Fernand Poullion's Residence Buffalo compared to The Smithson's Robin Hood Gardens http://socratesarchitects.com

1. Nicholas Socrates 4123875
Architecture Reflections
TU Delft
Comparison of the Architecture Designs of Robin Hood Gardens, London and Residence Buffalo,
Paris.
Introduction
Both Fernand Pouillon and the Smithson’s suggests a ‘wanting’ or a ‘need’ to change how
architecture is conceived of and built
Pouillon’s relatively monumental Residence Buffalo was built and acted as a catalyst to transform
the area or at least as a benchmark for Parisian post war social housing regeneration.
This essay will also relate between the way the Smithson’s have managed their façade, their
“skin” and how Pouillon’s design has dealt with the building surface; whether his design fits in
with the Smithson’s concept of creating a repetitive and non-stylistic façade; in order to create ‘a
generalizing aesthetic’, giving the sense of ‘ordinariness as the norm’.
This essay will also touch upon the significance of ‘the tower in the park’, (evident in Residence
Buffalo as an icon or landmark), and explore the relationships that Residence Buffalo has to the
Smithson’s idea of ‘the building as a street’, the building (and its space) as an extension of the
public sphere (for the residence).
Residence Buffalo consists of 466 rooms, distributed around 5 different spaces.
Residence Buffalo reflects and projects the Montrouge districts’ classical and memorable
qualities. It is a residential complex with a character of monumentality.
The Government launched a major campaign to build social housing from 1954. Residence
Buffalo was one of the first operations instigated by the Comptoir National Housing Corporation
(NLC) (the social housing campaign).
The residence was named after the Buffalo Stadium, famous and popular before the Second
World War.
The architect and urban planner Fernand Pouillon, born 14 May 1912 in Cancon (Lot-et-Garonne)
and died at the castle of Belcastel (Aveyron) on 24 July 1986.
Pouillon was one of the great builders of the years of the reconstruction after World War II in
France. Much of his abundant work consists of housing;
Fernand Pouillon was an innovative architect, both in his choice of construction methods and his
globally renowned designs. The buildings that he built were of a relatively low cost, whilst he
used quality materials and standards that were relatively high.
He was guided by ideas about a precise and organized space and its inclusion in the city. Within
his housing complexes, he provides a comfort similar to that enjoyed by the richest.
His accomplishments are characterized by an insertion into the site, a building mass balance; born
of rigorous harmonic proportions, noble materials and his collaboration with local sculptors,
potters and landscapers.
He used forms from classical examples, such as; squares, or ‘malls’ (walkways), the plaza and
various objects of urban furniture, especially the fountain.
He paid great attention to the quality of public space that adjusts (almost contrasts) its context; of
a rapidly developing high urbanization.

