to enable a group of 14 low-income families to access homeownership. It is located on a 35-m-wide plot of land near the canal and the centre of Molenbeek. From the outset, the residents wanted an environmentally friendly project, leading to a passive building in which they could master all the necessary built-in

technologies. The site is divided into seven bays perpendicular to the street, of 5 m each, in which two superimposed duplexes are placed, sharing a common entrance on the ground floor. The ground floor duplexes have a terrace and a garden at the rear, while the upper floor ones have terraces at the front and rear. All the dwellings are therefore through apartments, and thus offer a southern orien­tation at the front and a northern orientation at the back. The number of rooms varies from two to five and the dwelling floor areas vary from 100 to 150 m2. The four-storey building is built out of wood, a material that is clearly visible on the street side where a timber structure serves both as a ­sunshade and as a balcony. On the first two floors, each unit is singled out by a bright colour, while the next two floors are clad in wood.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

281

Cross section 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

282

76 P.NT2 COMPLETION: 2007 ARCHITECT: BOB361 Architects (original architect: J. Schockaert) ADDR ESS: Poincarélaan 28–31 boulevard Poincaré, 1070 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 18 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 176 m2 + terrace 86 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This project (see also p. 260) stems from the transformation of former goldsmithies located on Brussels’ inner ring road. Starting from a group of very dense buildings, several demolitions created a suitable environment for 18 dwellings, offices, and a commercial space organised around four outdoor areas. On the boulevard, there is a commercial space and the entrance to the site. Behind this first threshold,

a semi-public paved courtyard serves the office spaces of the architectural studio BOB361. Further in, a private garden is shared by all the dwellings while two smaller green spaces form the heart of the northernmost apartments. On the ­upper floors, the dwellings are accommodated in the old industrial structures, producing a great ­typological and spatial variety. Their spaces are spread over large areas and are completed by terraces between green roofs. Several communal spaces are provided, such as a summer kitchen in the ­collective garden and a bicycle room. The original façades of the buildings are mostly in red brick, while the new ­additions are mainly in concrete both inside and outside. All the window frames are made of wood except for those of elements such as greenhouses, which recall the industrial character of the site. In the first courtyard, holes have been cut in the concrete floor, which are used to create a passageway to the first garden.

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

283

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

284

77  La Tréfilerie COMPLETION: 2007 ARCHITECT: AAAArchitectures (unit: C. Titeux) (original architects: C. Thomisse, E. Dekeuleneer, and M. Dorselaer) ADDR ESS: Gustave Schildknechtstraat 33 rue Gustave Schildknecht, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 54 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 168 m2 + patio 14 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This project results from the transformation of ­several industrial buildings which accommodated a former wire-drawing mill and the EPEDA mattress shop. It was initiated in the framework of the “bourses d’achats collectives”, a programme by the City of Brussels enabling a large group of households to buy the structures communally. The complex consists of three buildings on the street and four in the centre of the block, which are now home to 54 dwellings, production, and office spaces.

The project is organised around an inner courtyard that is accessible from the street via a large entrance lobby and a common hall. All the vertical cores leading to the dwellings start in this courtyard. Just as in other industrial-building transformations, the project shows a variety of housing typologies both in terms of size and interior layouts. The dwellings were delivered casco (i.e. with just the structure, window, and heating but no ­finishing) and the interiors designed individually by the inhabitants. Besides the buildings, the project has two collective terraces on the roof and a large communal garden that opens onto the Rue de Moorsleede, where it has pedestrian access. The preserved façades of the original industrial buildings reveal different construction periods. The ­centre red-brick building dates from 1923, and is decorated with concrete bands. To its left is a later building from the 1950s, using the same materials with sterner ornamental features. To its right, a 1960s modernist building shows a concrete-mesh façade. All buildings are topped by tile roofs.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

285

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

286

78  Cheval Noir COMPLETION: 2010 ARCHITECT: L’Escaut, Atelier Gigogne ADDR ESS: Zwart Paardstraat 17 rue du Cheval Noir, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 31 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 100 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project (whose original architect is unknown) is located on the left bank of the canal. It is the result of the conversion of the former Hallemans breweries. The original L-shaped building has been complemented by a new construction to the east. Together, they form an inner courtyard accessible from the Rue du Cheval Noir and the Place Brunfaut. The new and higher building is easily seen from the

Façade 1:500

right bank of the canal. The project accommodates 31 artists’ apartments combined with workshops, an innovative programme for Brussels. The vertical circulation core is located on the west side of the new building and is accessible from the inner courtyard. From that single circulation core, a series of exterior landings and footbridges leads to the apartments. All dwellings have views both to the courtyard and to the outside and most of them are arranged as duplexes, which prevents privacy ­problems on the ground floor and reduces the ­collective circulation space. The sanitary facilities are concentrated in the centre of the dwellings around a minimum number of vertical ducts. The brick façades of the old building have been preserved, with a series of local interventions such as round windows with concrete frames. The new building shows a higher, twisted volume, coated in zinc.

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

287

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

288

79 Savonnerie ­Heymans COMPLETION: 2011 ARCHITECT: MDW Architecture ADDR ESS: Anderlechtsesteenweg 139–147 rue d’Anderlecht, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 42 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 146 m2 + terrace 15 m2, garden 28 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project (whose original architect is unknown) is located in the heart of Brussels. It results from the restructuring of the former Heymans soap factory, with some buildings dating back to the 18th century. The project accommodates 42 social-housing units, a caretaker’s lodge, a communal lounge, a laundry room, and a children’s day-care centre. The buildings

are organised around three large outdoor spaces: a tree-planted garden, a large paved courtyard, and a park-playground arranged around the concrete structure of a 1950s building. A great variety of dwelling typologies is found in the project, reflecting the variety of buildings on the site, ranging from new to renovated structures: studios, oneto six-bedroom apartments, lofts, duplexes, and three-storey houses. The smaller dwellings are ­located on the street side, while the larger units occupy the interior of the block. One of the ­characteristic elements of the project are the glass-­ enclosed bioclimatic loggias that create both an acoustic barrier, particularly towards the Rue ­d’Anderlecht, and greater thermal inertia for the dwellings. Most of the historical elements of the site have been preserved, such as the industrial chimney that is used to ventilate the underground car park.

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

289

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

290

80  Fin 15 COMPLETION: 2011 ARCHITECT: ectv architecten Els Claessens Tania Vandenbussche ADDR ESS: Finstraat 15 rue Fin, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 3 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 211 m2 + patio 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project is located near the canal in the centre of Molenbeek. It consists of three interwoven dwellings and a large garden set on an unusual plot of land, narrow – 8 m – on the street side, and wider – 20 m – deeper in the block. On the street side, the ground floor is completely open to allow entrance to all the dwellings, with space for two cars

Façade 1:500

to park. Beyond this threshold, a shared staircase leads to the upper floors where it serves a three-­ bedroom duplex and a one-bedroom simplex. On the ground floor, past this shared staircase, an ­exterior concrete path leads further into the depth of the block, offering a glimpse of the garden. After serving a collective bicycle room, this path leads to the entrance of the third dwelling that reveals large glazed façades along the garden. This dwelling has two bedrooms on the first floor that can be accessed by two individual staircases, allowing one of the bedroom spaces to become independ­ent within the dwelling. The garden is treated in a very sober fashion as a rock garden made using rubble from the demolition works. The façades combine light-coloured brick, concrete elements, and wooden panels. Inside, the ceilings’ wooden structure is kept visible and simply painted white.

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

291

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

292

81  Palais 95 COMPLETION: 2012 ARCHITECT: Matador ADDR ESS: Paleizenstraat 95 rue des Palais, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 5 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 122 m2 + terrace 4 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project was built as part of a “contrat de quar­ tier”, which aims to renew the socio-economically weakened areas of the city through a series of ­urban planning, architectural, and social actions. The complex includes five social-housing units and a local police station. It consists of two volumes that connect to very different existing neighbours: an eight-storey building on Rue des Palais and

a two-storey industrial building on Rue Brichaut. These two volumes are organised in an S-shaped plan in order to create two external spaces: a public square and an internal courtyard dedicated to the police station. The housing units are located in the taller volume. They are accessible via a hallway connecting the Rue des Palais and the newly created square. Their vertical circulation is arranged along the southern party wall. On the upper floors, the dwellings are organised in three parallel longitudinal bays. The first bay extends the vertical circulation and includes all the service spaces. The second shows a long hall with a view to the east. The third accommodates the living spaces, whose layouts vary according to the position of the terrace, located on the corner or towards the main façade. The whole building has a monolithic character. Its façades, clad in black brick, are pierced with bronze-coloured window frames.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

293

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Sixth floor plan 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

294

82  Claes 36 COMPLETION: 2014 ARCHITECT: AgwA ADDR ESS: Joseph Claesstraat 36 rue Joseph Claes, 1060 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 205 m2 + terrace 13 m2, garden 66 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This small single-family house is located in the lower part of Saint-Gilles on a particularly narrow plot – 3.3 m – that is 40 m deep. As with many houses built in Brussels’ 19th-century blocks, the garden level is about 2 m lower than the street. The design of the dwelling takes advantage of these two constraints –

Façade 1:500

narrow plot and lower garden level – to propose a split-level house assembled around a central block containing all the technical services such as toilets, shower, and storage room. These split levels are twice as long – that is 5.2 m – on the garden than on the street side. They are linked by flights of wooden stairs on either side of the central core. From the entrance hall, the staircase leads down to the kit­ chen and dining room, which is continuous with the garden, or up to the living room. Further up, the staircase serves a study, bedrooms, a bathroom, and a children’s playroom. The façades of the house are covered with white glazed bricks, a feature ­typical of the street. They are regularly pierced by white aluminium-framed windows, while the entrance has a perforated aluminium door. In terms of size, all windows are identical except for the larger bay that leads to the garden.

