MODERN HOUSING.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19255, 20 August 1924, Page 4

MODERN HOUSING.

PRESENT-DAY TENDENCIES REVIEWED. Under the auspices of the Workers’ Educational Association two most informative addresses ou “The .Modern House" were given in the Homo Science Building last evening by Professor Strong, dean of the Home Science Faculty, and .Miss A. Wilson, 8.C.E.. a visitor from America. Mr A. Munro presided over an attendance of 70 or 80. Professor Strong pointed out Unit tho subject was one very dear to the hearts of women. All the world over the housing problem was very keenly felt at the present time. She said she intended to speak in a purely impersonal way and to take a world view of the subject. There could be no doubt of the close connection between health and bousing. People could not live healthy lives in insanitary houses, but how exactly they were to meet the problem here she could not say. The housing problem had not yet been solved anywhere. It existed wherever any portion of the population lived under conditions dangerous to health. The health of a community was not determined by the average mode of living, but by the poorest. Overcrowding forced several families into houses designed for one family, which became the Worst kind of "Slum, ’ Measures for prevention were better than hospitals. Ellicieney in home management lead to efficiency in city management. .Municipal administration was housekeeping on a larger scale. Wherein did the modern house differ from that, of the past. The common impulse towards rational living had tended towards simplification and the diminution of tho useless and unnecessary. The modern house differed in that it was more costly on account of its elaborate equipment, and this had had a marked effect on the planning of the house. Intensive housekeeping and intensive house-planning were sigus of the times. if we demanded greater comfort the cost was bound to be greater, and that tended to make the houses smaller. The house was primarily for protection from the elements and from enemies. The enemies to-day were germs. "We needed a. house also as a place from which we could make our contacts with the world in a social way. In choosing ft house we had to take into consideration structure, sanitation, arrangement, location, and adaptability to our physical and social needs. The rooms of a house were, divided into (I) public rooms, _ where visitors are received and the family gathers; (2) private rooms, sleeping, dressing, study, or thinking; (3) work rooms where work required for physical needs of the family are carried out; (I) grouped together by halls and stairways or passageways, all under one roof. She was going to speak of what the modern house to-day usually was, but that did not necessarily mean that she was advocating that. She proceeded to throw slides on the screen by means of a delincascopc, the first being a a modern slum alley. Then, followed a detached English two-story house and its plan. A number of typical house plans followed, the good points of each being clearly explained. Professor Strong mentioned that in. modern homes the doors were all wide because bouses were centrally boated, and the house was of the siync even temperature throughout. Making a home beautiful and attractive was not so much a matter of money as of taste and arrangement. One of the modern tendencies was to have the furniture built in, and even (ho beds were being built in. The secret of the modern house was to make the work easy by having the tools just where they were wanted. The women of to-day wanted to save steps and energy. The modern house was using colour somewhat daringly. A room to be efficient should be planned for the, purpose for which it was used. Simplicity and harmony in interior management and furnishing turned a house into a home.

Miss Wilson spoke chiefly on the. housing problem as solved by co-partnership ownership in England and America. She stated that the solution of the housing problem was at the foundation of all social progress. She referred to pioneering town-planning experiments, and stated that in Bourneville, Messrs Cadbury’s model village in Manchester, the death rate was only about a third of that of Manchester city. In a co-partnership society the capital was raised by selling shares or stock. The selected area was built on on certain fixed conditions. Financial arrafigeinents were made enabling the tenants to proceed eventually to ownership, and indeed before they paid for their houses they enjoyed all the privileges of ownership. A. recreational and educational centre for all ages was provided with indoor and outdoor units. The individual houses should be limited to a few types for economy, but these plans could be varied in various ways so as to avoid the effect of uniformity. She detailed tho success of several notable housing schemes in England and America, of which she afterwards threw pictures on the screen. She illustrated and described the results obtained in the Forest Hills Gardens village planned by the Sago Foundation. Several English and other American experiments in co-partnership housing were also illustrated.

Professor Strong stated that Miss Wilson had been one of the architects of the first model village she had described. Mr Blackwood expressed the hearty thanks of the meeting to the lecturers, and said it had boon most gratifying to find that thinking people throughout the world were waking up to the vital importance of housing and town planning.