2. The State policies set out to solve the problem of housing shortages in the context of post-war
reconstruction and the succeeding phase of unprecedented demographic growth (the baby boom,
the massive rural exodus, and then at the start of the 1960s; the reintegration of two million
people from Algeria). All these issues were initially expressed in the building of large collective
structures, between 1950 and 1970.
The marked preference from this period, on for the acquisition of property, for individual
housing; the rejection of the large collective groupings by the middle classes, and modification in
family structures, inspired the first waves of the building of individual housing estates. The
motivations which were offered as reasons for moving ahead are related much more to the
conditions of housing (surface, space, cost, the desire to change from renting to property
ownership, and from the collective to the individual), than to a search for the advantages of a
rural environment.
Robin Hood Gardens
Robin Hood Gardens is a social housing estate build for the Greater London Council. It was
designed in the late 1960's and completed in 1972. It is in Popler, East London, and when it was
built, it was surrounded by working docks, which closed soon afterwards. Parts of the area are
now very wealthy, whilst others are extremely deprived. Its architects were Alison and Peter
Smithson; a husband and wife team who built very few buildings, but had great charisma and an
international reputation as innovative writers and teachers: their ideas did not only change how
individual buildings look, but also the way our cities are structured. Robin Hood Gardens consists
of two blocks of just over two hundred maisonettes; one block is seven stories high, and the other
is ten stories. These blocks are gently canted, so they shelter the central park from the noisy
adjacent roads.
Robin Hood Gardens is now populated by a largely Bangladeshi community. Many families are
living in cramped two bedroom maissonette apartments.
The estate is currently threatened by demolition, as the council wishes to redevelop the whole
area. The 20th Century Society is campaigning to keep the buildings as they believe both
magnificent piece of architecture, and that they can be refurbished to provide, much needed, good
quality housing. However, Robin Hood Gardens Gardens polarizes opinions; People either love
it, or hate it.
Above the garden flats for seniors and families, which have direct access at ground level, the
units are stacked in groups of three floors (three times in the BTS Block and twice in the CT
Block. A very generous covered walkway on the middle floor of each of these groups provides
access to three different types of maisonettes arranged above and below. The apartment entrances
are shifted to the side of the pedestrian deck, allowing for a sense of privacy. The resulting spaces
are intended for flowers or plants, or as a utilities storage space. The maisonette stairs - running to
the crosswalks are located at the covered walkway and, behind the corridor which serves as an
additional buffer zone, lie the kitchens of all the units, and depending on the unit type, a spall
room with a toilet. These spaces like the rooms above and below, are orientated toward the
tranquil lawn area in the centre of the complex. They are fitted with glass doors, which open onto
a narrow projected (escape) balcony. The (noisy) living rooms are separated from the bedrooms
by the corridor and the bathroom and are located beneath the pedestrian decks. The repetition
imposed by financial constraints has been overcome by the variety of unit types within each
horizontal and vertical section. Where the building bends is where the stairwell and the storage
rooms are housed.
It has many of the qualities good Georgian or Terrace Housing has, which is an order about it,
from the base to the parapet, and the proportions are similar in the sense that they play a rhythm;
by designing one bay and repeating it (to fill its urban context). The variation, which is overlaid

3. on top of it, makes it that little more bit interesting, with the large mullions for each of the
dwellings.
Description
The Smithson's wanted to create something radical in response to the usual Post War Housing
regenerations.
The Smithson’s approached each new design problem with no formalistic preconceptions and
solved each problem by taking it back to the first principles. “Their aim is always to create an
image that will convince and compel. When they demand that every building must be a prototype,
an exemplar, for the cities of the future, they intend this not only to be read functionally, but
visually too.” 1
The Smithson’s intention, and one of their main duties (thought their career) was to provide
order.
The Smithson’s were the Fathers of the New Brutalism and were probably the greatest influence
of the Modern Movement in Britain after the 2nd World War.2
This New Brutalism was opposed to 'the Picturesque' or the imposed Classicism, but was a design
which was inherent to each situation
New Brutalism was a major influence development of the modern movement – its main
practitioner is Le Corbusier starting with the Unité.3
The core of these ideas had been put into place in their 1952 competition entry for the Golden
Lane Housing project. A sense of community they argued could be re-introduced — or re-
identified—around the ordering device of ‘street decks’. All kinds of communal activities plus
individual yard-gardens connected to these streets in the air transforming them into places.4
They utilized a similar technique employing a construction rack into which individual dwellings
were inserted similar to Corbusier’s Unité
For the Smithson’s, their Brutalist ethic revolved around their duty to discover indigenous
solutions for a particular place at a particular time.
With each new building they proposed a new order.
Their forms were designed as a direct response to the specific site and program.
Their Brutalist principle of specificity to each situation was a great challenge to the notion of
Team 10's four functions, which was a central principle of the CIAM's Athens Charter in 1928
1
METRAUX, G. 1969. BOOKS-Livres, Team 10 Primer. Leonardo. 2 201-204 UK. The MIT Press. 317.
2
WEBSTER, H. 1997. Modernism Without Rhetoric; Essays on the work of Alison and Peter Smithson. Academy
Editions. London. 142.
3
SMITHSON
A,
&
P.1952-1960. Ordinariness and Light: Urban Theories 1952- 1960. London. Faber and
Faber 42.
4
SMITHSON
A,
&
P.1952-1960. Ordinariness and Light: Urban Theories 1952- 1960. London. Faber and
Faber 44.