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

Basement floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

295

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

296

83  Up-Site Tower COMPLETION: 2014 ARCHITECT: A2RC, Ateliers Lion ADDR ESS: Akenkaai 69 quai des Péniches, 1000

Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 251 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 96 m2 + terrace 11 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This housing tower is part of a larger project along the canal to the north of the city centre. Organised around a communal garden, the project includes several apartment buildings for a total of 356 units along the water, shops, and four office buildings on the Quai de Willebroeck. The whole complex sits on four levels of car parking. Facing the widening

of the canal at the Vergotte basin is a 42-storey t­ ower – the highest residential tower in Belgium. It is accessible from the canal side, where a large ­lobby leads to a central circulation core with two cross staircases and four lifts. On the standard floors, this core serves eight apartments of various sizes. Higher up, the tower becomes slimmer, with a series of setbacks, and the apartments are only five, and eventually only one, per floor. The highrise includes a high variety of dwellings, ranging from studios to three-bedroom flats and penthouses. All have a terrace and a classic division of space between day and night functions. The ­tower also includes various amenities such as a restaurant, wellness area, and panoramic roof terrace. The façades are clad in white and grey stone, with white aluminium elements for the window frames and railings.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

297

33rd floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0 Cross section 1:500

25 m

298

84  Cygnes Digue COMPLETION: 2014 ARCHITECTS: Ledroit Pierret Polet Architectes + Atelier de l’Arbre d’Or + Label Architecture ADDR ESS: Damstraat 10 rue de la Digue, ­Zwanenstraat 25 rue des Cygnes, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 14 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 123 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project is located in the lower part of Ixelles on a plot of land that connects two streets, formerly accommodating a cinema and a warehouse. Following the demolition of these buildings, the new ­design creates a garden inside the block benefiting the project but also the pre-existing surrounding buildings. The new 4000 m2 project, built within the framework of a “contrat de quartier”, is a good example of the social and functional mix of Brussels’

urban-renewal policies. The “contrat de quartier” comprises a series of urban-planning, architectural, and social actions with the objective of renewing deprived areas of the city. In this case, includes a community centre, 14 social-housing units, the aforementioned garden, and a car park. On the street sides, the height of the new constructions strictly follows that of the neighbouring buildings. Roughly perpendicular, a third volume is installed in the heart of the block. It is accessed by a pathway that runs through the newly created garden and is accessible from the streets through two passageways. This new building proposes a vertical circulation core in the centre, with two dwellings on either side. Each apartment shows a centrally located, through living room on either side of which are the bedrooms. The complex comprises 14 social-­ housing units, ranging from small studios to large four-bedroom apartments. The façades display zig-zag lines and are covered with white and grey glazed bricks arranged in a diamond pattern.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

299

Cross section 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

300

85 Brutopia COMPLETION: 2015 ARCHITECT: Stekke + Fraas ADDR ESS: Van Volxemlaan 385 avenue Van Volxem, de Mérodestraat 447 rue de Mérode, 1190 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 29 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 140 m2 + terrace 11 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This co-housing project (see also p. 263) is located on a plot of land connecting two streets in the ­lower part of Forest. The design completes the urban block with buildings that extend the built alignments on both streets in height and depth. The heart of the project lies between these volumes: a large communal garden. In addition to the garden,

the residents share common amenities such as a laundry room, a large polyvalent room with a kitchen, and an underground garage for 80 bicycles and 27 cars. Moreover, the ground floor includes three commercial spaces that accommodate an architectural office, an energy consultant, and a day centre for elderly people. The two buildings show a similar design. Each building has a vertical core that serves very wide exterior galleries – 2.4 m – on the first and fourth floors on the street side. These galleries serve ­duplexes, while simplexes are grafted directly on either side of the cores. All the dwellings are through apartments and have a large terrace. On the first floor, these terraces are linked to the garden by a private staircase. The dwellings were delivered offplan and the interiors designed individually by the inhabitants. The façades are clad in grey aluminium with vertical joints, while balconies are made of ­galvanised steel and the galleries of unstained wood.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

301

Cross section 1:500 Second floor plan 1:500

Façade 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

302

86  Villa Pilifs COMPLETION: 2015 ARCHITECT: Pierre Blondel Architectes ADDR ESS: Wimpelbergstraat 188 rue du ­Wimpelberg, 1120 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 20 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 22 m2 + terrace 4 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This building is located on a sunken road in Neder-­ Over-Hembeek, north of Brussels. It houses people with mental disabilities and is positioned near other facilities managed by the association that runs it. The project is designed as a large villa for 20 people. Its steeply sloping site offers two access levels to the building. The lower level, where it meets the street, includes the service areas, workshops, and

Façade 1:500

staff rooms. The upper level, connecting to a communal garden, takes up the residents’ entrance, a common room, and additional workshops. The villa accommodates spaces that bring all the residents together, such as the dining room, multi-purpose activity rooms, and terraces. The residents live in family-sized clusters of five people. The specificity of these smaller units lies in their relationship with the outdoor spaces – whether a garden, a patio, or a panoramic roof terrace. In addition to these outdoor spaces, each cluster is equipped with a common living room and bathroom. Inside the clusters, each resident has a large 16 m2 bedroom with a shower room and access to a balcony or a terrace. The façades are white plastered, with wooden elements marking the communal lounges and balconies. The bedrooms are fitted with white shutters.

Cross section 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

303

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

304

87  Népomucène 15 COMPLETION: 2015 ARCHITECT: KIS Studio (original architect:

J. Michiels) ADDR ESS: Sint-Jan Nepomucenusstraat 15 rue Saint-Jean Népomucène, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 4 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 144 m2 + terraces 13 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

Located in the centre of Brussels, this project offers a triplex apartment on top of a traditional row house from the beginning of the 20th century. In view of its qualities, the street façade has been ­preserved, including two roof dormers. The existing pitched roof was partly removed and replaced by

Façade 1:500

a new double-height living space. In order to make it more accessible, a lift is placed against the rear façade. The triplex encompasses this new volume together with the existing third floor. That floor includes two bedrooms and bathrooms. The living areas are located above, in the double-height ­volume. The fourth floor accommodates the kitchen and dining and living rooms. It has a full-width­ ­balcony and a triple-opening window for maximum openness. Above the dining table, the double height allows light to penetrate. A study is located on the mezzanine level, leading to a corner terrace. The first two-thirds of the mansard roof have been retained to serve as a railing for the terrace created by the recess of the fourth floor. Like the rest of the unglazed elements, it is made of pre-weathered anthracite zinc. A monumental fresco by Dominique Goblet is painted on the east gable wall.

Cross section 1:500

Fifth floor plan 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

305

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

306

88  Navez 111 COMPLETION: 2015 ARCHITECT: LOW architecten ADDR ESS: François-Joseph Navezstraat 111 rue François-Joseph Navez, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 3 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 107 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project is located on the northern corner of a triangular block in Schaerbeek (see also p. 258). The five-storey building is integrated into a streetscape of similar height. Its acute triangular plot is small: 10 m long to the east and 12 m to the west. The entrance to the building is on this latter side. The hallway serves a bicycle store and a waste room, as well

as the communal staircase, which is located against the party wall. The staircase leads down to a level of underground cellars where utility meters and individual storage spaces are located. It also leads up, serving three interlocking duplex apartments on five floors. Each duplex presents a main floor with the living areas and a bedroom, followed by one or two bedrooms on the floor above or below. In this way, the living rooms take advantage of the full depth of the plot and have a double orientation to the east and north or west, depending on the apartment. The building is finished with a flat roof. The façades are made of white and green glazed bricks with a small cross pattern, which clad a prefabricated-concrete plinth. All the window openings are square-shaped and fitted with wooden frames and sashes.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

307

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

308

89  Portaels 158 COMPLETION: 2016 ARCHITECT: MSA, V+ ADDR ESS: Portaelsstraat 158 rue Portaels, 1030 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 5 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 161 m2 + terrace 12 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project (see also p. 259) is located on one of the main north ­entry roads in Schaerbeek, the Boulevard Lambermont, whose building heights it uses to ­create a gateway effect into the neighbourhood. The building occupies the acute northern corner of a trian­gular urban block. It accommodates five social-housing units built in the context of a “contrat de quartier”, a programme aiming to improve socio-­ economically deprived neighbourhoods. The build-

ing has three main façades to the north, east, and west and a small inner courtyard to the south. On the ground floor, its footprint is ­minimal, allowing the public space to be enlarged. The entrance hall is on the north façade, where it leads to a collective staircase located in the angle of the V-shaped floor plan. Each apartment has two to three bedrooms and four orientations. Two dwelling types are found. On the lower levels, there are three split-­ level apartments with the living ­areas to the west and the bedrooms to the east. The top levels are occupied by two head-to-tail duplexes, each with a large roof terrace. The façades are made of white brick with projecting and recessed bonding. The main openings of the dwellings are on the east and west façades, while large windows allow a panoramic view from the staircase.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

309

3

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Roof floor plan 1:500

Fifth floor plan 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

310

90  Charme 9 COMPLETION: 2016 ARCHITECT: Atelier 4/5 ADDR ESS: Steenbeukstraat 9 rue du Charme, 1190 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 255 m2 + terrace 47 m2, garden 60 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

Located in Forest, this project resulted from the refurbishment of an existing house dating from 1928 (whose original architect is unknown). Origin­ ally the house had a garden positioned one level higher than the ground floor, which was therefore quite dark. The new design reorganises the outdoor spaces into three successive levels: a patio on the

Façade 1:500

ground floor, a terrace on an intermediate level, and a garden on the level of the first floor. In addition, the living spaces are positioned on the first floor to benefit from the light and the views over the garden. On the ground floor, the entrance hall leads to a study on the street side and a large bedroom to the back, in direct connection with the patio. In between, the central room includes bicycle storage, cloakroom, dressing room, and ­a toilet. The ground floor bedroom is extended by a large shower room located under the staircase linking the first floor to the terrace. The second floor, under a sloping roof which was formerly an attic, now accommodates two children’s bedrooms. On the garden side, a new dormer allows access to a roof terrace above the kitchen. The front façade has been simply restored, while the rear façade has been rendered white over insulation. Both are fitted with black aluminium frames.

