Manifesto development and Monograph brief

 For the manifesto I've chosen the grannyflat typology to explore suburban infill as it relates to mature neighborhoods.  A concern of mine regarding suburban settlement is the atemporal aspect of its dwelling culture.   Houses are designed for their peak-usage, a 15 to 20 year period of family life, but are lived in several generations passed their optimal use.   Ideally the housing stock of SFDs would take on some kind of cyclical use.  It should be possible to age-in-place and at the same time forgo living in oversized houses of little use.  The grannyflat, applied as uniformly as the principle dwellings themselves, provides higher population density and diversity.   It allows different age-groups to dwell adjacent to each other and, given today's smaller family unit, returns some of the convivial living of times passed.  Here I've selected design 767 of the CMHC small house designs as the principle dwelling, a 3-bedroom split-level with partial basement.  It has an internal courtyard for private affairs and a dedicated laneway to the side providing unobtrusive access to the rear yard.  The grannyflat will have a modest footprint of roughly 9 or 10' by 24' with a half-storey above to maintain adequate yard space.

Design 767 from the CMHC Small House Design  compendium

Monograph

I've taken as the subject of my monograph the Canadian post-war housing program operated by the, then, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation(CMHC) dubbed the Small House Design Scheme. Throughout the 1950s and 1960s, The CMHC solicited designs for small single-detached homes from architects nation-wide and through a series of annual publications made them available to citizens and builders across the country. For the trivial fee of 10$, any man could purchase a complete set of plans and specs designed by professionals. For their part, the architects received a 1000$ lump sum and a 3$ royalty for every set of plans sold. As a supplement to these catalogs, several other publications were made available to educate buyers and builders on such topics as “Principles of Small House Grouping” and “Choosing a House Design.” These items helped guide builders or land-owners in parceling their land, site buildings and bring some sense of harmony to adjacent houses. They also helped buyers make an educated decision for the largest investment of their adult lives.

This process accomplished several remarkable goals, some intentional, some not. Firstly, it provided the means and the know-how to a whole generation of Canadians to acquire modest and well-designed dwellings. In doing so it provided an opportunity for architects to bring their expertise to a yet untapped building sector, middle-class housing, a sector that architects have since regrettably pulled out of entirely. Secondly, it marks one of few occasions prior to the 1970s when public opinion(plan selection) informed the decisions and designs of city planners. It put the means of production in the hands of the worker so-to-speak, housing was being developed by the people for the people. Prospective home-owners would purchase quality plans at little to no cost, acquire land, orient their house on site, find their own builders(often acquaintances or neighbors) and each in-turn contributed to a growing settlement. Thirdly, it produced a culture of modest dwelling. People built what they could afford and added to or completed their houses as time passed once they could afford to do so. People lived within their means and despite the relative isolation of individual homes, the size and design of houses made for convivial living relative to today's McMansions.

For a brief moment in history, architecture was actually a public concern as opposed to the plaything of the elite.