{"title":"Mass Housing Estates in Csepel, Budapest: Urban Form Evaluation in Relation to Sustainability","authors":"Hlib Antypenko, M. Benkő","doi":"10.18485/arh_pt.2020.7.ch3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mass housing is a global urban phenomenon, whilst in the Central and Eastern European countries the majority of these neighborhoods were constructed during the socialist period. The research focuses on the city of Csepel, former industrial town, since 1950 the 21 st district of Budapest. Budapest is one of the Hungarian cities with a very high mass housing ratio, more than two-third of its population lives there. The paper compares five housing developments in Csepel - three of them were awarded on a national level at the time of their construction. Situated next to the main axis of Csepel - Béke téri, a modern housing estate from the end of 40s; Rakéta utcai, an awarded modern housing estate from the end of 50s; Ady út large prefabricated housing estate with 10 story high slabs from the end of 60s; Simon Bolivár Estate, an awarded large prefabricated housing estate from the end of 70s; and Rákóczi úti - one of the rare social housing developments from 2000s in Hungary. The urban position of these neighborhoods is similar, while the architectural and technical qualities of the buildings vary and is often subjected to the original construction problems or actual renewal policy issues. Taking into consideration that all these estates were planned as a single urban and development unit, its urban form and open space elements should be revaluated, seeking the perspectives for its adaptation to the contemporary urban and market demands. Comparison uses sustainability indicators related to physical environment such as: density, diversity, land use, green-ing, transportation, compactness et cetera to give a fair picture of the estates’ urban values and potentials. What are the architecture and urban qualities and weaknesses of these housing estates? How the urban form developed over time? How sustainable is the urban form of these estates? What can be done to boost its attractiveness to the citizens, architects, and developers?","PeriodicalId":337051,"journal":{"name":"International Academic Conference on Places and Technologies","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Academic Conference on Places and Technologies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18485/arh_pt.2020.7.ch3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Mass housing is a global urban phenomenon, whilst in the Central and Eastern European countries the majority of these neighborhoods were constructed during the socialist period. The research focuses on the city of Csepel, former industrial town, since 1950 the 21 st district of Budapest. Budapest is one of the Hungarian cities with a very high mass housing ratio, more than two-third of its population lives there. The paper compares five housing developments in Csepel - three of them were awarded on a national level at the time of their construction. Situated next to the main axis of Csepel - Béke téri, a modern housing estate from the end of 40s; Rakéta utcai, an awarded modern housing estate from the end of 50s; Ady út large prefabricated housing estate with 10 story high slabs from the end of 60s; Simon Bolivár Estate, an awarded large prefabricated housing estate from the end of 70s; and Rákóczi úti - one of the rare social housing developments from 2000s in Hungary. The urban position of these neighborhoods is similar, while the architectural and technical qualities of the buildings vary and is often subjected to the original construction problems or actual renewal policy issues. Taking into consideration that all these estates were planned as a single urban and development unit, its urban form and open space elements should be revaluated, seeking the perspectives for its adaptation to the contemporary urban and market demands. Comparison uses sustainability indicators related to physical environment such as: density, diversity, land use, green-ing, transportation, compactness et cetera to give a fair picture of the estates’ urban values and potentials. What are the architecture and urban qualities and weaknesses of these housing estates? How the urban form developed over time? How sustainable is the urban form of these estates? What can be done to boost its attractiveness to the citizens, architects, and developers?