Cross section 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

311

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

312

91  House William COMPLETION: 2017 ARCHITECT: Ouest architecture ADDR ESS: Schepenenstraat 27 rue des Échevins, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 1 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 350 m2 + terrace 5 m2, garden 86 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced house

This family dwelling (see also p. 255) is the result of the complete transformation of a 1920s Brussels row house. The original house (whose architect is unknown) displayed two distinctive features of this housing type: a half-sunken basement leading to a garden half a storey below street level, and a threeroom enfilade on the ground floor with little natural

light in the central room. The renovation tackles these two limitations by transforming the basement into the main living space and removing its ceiling in the last two rooms of the enfilade, producing a double-height volume of almost 7 m. This generates a direct connection to the garden and brings light into the central room. In this space, the mantelpiece of the former ground floor is preserved, hanging in the air. On the garden side, a hanging study floats above the dining room, as a memory of the house’s past annexes. The entrance hall leads now directly to the garden level. On the upper floors, where the bedrooms and bathrooms are found, the origin­al layout has been maintained more faithfully. The front façade was renovated and preserves a very classic aspect. The back façade has been entirely revised. The first level is made of recuperated bricks while the upper floors are clad with zinc.

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

313

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

314

92  Dumont 5 COMPLETION: 2018 ARCHITECT: VVV architecture urbanisme ADDR ESS: Hermann Dumontplein 5 place Hermann Dumont, 1060 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 2 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 42 m2 + common spaces 37 m2, terraces 12 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Terraced “kangaroo” house

This renovated house is part of a group of three ­residences built in 1900 on the western side of Place Hermann Dumont in Saint-Gilles (their original ­architect is unknown). Located on a V-shaped plot, the house shows a funnel footprint that narrows towards the interior of the block. The objective of the renovation project was to create a “kangaroo”

dwelling, i.e. the cohabitation of two households with elderly and younger inhabitants around a common space. Access on the ground floor is via a large triangular stairwell. It leads to the first floor, where the common spaces of the two dwellings are found. This level has three adjoining spaces which accommodate a dining room, living room, and kitchen, with a small terrace towards the heart of the block. On the second floor, there is a flat with a bathroom, dressing room, and bedroom opening onto a winter garden. The last two floors house a duplex dwelling combining a living space on the third floor and a bedroom on the mezzanine. The floors are organised with successive recesses allowing each level to benefit from a terrace facing west. The front façade has been restored to its original state, while the rear façade is clad in zinc panels with vertical joints. It is fitted with wooden frames and the terrace vertical bar railings are bronze-coloured.

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

315

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

316

93  Akenkaai 36 COMPLETION: 2019 ARCHITECT: BEEL architecten ADDR ESS: Akenkaai 36 quai des Péniches, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 39 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 134 m2 + terrace 23 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This project is part of a group of four new buildings organised in the form of an open city block around a collective garden between the east bank of the canal and Parc Maximilien. The building has a rectangular shape and is positioned perpendicular to the canal. The landscape of the collective garden hides away a bicycle storage under the 4-m-tall “hill”. The nine-storey building is located above under-

ground parking shared with the other buildings on the block. On the canal side, there is a large ­double-height commercial space. Behind it, the entrance to the dwellings is accessible through the building’s southern façade. It leads to a hall that gives access to two vertical circulation cores, individual storage spaces, and a common room. The upper floors accommodate five flats with two to three bedrooms. In the centre, there are two through apartments with bedrooms to the north and living rooms to the south. The other three dwellings have bi-oriented living rooms on the ­corners of the building. All apartments have either a large balcony facing the canal or two smaller ­balconies facing south and north. The façades of the building are coated in white, the north façade – as an accent – is finished in travertine tiles. They have prefabricated-concrete balconies lined with transparent glass balustrades.

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

317

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

318

94  Willebroekkaai 22 COMPLETION: 2019 ARCHITECT: 51N4E ADDR ESS: Willebroekkaai 22 quai de Willebroek, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 93 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 68 m2 + terrace 8 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This project is part of a group of four new buildings organised in the form of an open city block around a collective garden along the east bank of the canal. This rectangular building is located on the Quai de Willebroek, parallel to the street. The nine-storey volume stands on an underground parking lot shared with the other buildings on the block. On the street side, there are commercial spaces as well

as the entrance to the parking garage. The entrance to the dwellings in on the south side, alongside a path leading to the common garden. The relatively wide – that is 19 m – standard floors are divided by an interior corridor into two longitudinal bays, ­creating single-aspect apartments. On the east side, a 10-m-wide bay accommodates one-bedroom apartments including a living area, bedroom, and loggia. This exterior triangular-shaped space can be closed off with glazed panels to shield the apartment from the street and create an extra room. On the west side, a 10-m-wide bay includes studio apartments with three French windows and balcon­ ies facing the collective garden. The façades clearly reflect the longitudinal division of the building in two parts. The east façade is clad with green bricks, while the west one is made of pink-pigmented plaster above a concrete plinth.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

319

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

320

95  The Cosmopolitan COMPLETION: 2019 ARCHITECT: BOGDAN & VAN BROECK (original architect: C. Verhelle) ADDR ESS: Arduinkaai 16 quai aux Pierres de Taille, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 130 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 275 m2 + terrace 228 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This project (see also p. 261) converts the former 1960s Assubel headquarters into a residential ­tower. Disrupting the urban fabric of warehouses on Brussels’ former trading harbour, the building runs between the ancient docks and the Rue du ­Canal. The existing tower structure was preserved and extended with three floors, totalling 16. It stands next to a minimal underground parking

lot shared with a five-­storey building on the Rue du Canal that connects smoothly with the neighbouring row houses. It ­features spaces for parking 170 bicycles and 50 cars. The ground and first floors accommodate office spaces to the north and south. In between, a double‑height access hall serves the main vertical distribution core, left in the original position. Given the preservation of the south ­stairwell, the floors are organised around a central corridor with apartments on both sides. They are complemented by new, 1.8-m-wide terraces running the length of the east and west façades. The dwellings range from studios and one-bedroom apartments to large apartments up to four bedrooms, and two top-floor penthouses. Preserving the existing structure offers unusual ceiling heights of more than 3 m. The concrete façade was removed and replaced by a white secondary steel structure ­containing balconies lined with white, perforated sliding panels.

Unit plan 1:100 (southern penthouse) 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

321

Penthouse floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

322

96  Mexico 15 COMPLETION: 2020 ARCHITECT: VERS.A ADDR ESS: Mexicostraat 15 rue de Mexico, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 3 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 175 m2 + terrace 10 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This project (see also p. 257) is located in Molenbeek, on a square plot with 20-m-long sides. Built as part of a “contrat de quartier”, it includes an apartment building and a small neighbourhood park. The latter is arranged around a pre-existing plane tree that becomes the park’s defining feature. A brick portico with three large gated bays makes the park visible from the street. To the west

Façade 1:500

of the plot stands a five-storey building of 8.5 m width composed of two longitu­dinal bays. The ­entrance to the dwellings and the staircase are ­located in the narrow bay. On the ground floor, a one-bedroom apartment extends to the back with a terrace and a small garden. On the upper floors, two duplexes are organised similarly, except that one goes up and the other goes down. Each duplex includes a living area taking up an entire floor. The wider bay comprises a living-dining and loggia enfilade. This loggia is also linked to the kitchen. At the back, behind the collective staircase, a private staircase leads up (or down) to a floor with four bed­ rooms and two bath-/shower rooms. Each dwelling has three orientations. The red-brick façades have white ­mortar joints and trellised-screen openings. The window frames are made of bronze-coloured aluminium, while the loggia railings and the park fences are black.

Cross section 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

323

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

324

97  Habitat groupé Tivoli COMPLETION: 2021 ARCHITECT: Epoc ADDR ESS: Andrée de Jonghstraat 6 rue Andrée de Jongh, 1020 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 9 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 148 m2 + terrace 11 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This co-housing project is located in the new Tivoli neighbourhood in Laeken near the canal. One of the scheme’s particularities is its emphyteutic lease, which remains the property of the Tivoli public developer. The project includes various collective spaces for the residents: a garden, a community room on the ground floor, and another on the top

floor opening onto a large roof terrace. The six-level building volume is set above a basement that accommodates parking for seven cars and 20 bicycles. The ground floor is slightly raised from the street to ensure privacy for the living spaces. It accommodates a large hall serving an apartment, the community room in connection with the garden, and a vertical core. On the upper floors, this vertical core serves an exterior gallery that gives access to two dwellings. Two bedrooms located on the gallery have French windows that provide independent access and further subdivision of the apartments if necessary. In total, the project consists of nine dwellings of three to four bedrooms. All have large south-oriented terraces and the first-floor dwellings enjoy direct access to the garden via a private staircase. The project has load-bearing façades that allow the interior spaces to be laid out in a free plan. The red-brick façades are fitted with black aluminium frames and steel railings.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

325

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Fifth floor plan 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

326

98 Dayton COMPLETION: 2022 ARCHITECT: noArchitecten ADDR ESS: Parkdreef 15 drève du Parc, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 86 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 87 m2 + terraces 20 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This project is part of the very large “Tour & Taxis” development. It includes two types of buildings: linear street-aligned buildings and free-standing towers along a new street – Drève du Parc – that runs parallel to the historic buildings of the Gare Maritime. These residential buildings are organised around public courtyards and private shared gardens. The 13-storey Dayton building illustrates the free-standing-tower typology. Like the develop-

ment’s other buildings, for instance Mansion Block (pp. 328–329), it stands on a basement where individual cellars, bicycle storage, and garages are ­located. The tower has a 25 m2 base. It is divided symmetrically from south to north by internal circulation. The ground floor accommodates a restaurant on the west side and three dwellings on the east side. On the upper floors, the vertical circulation serves two octagonal halls and a common living room arranged in a row with light intake to the north. The apartments have one or two bedrooms. Their living rooms are arranged along the façades while the bathrooms are gathered around the circulation spaces. The tower has a 1.3-m recess from the sixth floor, accommodating from there one apartment fewer per floor. The façades show bay-windows and loggias and are entirely in brown brick and concrete, alternating two types of horizontal beds. The window frames are coloured dark bronze and the railings made of clear glass.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

327

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Sixth floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

328

99  Mansion Block COMPLETION: 2025 (estimated) ARCHITECT: Sergison Bates architects ADDR ESS: Parkdreef 46-50 drève du Parc, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 50 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 125 m2 + terraces 12 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

The project is part of the 93,000 m2 Tour & Taxis development (see also pp. 264–265), which includes free-standing towers, villas organised around public courtyards and shared private gardens, and linear buildings along Drève du Parc, a new street that runs parallel to the historic Gare Maritime. The Mansion Block is a five-storey volume aligned with the edge of Drève du Parc, with a setback of two

levels on the upper floors and a basement for garages and individual storage units. The building is ­accessed through three entrance halls that open onto Drève du Parc and the gardens at the rear, where the ground level is almost 1 m higher than the street, so that ground floor apartments are screened by plants for privacy. On the lower floors, vertical circulation cores serve three dwellings: a single-aspect apartment organised around an east-facing terrace, and two two-bedroom apartments at either end with a long open living area. The two upper floors accommodate two larger apartments per core. The red-brick façades feature alternate vertical and horizontal bonding and ornamental details around windows. Rounded-belly bays and two-sided bays provide expansive views from the interior, framed by bronze-coloured window frames and balustrades.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

329

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Fifth floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

330

100 Rempart des Moines – Southern Block COMPLETION: Ongoing (preliminary design) ARCHITECT: MDW Architecture, LAN (original architect: Groupe Structures) ADDR ESS: Papenvest – rue du Rempart des Moines, 1000 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 112 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 78 m2 + terrace 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

The project is located on a site occupied by five free-standing modernist buildings dating from the 1960s. The plan is to demolish the existing buildings and replace them with a multi-functional complex comprising 335 new dwellings, a public space,

social premises, a sports centre, and an urban farm. Morphologically, the new dwellings will be accommodated in three volumes: a ten-storey-high ­triangular volume to the north and two six-storeyhigh urban blocks: a courtyard block in the centre and a patio block to the south. The last-named proposes a hybrid form of the city block. It is triangular in shape and has two long rectangular patios that open up to the south onto the Rue Notre-Dame-­ du-Sommeil. These tree-lined patios are raised by 70 cm and constitute the entrance forecourts to all the housing units. The new block displays six vertical circulation cores serving a variety of dwellings, ranging from studios to five-bedroom apartments in 14-m-wide buildings. The most common plans show a pass-through living room with a terrace to the west and two bedrooms. The southern buildings have large two-level openings, giving the impression of a lower building. Their façades are planned as green brick.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

331

HOUSING ATL AS   III

Cross section 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

332

101 Engelenbergstraat 21 COMPLETION: Ongoing ARCHITECT: Dierendonckblancke ADDR ESS: Engelenbergstraat 21 rue Montagne aux Anges, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 17 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 56 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Co-housing apartment building

This project is located on a long plot that links two streets and already accommodates a house with a porch on the Boulevard Leopold II and an office building in its centre. The new dwellings are organised as a collective house. A semi-public passage though the block is made possible by installing various outdoor spaces such as gardens, a collective

greenhouse, and vegetable plots. A new U-shaped building is placed on the Rue Montagne-­aux-Anges. One of its sides closes the street with a 25-m-long façade. Its ground floor includes a study area for school children and a porch that leads to a courtyard. Under a canopy at the back of the courtyard is the entrance to the communal house. The building accommodates various shared spaces such as a workshop, a community room with a kitchen, and a bicycle garage on the ground floor – as well as a guest room on the top floor. On the upper floors, a wide – between 1.6 m and 2.2 m – interior gallery is organised around the courtyard. The dwellings it serves are all through apartments and open to the gallery. Inside, the space is free and only a partial wall delimits the bedroom. The façades are white rendered on a grey-concrete plinth. The railings are made of galvanised steel and the wooden window frames are coated with red aluminium.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

333

Cross section 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

334

102  Havenlaan 12 – Southern Tower COMPLETION: Ongoing ARCHITECT: OFFICE Kersten Geers David Van Severen - Nicolas Firket Architects ADDR ESS: Havenlaan 12 avenue du Port, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 30 + 75 hotel rooms UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 72 m2 + winter gardens 10 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This site is located in Molenbeek and is currently occupied by an office building, whose underground car park serves as the foundation for the new development. The new project consists of three towers and a linear building organised around a semi-public garden. The volumes are arranged to allow views of the canal from every building. The project com-

prises 248 dwellings, assisted living, a hotel, and various commercial spaces. The south tower has a footprint of 25 m × 30 m and is composed of two superimposed volumes. Its structure shows a ­central circulation core and a load-bearing façade, allowing for functional flexibility. For example, the lower volume can accommodate a hotel, serviced residences, offices, or flats. In the hotel version, accessible from the street, the ground floor accommodates the lobby and a conference room, while the hall to the upper dwellings is accessible from the communal garden. On the first five floors, the hotel rooms are arranged in a tetragammadion ­formation around the central core. The plan of the next six floors is reduced to 21 m × 25 m. Its configuration is based on six two-bedroom apartments per floor, which can easily be adapted to other ­typologies if needed. Each dwelling has a winter garden extending the living space. The façades are made of coloured precast concrete.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

335

Façade 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Seventh floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

336

103  Making a/+ Living – Northern Tower COMPLETION: Ongoing ARCHITECT: plusofficearchitects, MSA, B2Ai ADDR ESS: Vaartdijk – digue du Canal, Dantestraat – rue Dante, Grondelsstraat – rue des Goujons, 1070 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 74 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 86 m2 + winter garden 13 m2, terrace 2 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This project is located in Anderlecht along the canal. It combines production spaces and housing for a total of 180 dwellings on a large pentagonal plot. On top of a two-storey-high basement, these two functions cohabit in a superimposed manner. The work spaces are arranged on the ground floor in a vast 8-m-high “plateau” space. Its roof accommodates a garden for the residents, whose dwellings

are located above. This roof garden is accessible from the canal embankment by a large staircase and the communal entrances of each of the housing volumes. Two 14-storey towers and a 6-storey building are located on top of this large roof. They are accessed from the ground floor, between the production spaces. The north tower rests on a ground floor designed for light manufacturing. The rectangular plan of the residential floors is structured around a central corridor, which serves six, then five, and finally three dwellings. The corridor opens to the south onto a small communal terrace allowing ­natural daylight in the communal spaces. All the apartments have a terrace and those on the canal side have a winter garden to the west with ceilings inclined towards the interior of the dwelling. The crown of the north tower includes a roof garden, accessible to all residents. The concrete façades and aluminium window frames are light grey, while the frames of the winter garden panels and railings are champagne-coloured.

+7,92

+3,70

Cross section 1:500

Unit plan 1:100 0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

HAL:50cm

HAL:50cm

337

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

338

104 Dockside COMPLETION: Ongoing ARCHITECT: MSA, TRANS, V+ ADDR ESS: Koolmijnenkaai 88 quai des Charbonnages, 1080 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 124 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 139 m2 + terrace 30 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This project is located in Molenbeek at an important crossroads between the inner ring road and the canal. To the north, a significant part of the plot is given back to the public realm to enlarge the Place Sainctelette. The project footprint is limited to a simple rectangle adjoining the neighbouring buildings consisting of ancient warehouses. Built above two parking levels, the 13-storey building superim-

poses several functions and dwelling typologies. On the ground floor, it accommodates three large commercial areas. A main entrance hall leading to the vertical circulation cores is found on the north side of the building, while a secondary access is found on the canal side. The first four levels are positioned around an interior courtyard set on top of the commercial spaces. The fifth floor accommodates various collective functions including a laundry, multi-purpose rooms, and a library. The next seven levels are arranged in a vertical volume. They are served by a central circulation spine. The dwellings range from studios to three-bedroom apartments. On the top floor, there is a communal roof garden with a panoramic terrace for the residents. The façades of the building are designed with light-coloured bricks and white-concrete ­window sills. The aluminium window frames are champagne-coloured.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

339

HOUSING ATL AS   III

Eighth floor plan 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Fifth floor plan 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

340

105 Tilleuls COMPLETION: Ongoing ARCHITECT: Karbon’ (original architect: M. Barbier) ADDR ESS: Bosvoordsesteenweg 46 Chaussée de Boitsfort, 1050 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 65 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 124 m2 + terrace 43 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

Located in the Boondael neighbourhood of Ixelles, this project involves the renovation of a 1970s housing building located in a park. The project densi­ fies and renovates the existing building to bring it up to current comfort standards, both in terms of thermal insulation and size. The building densification is accomplished in length by adding a bay to

the north and a bay to the south on the footprint of the existing car park. It is also achieved in height by adding a duplex floor on the roof, wrapping around the existing individual storage spaces. The newly created duplexes have an entrance and bedrooms on the existing fifth floor and living spaces with 2.2-m-wide terraces on the sixth floor. The façades are completely remodelled to improve the quality of the existing dwellings. The 1970s façades and their concrete balconies are removed, and a new self-supporting structure is added against the east and west sides of the building. This allows for the creation of larger living-room terraces and the enlargement of bedrooms that were too small. In addition, new isolated façades close off the building. The new structure is made of white steel, lined with white railings. It is combined with wooden elements for the façades and the terrace floors and ceilings.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

341

Façade 1:500

Cross section 1:500

Sixth floor plan 1:500

Fifth floor plan 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

342

106  Peterbos 9 COMPLETION: Ongoing ARCHITECT: 51N4E, Lacaton & Vassal (original architects: M. Boelens and R. Wasterlain) ADDR ESS: Peterbospark 9 parc du Peterbos, 1070 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 80 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 90 m2 + winter garden 32 m2, terrace 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

This project is part of a large-scale renovation plan for the Parc Peterbos in Anderlecht, one of Brussels’ largest social-housing estates. The building currently comprises 81 dwellings on 10 floors, a grocery shop, a pharmacy, a non-profit social association, and a neighbourhood office on the ground floor. The ground floor spaces are completely ­r­enovated

and extended, on the south-east corner, by a double-­ height extension. The formerly single-­aspect entrance halls to the apartments now connect the west and east sides, the latter being one floor lower. On the upper floors, all the dwellings undergo a simple renovation of their technical equipment and interior spaces, leaving the interior layouts ­unchanged. This light renovation allows the inhabitants to remain in their homes during the entire renovation period. In addition, an independent, prefabricated 3.2-m-deep concrete structure is added to the long east and west façades. This new structure provides a winter garden for each flat, which acts as an extension of the liveable surface area. The exterior façades read as a stacking of ­natural-coloured concrete strips. From the outside, they show three successive rows of infill: glass ­railings, sliding polycarbonate shutters in anodised aluminium frames, and new aluminium windows.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

343

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Typical floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500

0

25 m

344

107 Vervloet –  Villa Nord COMPLETION: Ongoing ARCHITECT: Matador, BAUKUNST ADDR ESS: François Vervloetstraat – rue François Vervloet, 1180 Brussels NUMBER OF UNITS: 9 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 105 m2 + winter garden 7 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Free-standing apartment building

The project is located in Uccle on a wooded plot. Its typology is inspired by the surrounding buildings, which stand dispersed in large green spaces. All three urban villas have a compact footprint, allowing for a large communal garden on the rest of the plot. Accommodating 37 dwellings, the three five-storey villas show square bases of 17, 18, and

19 m and are freely positioned according to topography, streets, and orientation. The northern building is located at the junction between the street and the garden. On the ground floor, it features a large open outdoor space focused on a circular entrance hall with a staircase to the one- and three-­ bedroom apartments, and two sculptural technical columns. The buildings are governed by simple ­principles: a vertical circulation core at the centre is surrounded by a ring of service rooms, including entrance, laundry room, toilets, bathrooms, and storage, while the living areas are arranged along the façades with at least two orientations per apartment. They also offer winter gardens on the corners of the building. The façades of the three buildings are characterised by an exoskeleton of prefabricated concrete, whose regular grid participates in the identity of the project. The windows, made of dark aluminium, are veiled by external ­curtains.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

345

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Fourth floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

346

108  Do you see me when we pass? COMPLETION: – ARCHITECT: Dogma ADDR ESS: Demosthenesstraat 133 rue Démosthène, 1070 Anderlecht NUMBER OF UNITS: 17 UNIT FLOOR AR EA: 110 m2 HOUSING T YPE: Apartment building

This housing prototype was developed in collabo­r­ ation with the Community Land Trust Brussels. This association produces affordable housing based on hybrid homeownership: the land is collectively owned while the buildings are homeowners’ individual property. Building on this innovative approach to ownership and building codes, this project features housing that can accommodate various forms

of households from nuclear families to singles, ­ ssisted living, etc., and their changes according to a the seasons of life, from youth to old age. To achieve this goal, the project started as a site-less prototype designed to enable inhabitants to live together and negotiate their dwelling spaces with others through time. It was then adapted to a ­specific site in Anderlecht. This evolving housing features a plan that combines two types of parallel bays. The wide bays accommodate the living areas while narrow ones – “service walls” – include all the fixed utilities such as bathrooms, kitchens, storage, and interior staircases. This plan allows for a light partitioning of the spaces according to need. In ­addition, the project enables the inhabitants to exchange or share spaces according to their needs. These combinations enable a very wide range of housing typologies. All the spaces are served by a large, 3-m-wide terrace. The proposed construction system is made of cross-laminated timber, which results in savings in construction time.

Unit plan 1:100

0

5m

HOUSING ATL AS   III

347

Cross section 1:500

Façade 1:500

Third floor plan 1:500

Second floor plan 1:500

First floor plan 1:500

Ground floor plan 1:500 0

25 m

348

About the Authors

Gérald Ledent

Alessandro Porotto

Maxime Delvaux

Gérald Ledent is an architecture professor at UCLouvain in Brussels, where he teaches theory as well as in various studios. His PhD thesis, “Potentiels Relationnels”, explores the relations in dwelling ­between spaces and uses illustrated by an atlas of more than 10,000 housing units in Brussels. Ledent plays a coordination role in the Uses&Spaces research team, in which his interests focus on the relationship in architecture between uses and spaces, housing typo-morphologies, and research by design. Recently, Ledent co-edited Sustainable Dwell­ ing (Brussels, PUL – PU Louvain, 2019), a book that examines the social and spatial dimensions of housing from a sustainability perspective. He is also the ­author of Institutions & the City: The Role of Architec­ ture (Zürich, Park Books, 2022), which explores the role of architecture in establishing and perpetuating social structures and ideologies. Ledent has extensive experience as a practitioner in the fields of public buildings and collective housing developments in Belgium and abroad. He is the co-founder of the architectural practice KIS studio (Keep It Simple studio), which aims to avoid unnecessary complexity in order to focus on the essentials.

Alessandro Porotto is a postdoctoral researcher in the Uses&Spaces research group at UCLouvain, ­Belgium and in the Architecture and the City research group at Delft University of Technology, Netherlands. His research interests focus on the typological and historical evolution, as well as new forms, of urban housing and urban blocks in various cities. He is an architect who ­graduated from Politecnico di Torino, Italy (2012) and holds a PhD from École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Switzerland (2018) with a dissertation investigating the interwar housing ­typologies in Vienna and Frankfurt am Main. He was a visiting researcher at the Art History Department of Emory University, USA, to study the ­architectural design of public-housing initiatives in Atlanta (2020). Alongside peer-reviewed articles and contributions to international conferences, he is the author of the publication L’intelligence des formes: Le projet de logements collectifs à Vienne et Francfort (Geneva, MétisPresses, 2019).

Maxime Delvaux is a Belgian architecture photo­ grapher based in Brussels. He works with different architectural practices such as Bruther, 51N4E, XGDA, Herzog & de Meuron, Christian Kerez, BAUKUNST, L’AUC, and Central. In addition to teaching at HELB in Brussels and at the Toulouse School of Architecture, he is often invited by different architecture schools around the world to give lectures and workshops on the relationship between ­photography and architecture. Delvaux also uses the image as a research and project tool, to deal with topics ranging from urbanism to architectural heritage in the context of exhibitions or publications. His work has been exhibited on various occasions including at the 2019 Versailles Architecture and ­Landscape Biennale, the 2018 Chicago Architecture Biennale, and the 2014 Architecture Venice Biennale. His photos have been published in architectural monographs and journals such as A+, D’A, 2G, AMC, Le Moniteur, A+U, Arch +, Detail, Archi­ tectural Review, AA, Abitare, MARK, and Domus.

Jacques Lucan Architect, architectural critic, and historian, Jacques Lucan was Editor-in-Chief of the journal Architecture-­ Mouvement-Continuité (AMC) from 1978 to 1988. He is honorarium professor at the EPF Lausanne. His teaching activities and research work focus on the history of architectural theories, the relationship between 20th-century urban theories and doctrines, and the transformations taking place in towns and cities. His research work has led to a number of publications, among them Composition, non-compo­ sition. Architecture et théories, XIXe – XXe siècles (Lausanne, PPUR, 2009), translated into English as Composition, Non-Composition. Architecture and ­Theory in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries (New York, Routledge, 2012); Précisions sur un état présent de l’architecture (Lausanne, PPUR, 2015); Habiter, ville et architecture (Lausanne, EPFL Press, 2021). With Odile Seyler, he founded the office Seyler & Lucan Architects, and has realised several buildings, in particular in Paris and Geneva.

349

Acknowledgements

At the end of the journey, there are many people, architecture offices, and institutions that we would like to thank: Archives de la Ville de Bruxelles, Archives d’urbanisme de Forest, Archives d’urbanisme d’Ixelles, ­Archives d’urbanisme de Schaerbeek, Archives ­d’urbanisme d’Uccle, Archives d’urbanisme de Woluwé-Saint-Pierre, Archives Générales du ­Royaume, BAIU – UCLouvain, CIVA, Ecole nationale supérieure des arts visuels – La Cambre. 51N4E, A2RC, AgwA, Architectesassoc+, Aurélie Hachez Architecte, Atelier 4/5, Atelier Gigogne, Atelier Kempe Thill, Atelier Pierre Hebbelinck, BAUKUNST, BEEL architecten, BOB361 architecten, BOGDAN & VAN BROECK, Carnoy-crayon, ­Dierendonckblancke architecten, Dogma, ectv ­architecten Els Claessens Tania Vandenbussche, epoc architecture, Eugeen Liebaut, Hé ! Architec­ tuur, KIS Studio, Karbon’, LAN, L’escaut, Ledroit ­Pierret Polet architectes, LOW architecten, Marcel Rijdams, Matador, MDW Architecture, MSA, ­noArchitecten, OFFICE Kersten Geers David Van Severen, OUEST architecture, Pierre Blondel ­architectes, Plus office architects, Sergison Bates architects, Stekke + Fraas, TRANS, Urban Platform, VERS.A, V+, VVV Architectes, XDGA.

Priscilla Ananian, Nathanaëlle Baes-Cantillon, ­Bernard Baines, Jean-Marc Basyn, Emilie Bechet, Luca Beel, Caroline Berckmans, Geneviève Blondiau, Bernard Boccara, Stijn Bollaert, Elise Bollu, Philippe Boris, Kristiaan Borret, Serge Brison, Maxime ­Brygo, Sylvie Carabin, Régine Carpentier, Audrey Cerdan, Ludmilla Cerveny, Philippe Charlier, Paulo Charruadas, Sarah Cleeremans, Olivier Cornil, Hannes Coudenys, Lucio Cressatti, Bernard Declève, Marine Declève, Patrick Debouverie, Charles de Bueger, Jaime de Mendoza, Philippe Demoulin, ­Elodie Degavre, Georges De Kinder, Emiel De Kooning, Pauline Delpire, Brigitte de Terwangne, Hilde D’haeyere, Gabriel Pascoal Domingos Perugini, ­Laure d’Oultremont, Filip Dujardin, Christine ­Fontaine, Bernard Francq, Patrice Gautier, Valérie Ghesquière, Christophe Gillis, Katia Goyens de Heusch, Marie Guérin, Anja Haering, Louise ­Hardenne, Céline Hatt, Oliver Heckmann, Vincent Heymans, Frederic Hossey, David Houbrechts, Marc Laenen, Stefan Langerman, Jan Leerman, Margaux Legrand, Laurent Leprince, Pierre-Alexandre ­Lesuisse, Hubert ­Lionnez, Marc Lodewijckx​, Jacques Lucan, Cécile Mairy, Séverin Malaud, Bruno ­Marchand, Olivier Masson, Delphine Mathy, JeanClaude Maury, ­Emilie Meirlaen, Julie Merschaert, Sacha Moullin, Modrie Sylvianne, Thomas Montulet, Thomas Moor, Silke Nalbach, André Nullens,

­Savinien Peeters, Daniel Pinson, Marie-Françoise Plissart, Sarah Poot, Kathleen Schick, Krysia S ­ obieski, Guillaume Sokal, Christian Spaepens, G ­ uido Stegen, Ria Stein, Martino Tattara, Jean Theys, Simon ­Thielen, Pierre Van ­Assche, Stephan Van Bellingen, Géraldine Vandenabeele, David Vandenbroucke, Maarten Van den Mooter, Tim Van de Velde, ­Isabelle Vanderhoeven, Cécile Vandernoot, Pierre Vanderstraeten, Céline Vandewynckel, Dick Van Gameren, Kim Van Kerckhoven, Christophe Verbiest, Jules Verhaest, Jeroen Verrecht, Wim Vervoort, Marie-Elisabeth Volckrick.

350

Index

51N4E  244i, 246i, 318, 319, 342, 343 A2RC  296, 297 AAAArchitectures  284, 285 Abeels, Gustave  22n Accorsi, Florence  250n AgwA  243i, 294, 295 AHA – Aurélie Hachez Architecte  241i, 251i Alexander, Christopher  29n Altuna, Joseph  236, 237 Amelinckx  111 Ananian, Priscilla  242n architectesassoc+  250i Assassin, Sylvie  236, 237 Atelier 229  248i Atelier 4/5  310, 311 Atelier de l’Arbre d’Or  298, 299 Atelier de Recherche et d’Actions Urbaines (ARAU)  112 Atelier Gigogne  274, 275, 286, 287 Atelier Kempe Thill  245i Ateliers Lion  296, 297 Atlante  236, 237 Ausia  172, 234, 235 B2Ai  336, 337 Banham, Reyner  112n Barbier, Michel  340 Bastin, Christine  26n Bauer, Catherine  108n BAUKUNST  10, 11i, 344, 345 Becher, Bernhard  12 Becher, Hilla  12 Beekaert, Geert  108n BEEL architecten  316, 317 Berger, Mathieu  242n Bernard, Pierre  110n Bertrand, Jean-Michel  16n Besme, Victor  22, 22i, 29, 29n, 86, 162, 196, 198 Beyaert, Henri  21i, 22, 22n, 72, 73, 99i, 103n, 134, 135 Blaeu, Joan  16n Blondel, Pierre  302, 303 BOB361 Architects  282, 283 Boelens, Michel  342 BOGDAN & VAN BROECK  320, 321 Bonenfant, Paul  15n Bordiau, Gédéon  29, 138, 139, 140, 141 Borret, Kristiaan  245n, 251n Boucher, Lucien  176 Bourgeois, Victor  105, 108, 108n, 109i, 111n, 164, 165, 166, 167, 168, 169, 178, 179, 253 Braem, Renaat  108, 110n, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 253 Brauman, Annick  102n, 107n Breyne, Gustave  111 Brueghel the Elder, Jan  16i Brugmann, Georges  29 Brunfaut, Fernand  109, 184 Burgraeve, Raymond  188, 189 Burniat, Patrick  24n Cabestan, Jean-François  16n, 17n, 18n Carnoy-Crayon  280, 281 Casier, Charlotte  239n Castermans, Auguste  22n, 103n Cenica-Celaya, Javier  236, 237 Centre d’Etude, de Recherche et d’Action en Architecture (CERAA)  15n Chambon, Gaston  274 Charlier, Sébastien  108n Charreau, Pierre  192 Charruadas, Paulo  15n Chemetoff, Alexandre  249n Christ, Emmanuel  10, 10n Cloquet, Louis  15, 15n, 16n, 17n, 18n, 22, 22n, 24n, 67, 108, 108n Cluysenaar, Jean-Pierre  66 Coekelberghs, Denis  20n Cohen, Maurizio  242n Colinet, Émile  16n Collin, Jean-Florian  111, 198, 199, 274 Communa  269 Community Land Trust Brussels (CLTB)  248i, 249, 249i, 252, 253, 346 Coolens, Victor  202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207 Coudenys, Hannes  8i, 9, 9n Courtens, Antoine  182, 183

Crop, Paul-Alexander  110n Cuisinier, Jacques  110, 110i, 216, 217, 218, 219, 222, 223, 230, 231 D’Alembert, Jean Le Rond  10, 10n, 13i Dallegret, François  112n De Beule, Michel  245n, 247n De Boeck, Sarah  251n Deboosere, Patrick  239n Dehaibe, Xavier  239n Dejemeppe, Pierre  110n, 239n, 240n Dekeuleneer, Egide  284 De Kooning, Emiel  110n De Koninck, Louis-Herman  106, 108, 109, 109i De Laet, Sarah  240n, 242n De Taye, Alfred  109 Delhaye, Jean  107i, 108, 108n, 110 Deligne, Chloé  15n Delvaux, Maxime  12, 348 Demany, Emile  28n, 74, 75 Demey, Thierry  109n De Portzamparc, Christian  250n De Quéker, Charles  150, 151 De Ridder, Julien  100i, 162, 163 De Saulnier, Pierre  110n Dessouroux, Christian  100n, 239n, 245n, 247n Devillers, Christian  23n, 29n De Visscher, Jean-Philippe  250n Dhont, Erik  276 Diderot, Denis  10, 10n, 13i Dierendonckblancke  332, 333 Diongre, Joseph  88, 89, 186, 187 Dogma  252i, 252n, 346, 347 Dorselaer, Maximilien  284 Draps, Frans  214, 215 Dulière, Cecile  10, 23n Dumons, Barthélémy  236, 237 Durand, Jean-Nicolas-Louis  6, 20, 20i, 20n, 24, 58, 60 ectv architecten  290, 291 Eggerickx, Jean-Jules  158, 159, 160, 161, 194, 195 Eloy, Marc  17n, 20n, 25n, 113n, 241n Elseline Bazin  251i Empain, Louis  180, 181 Entrakt  268 Epoc  324, 325 Etrimo  98i, 107, 111, 111i, 198, 199, 214, 215, 228, 229 Evans, Robin  18n Firket, Nicolas  334, 335 Fonteyne, Jules  26n Forstner, Leopold  154, 155 Fourier, Charles  102 Franssen, Josse  106, 224, 225 Gaiani, Marco  236, 237 Gantenbein, Christoph  10, 10n Garric, Jean-Philippe  236, 237 Gautier, Patrice  17n Gevers, Valérie  236, 237 Gisclard, Philippe  236, 237 Godin, Jean-Baptiste André  102, 142, 143 Govaerts, Léon  101i, 148, 149 Grabbe, Ernst  16n Great Beguinage  18, 19i, 20, 36i, 37i, 58, 59, 60, 61 Groupe Structure  226, 227, 330 Groupe Urbanisme  228, 229 Guadet, Julien  24n Hankar, Paul  103n, 104 Hannaert, Alphonse  150, 151 Harvey, David  9, 9n Hé! Architectuur  242i Hebbelinck, Pierre  278, 279 Heene, Marc  236, 237 Hellemans, Emile  156, 157 Hemelsoet, François  86, 87 Hennaut, Eric  105n Henne, Alexandre  15n Herman, Joseph  26n Hermia, Jean-Pierre  240n Heymans, Vincent  22n, 29n Higginbotham, Peter  102n Hoeben, Jean-François  172 Hoffmann, Josef  154, 155 Horta, Victor  10, 23, 50, 103, 104, 104i, 108, 144, 145 Hoste, Huibrecht  108, 170, 171, 172, 173 Houbrechts, David  17n

Howard, Ebezener  105 Jacobs, Henri  152, 153 Jasinski, Stanislas  108, 110n Jencks, Charles  112n Kaisin, Gérard  107 Kaisin, Lucien  107, 108, 174 Karbon’  340, 341 Khnopff, Fernand  100, 154, 155 KIS Studio  304, 305 Klimt, Gustav  100, 154, 155 Korteknie Stuhlmacher Architecten  251i Kroll, Lucien  112, 113i, 232, 233 Kroll, Simone  232, 233 Label Architecture  298, 299 Lacaton & Vassal  342, 343 Lambeaux, Jef  182 LAN  330, 331 Langrand-Dumonceau, André  29n Lasserre, Christian  247n Laurens, Claude  222, 223 Lebrun, Serge  216, 217, 218, 219 Le Corbusier  109, 192 Ledent, Gérald  22n, 23n, 29n, 108n, 110n, 239n, 241n, 249n, 348 Ledroit Pierret Polet Architectes  243i, 298, 299 Lefebvre, Henri  112n Le Fort, Barbara  250n Leloup, Michel  236, 237 Le Muet, Pierre  18, 18i, 18n Lenel, Emmanuelle  242n, 248n L’Escaut  286, 287 Liebaut, Eugeen  276, 277 Liesens, Liliane  105n Louis XIV  10, 54 LOW Architecten  244i, 306, 307 Loze, Pierre  22n Lucan, Jacques  6, 7, 348 Malfait, François  19i Manfredo, Tafuri  112n Marique, Robert  110n Martens, Albert  110n Martens, Mina  16n Martiny, Victor-Gaston  15n, 16n, 18n, 20n Matador  292, 293, 344, 345 Matthys, André  15n MDW Architecture  247i, 288, 289, 330, 331 Metamorphose Project Team  272 Metzner, Franz  154, 155 Michel, Paul-Amaury  109, 192, 193 Michiels, Jean  92, 93, 304 Millin, Aubin-Louis  15n, 16i Mombach, Marcel  110n MSA  308, 309, 336, 337, 338, 339 Muller, Emile  105, 136 Mumford, Eric Paul  108n Nègre, Valérie   236, 237 noArchitecten  251i, 326, 327 Noël, Françoise  102n O’Connor, Liam  236, 237 OFFICE Kersten Geers David Van Severen  334, 335 Ouest architecture  312, 313 Palm, Léon  212, 213 Panerai, Philippe  29n Panis, René  202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207 Parent, Emile  202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207 Parmentier, Edmond  29 Partoes, Henri  18i, 20, 22, 58, 99 Pauwels, Félix  70, 71 Peeters, Marcel  190, 191, 196, 197 Périlleux, Benoit  239n, 240n Petit, Marie-Laure  236, 237 Picquet, Paul  84, 85 Plusofficearchitects  336, 337 Polak, Michel  174, 175, 180, 181 Pompe, Antoine  172 Porotto, Alessandro  239n, 348 Posener, Julius  102n, 105n Posno, Paul  172 Prat, Nathalie  236, 237 Puissant, Adolphe  102i Rassemblement Bruxellois pour le Droit à l’Habitat (RBDH)  29n Ravenstein III  274, 275

351

Illustration Credits

Rijdams, Marcel  272, 273 Robins, John  236, 237 Robyns, Martin  56 Roland, Lee  19n Roth, Alfred  180, 181 Rubbers, Paul  172 Ryckewaert, Michael  251n Salembier, Chloé  249n Salmain, Fernand  26n, 27i, 28i Salona, Iñigo  236, 237 Sander, August  9, 9n Schockaert, J.  282 Schoonbrodt, René  105n Secchi, Bernardo  239n Sergison Bates architects  251i, 328, 329 Sèthe, Maria  146, 147 Sigfried, Giedion  108n Smets, Marcel  28n, 29n, 99n, 100n, 102n, 105n Société Anonyme des Habitations Ouvrières dans ­l’Agglomération Bruxelloise (SABH)  29, 105, 136, 138 Société Nationale des Habitations et Logements à Bon Marché (SNHLBM)  102, 110 Somssich, Gabor  236, 237 Steinmann, Martin  108n Stekke + Fraas  248i, 300, 301 Stenier, Raymond  202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207 Strauven, Francis  108n, 110n Strauven, Gustave  78, 79, 104 Suys, Tilman-François  20, 21i, 22, 62, 63 Taelemans, Victor  76, 77, 80, 81 Tagliaventi, Gabriele  236, 237 Tassel, Emile  144, 145 Thomisse, Charles  284 Titeux, Catherine  284, 285 T’Jonck, Pieter  240n TRANS  338, 339 Trappeniers, Antoine  99i, 134, 135 Tummers, Lidewij  248n Unwin, Raymond  105 Urban Platform  249i V+  308, 309, 338, 339 Van Criekingen, Mathieu  240n, 242n Van Damme, Henri  200, 201 van de Castyne, Oda  18n, 19n Vanden Bossche, Albert  220, 221 Vandenbreeden, Jos  108n Vanden Eende, Myriam  110n Van Der Meeren, Willy  110, 110i, 208, 209, 212, 213 Van der Swaelmen, Louis  105, 158, 159, 160, 161, 170, 171, 172, 173 Van de Velde, Henry  76, 109, 146, 147, 176, 177 van de Walle, Adelbrecht  15n Van Dijk, Pauline  103n, 105n, 107n, 110n Van Doosselaere, Jean  202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207 Van Eetvelde, Edmond  104 Van Hamme, Gilles  242n Van Hoeter, C.  68, 69 Van Roelen, Florent  82, 83 Van Vaerenbergh, Alexis  101i Venlet, Richard  176 Veraart, Chrétien Guillaume  94, 95 Verbruggen, Pierre  106 Verhelle, Charles  320 Verniers, Louis  15n VERS.A  322, 323 Verwilghen, Raphaël  108, 194, 195 Viganò, Paola  239n Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène Emmanuel  9, 9n, 15n, 16n, 17, 17n Volckrick, Georges  210, 211 VVV architecture urbanisme  314, 315 Wasterlain, Robert  342 Wauters, Alfonse Guillaume Ghislain  15n Wolfers, Raymond  176 XDGA  251i Zitouni, Benedikte  22n The letter n indicates a name in a note while i refers to an illustration.

Cover Photo by Maxime Delvaux

Introduction Brussels Housing: A Typology p. 8 From: Coudenys, Hannes. Ugly Belgian Houses: Don’t Try This at Home. Ghent, Borgerhoff & Lamberigts, 2015. p. 11 BAUKUNST, Brussels collage, 2003. p. 13 Diderot, Denis and Jean Le Rond D’Alembert. ­Encyclopédie ou Dictionnaire raisonné des sciences, des arts et des métiers par une société de gens de lettres. Paris, Briasson – Le Breton – David-Durand, 1751–1772.

A City of Row Houses: From the Origins to 1914 p. 14 Photo by Maxime Delvaux p. 15 Model at the Musée du Comté de Jette (top); from: Matthys, André. “La villa gallo-romaine de Jette.” ­Archeologica Belgica, vol. 2, no. 152, 1972, p. 30 (bottom). p. 16 left Jan Brueghel the Elder, The Adoration of the Kings, 1598, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna p. 16 right From: Millin, Aubin-Louis. Antiquités nationales ou Recueil de monuments pour servir à l’histoire générale. vol. 5, Paris, Drouhin, 1797, pl. 6. p. 17 Puttaert, Emile. Petite rue des pierres, 1875, MAH Musée d’art et d’histoire, Ville de Genève. p. 18 left Archives de la Ville de Bruxelles|Archief van de Stad Brussel, Travaux Publics 6334 (AVB|ASB TP 6334). p. 18 right Le Muet, Pierre. Manière de bien bastir pour toutes sortes de personnes. Paris, François Langlois, 1647, pl. 11, 13. p. 19 top Harrewijn, Magnum Begynasium Bruxellense, 1727. p. 19 bottom Malfait, François. Dessin de la place de la Vieille Halle aux Blés, no. 50–33, 1919, pl. 27. p. 20 Durand, Jean-Nicolas-Louis. Précis des leçons ­d’architecture données à l’école polytechnique. vol. 2, Paris, Ecole polytechnique, 1809, pl. 25. p. 21 top Beyaert, Henri. Travaux d’architecture exécutés en Belgique. vol. 1, Bruxelles, Lyon-Claessen, 1894, pl. 2, 6. p. 21 bottom Suys, Tilman-François. Plan du Quartier Léopold, 1838, Bibliothèque Nationale de France. p. 22 Archives de la Ville de Bruxelles|Archief van de Stad Brussel, Section cartographique 96/8. p. 23 Ledent, Gérald. Potentiels Relationnels. L’aptitude des dispositifs physiques de l’habitat à soutenir la sociabilité. Bruxelles, le cas des immeubles élevés et isolés de loge­ ment. LOCI, UCLouvain, 2014. p. 24 Cloquet, Louis. Traité d’architecture. Eléments de l’architecture. Types d’édifices. Esthétique. Composition et pratique de l’architecture. vol. 4, Liège, Ch. Béranger, 1900, p. 42, 43. p. 25 Devos, Laurent. Analyse d’une maison mitoyenne bruxelloise de 1914. Sous la direction de Michel Procès. Institut Supérieur d’Architecture Saint-Luc, UCLouvain, 1997. p. 26 Drawing by Gérald Ledent p. 27 From: Salmain, Fernand. Album de la maison moderne. Brussels, 1908–1913. p. 28 left Drawing generated with BruGIS®, 2012 p. 28 right Salmain, Fernand. Album de la maison moderne. Brussels, 1913, pl. 3.

Brussels Cityscapes I pp. 30–47 Photos by Maxime Delvaux

Housing Atlas I p. 49 Map by Alessandro Porotto p. 50 Hôtel Clèves-Ravenstein. Photo by Alessandro ­Porotto p. 52 Duivelshuis. Photo by M.M.Minderhoud of ­Wikipedia/Michiel1972 p. 54 Chapeliers 22–24. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 56 Hôtel Vanderlinden d’Hooghvorst. From: L’Emulation, 1930, pl. 5 (detail) p. 58 Grand Hospice. Photos by Alessandro Porotto p. 60 Grand Hospice Houses. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 62 Quartier Léopold Ideal Urban Block. Photo by ­Alessandro Porotto p. 66 Galeries Royales Saint-Hubert. Photo by Alessandro Porotto

p. 67 Léopoldian House. From: Cloquet, Louis. “Les sciences architecturales.” Le mouvement scientifique en Belgique 1830–1905, vol. 1, Bruxelles, Oscar Scheppens & cie, 1907, p. 507. p. 68 Impasse Vanhoeter. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 70 Cité Pauwels. Drawing by Jules Géruzet, 1854. From: Voncken, Tony. Belgique industrielle. Vues des établisse­ ments industriels de la Belgique. vol. 1, Brussels, Géruzet, Jules, 1854, pl. 80. p. 72 Hôtel Marnix. Drawing by Henri Beyaert, 1894. From: Beyaert, Henri. Travaux d’architecture exécutés en ­Belgique. vol. 1, Bruxelles, Lyon-Claessen, 1894, pl. 2. p. 74 Worker Terraced House. Drawing by Emile Demany, 1899. From: Demany, Emile. Construction de maisons ouvrières: notice, plans, évaluations & conditions. 2 ed., Liège, Vaillant-Carmanne, 1899, pl. 17. p. 76 Le Bon 70. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 78 Maison Strauven. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 80 Solvay 32. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 82 Discailles 9. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 84 Molière 112. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 86 Lambermont 73. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 88 Berkendael 203. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 90 Perdrix 33. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 92 Commerçants 6. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 94 Reyers 213. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 96 Trooz 12. Photo by Alessandro Porotto

Perpetuating or Opposing the Terraced House p. 98 Photo by Maxime Delvaux p. 99 Postcard 19th century p. 100 From: Moenaert, Raymond. “Les maisons à loyer.” La Technique et Travaux, vol. 11–12, 1925, p. 403. p. 101 top Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 101 bottom Drawing by Gérald Ledent p. 102 Archives communales de Molenbeek p. 103 Drawing by Gérald Ledent p. 104 left Collection Horta Museum/Wikicommons p. 104 right Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 104 bottom Drawing by Gérald Ledent p. 105 From: Dhainaut, Laly. La ville éclatée. Typo-mor­ phologie continue de l’habitat individuel isolé aux zones périphériques de Bruxelles. 2016. UCLouvain, Bruxelles. p. 106 Archives Urban Brussels p. 107 top From: Delhaye, Jean. L’appartement ­d’aujourd’hui. Liège, Desoer, 1946, pp. 28 and 91. p. 107 bottom Drawing by Gérald Ledent p. 109 left From: Bourgeois, Victor. “Habitations Minima.” L’émulation, no. 11, 1931, p. 412. p. 109 right Photo by Winston Spriet p. 110 left Archives Urban Brussels p. 110 centre and right Willy Van Der Meeren Archives; coll. A&D 50 Mechelen p. 111 Archives Pol Mertens p. 112 Drawing by Gérald Ledent p. 113 top Drawing by Gérald Ledent p. 113 Archives Lucien Kroll

Brussels Cityscapes II pp. 114–131 Photos by Maxime Delvaux

Housing Atlas II p. 133 Map by Alessandro Porotto p. 134 Cité Fontainas. Photos by Alessandro Porotto p. 136 Cité de Dilbeek. Photos by Alessandro Porotto p. 138 Cité Louvain. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 140 De Brouckère 33–35. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 142 Familistère Godin. Top photo by Alessandro ­Porotto; bottom photo Anonymous, 1898 p. 144 Hôtel Tassel. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 146 Villa Bloemenwerf. Archives by Urban Brussels p. 148 Marconi 32. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 150 Rodenbach 14–35. Top photo by Alessandro Porotto; bottom photo: Collection Belfius Banque ARB-SPRB p. 152 Cité de l’Olivier. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 154 Palais Stoclet. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 156 Cité Reine Astrid. Photos by Alessandro Porotto p. 160 Le Logis-Floréal. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 162 Saint-Michel 97. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 166, 168 Cité Moderne. Photos by Alessandro Porotto p. 172 Kapelleveld. Photo by Alessandro Porotto

p. 174 Résidence Palace. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 176 Hôtel Wolfers. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 178 Le Nouveau Bruxelles. From: L’émulation, no. 11, 1931, p. 412. p. 180 Villa Empain. Photos by Alessandro Porotto p. 182 Palais de la Folle Chanson. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 184 Cité Melckmans. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 186 Cité Van Hemelrijck. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 188 Broqueville 1–4. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 190 Pavillons Français. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 192 Maison de Verre. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 194 Résidence Léopold. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 196 Résidence de la Cambre. Photo by Alessandro ­Porotto p. 198 Churchill 126. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 200 De Roovere 14–16. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 204 Cité Modèle 3. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 206 Cité Modèle 6. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 208 Ieder Zijn Huis. Photos by Alessandro Porotto p. 210 Maison Volckrick. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 212 Maison Verhaegen. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 214 Villas Parc Albert I. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 216 Centre International Rogier. Archives Urban Brussels p. 220 Van Overbeke 243. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 222 La Magnanerie. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 224 Europa II. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 226 Peterbos 6. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 228 Résidence Parc Albert I. Photo by Alessandro ­Porotto p. 230 Brusilia. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 232 La Mémé. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 234 Les Venelles. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 236 Laeken 95–121. Photo by Alessandro Porotto

The Search for Quality Housing: From 2000 ­onwards p. 239 Photo by Maxime Delvaux p. 241 Photo by Delphine Mathy p. 242 Photo by Tim Van de Velde p. 243 left Photo by Ludmilla Cerveny p. 243 right Photo by Marie-Françoise Plissart p. 244 left Photo by Séverin Malaud p. 244 right Photo by Filip Dujardin p. 245 Drawing by Atelier Kempe Thill p. 246 Images by 51N4E p. 247 Image by MDW Architecture p. 248 left Photo by Tim Van de Velde p. 248 right Drawings by Sofie van der Linden (photo by Driss Soussi) p. 249 Photo by Community Land Trust Brussels p. 250 Image by architectesassoc+ p. 251 top Images by noArchitecten p. 251 bottom Image by XDGA p. 252 Image by Dogma p. 253 Photo by Lucio Cressatti

Brussels Cityscapes III pp. 254–269 Photos by Maxime Delvaux

Housing Atlas III p. 271 Map by Alessandro Porotto p. 272 CôtéKanal. Photo by Marcel Rijdams p. 276 Helivenlaan 7. Photo by Filip Dujardin p. 278 Maison Krantz-Fontaine. Photo by Marie-Françoise Plissart p. 280 L’Espoir. Photo by Alessandro Porotto p. 282 P.NT2. Photo by André Nullens p. 284 La Tréfilerie. Urban Brussels p. 286 Cheval Noir. Photo by Audrey Cerdan p. 288 Savonnerie Heymans. Photo by Filip Dujardin p. 290 Fin 15. Photo by Hilde D’haeyere p. 292 Palais 95. Photo by Maxime Brygo p. 294 Claes 36. Photo by AgwA p. 296 Up-Site Tower. Photo by Georges De Kinder p. 298 Cygnes Digue. Photo by Tim Van de Velde p. 300 Brutopia. Photo by Tim Van de Velde p. 302 Villa Pilifs. Photo by Bernard Boccara p. 304 Népomucène 15. Photo by Jan Leerman p. 306 Navez 111. Photo by Stijn Bollaert p. 308 Portaels 158. Photos by Serge Brison

p. 310 Charme 9. Photo by Atelier 4/5 p. 312 House William. Photo by Olivier Cornil p. 314 Dumont 5. Photo by Séverin Malaud p. 316 Akenkaai 36. Photo by Luca Beel p. 318 Willebroekkaai 22. Photo by Filip Dujardin p. 320 The Cosmopolitan. Photo by Jeroen Verrecht p. 322 Mexico 15. Photo by Stijn Bollaert p. 324 Tivoli. Photo by Séverin Malaud p. 326 Dayton. Image by noArchitecten p. 328 Mansion Block. Image by Sergison Bates architects p. 330 Rempart des Moines – Southern Block. Image by LAN p. 332 Engelenbergstraat 21. Image by Dierendonckblancke architecten p. 334 Havenlaan 12 – Southern Tower. Image by OFFICE KGDVS p. 336 Making a/+ Living – Northern Tower. Image by MSA, plusoffice, B2Ai p. 338 Dockside. Image by MSA, TRANS, V+ p. 340 Tilleuls. Image by Karbon’ p. 342 Peterbos 9. Image by 51N4E p. 344 Vervloet – Villa Nord. Image by Maxime Delvaux, ArtefactoryLab – Olivier Campagne p. 346 Do you see me when we pass?. Image by Dogma All plans, sections and elevations, unless noted otherwise, were drawn by Gérald Ledent and Alessandro Porotto.