4. The Functional City of CIAM (4th Congress) that Le Corbusier advocated, which was to;
separate space into four categories;
1. Distinct housing units, 2. Work, 3. Leisure and, 4. Transportation.
The Smithson's were interested in ‘the status of ideas’ – taking accepted ideas and reorganizing
them, adding to them, or reformulating them.
So the Smithson's searched for an order that linked these spaces of 'The Functional City (distinct
housing units, work, leisure and transportation).
It was the relationships and processes that counted/ that were significant. They stated: “Without
links to our fellows we are dead”.5
They proposed a conceptual system; with four city elements, or patterns of association, clearly; a
new system of relationships that structured the city, they coined;
1. The House, 2. The Street, 3. The District and, 4. The City.
They defined the first element to be the ‘house’, the shell that fits man’s back, it looks inward to
the family and outward to society and how it is organized should reflect this duality. 44 The
'street', is the second city element; a new idea being the multi-layered arrangement of streets in
the air. The third element is the 'district' where our circle of friends resides, and finally the
ultimate community, the 'city', becomes an arrangement of such districts.
Discussion
The Smithson's sort after a design, of their “skin”, their building surface, in a repetitive and non-
stylistic way, which the Smithson's called; 'a generalizing aesthetic', with the aim to create their
motion of "ordinariness as the norm"; a sense of familiarity, which is not subject to the changing
trends of design.
In a sense, the same concept is achieved in Pouillon's design of Residence Buffalo, but in a very
different way. His building surface was by no means ordinary, but was not elaborate, but it was
repetitive in the way he ordered his façade; he very skilled in his approach to materials and the
outcome was very much different to Robin Hood Garden’s.
Here, then, Buffalo’s 466 homes and garages are organized; the plan of this residential complex
offers a clear hierarchy among the domestic; reserved for pedestrians (including the gardens, a
circular pool, a mall/ passage way and plaza), and outside; the house (including the garages, and
the street), thanks to the great and long building aligned along the north side closing in the view
of the outside, the complex creates as enclave very successfully.
The buildings range from 3 to 7 floors and a tower built on stilts, as to allow for a grater sense of
space; extending the views of the gardens, and which also marks the centre of this urban
composition.
Apart from the tower, built of concrete, then painted and covered with hard stone, the buildings
5
SMITHSON
A,
&
P.1952-1960. Ordinariness and Light: Urban Theories 1952- 1960. London. Faber and
Faber 44.

5. are constructed of massive stone walls and at the front of one the three interior faces; are cladded
with pink marble slabs.
We notice that the mullions and the board of the attic were painted black. Moreover, the facades
of the outside of the buildings of the marble courtyard are designed so that you do not see the
number of floors, but only but the masses are observed within the same facade, coinciding with
the Smithson's concept of a 'generalizing aesthetic'; whilst on interior of the complex the facades
do indicate the floors, and by the array of windows; suggests the indication of the individual units
- on the interior; giving the residents a sense of identity and community within that identity.
The facade of the marble court does not read like a building of many floors, but of only two
floors; a high noble part and bourgeois part; resting on a base, topped by an attic or Mansard roof.
The tower, composed of isolated layers of concrete, stone and glass, Positioned in the heart of the
residence; it is real and unvarnished; it becomes a remarkable and unique element of the complex.
Referencing to the Smithson's ideological concept of the "tower in the park", and in this case;
derived from traditional towers, the belfry or the bell tower of the Italian piazza, acting as the
central point of the project found consistently throughout all urban complexes of Fernand
Pouillon.
As for the garages, they combine concrete and original masonry decorative bricks made of lined
white cement mortar.
Noble materials have been used; the main buildings are built with sober volumes limestone and
rock. Pouillon worked in collaboration with sculptors, potters and landscapers. The limestone
used preserves very well; a sand coloured stone; as it ages, turns golden coloured.
Its counterpoints exalt the massiveness of the masonry walls: pink marble slabs placed in between
the pilasters of stone-lined hollow bricks, with cement mortar, which makes the texture of the
walls appear very rich.
Materials have the potential to speak; they are static as individual elements, but when they are
combined, there are infinite possibilities, and they always say something new.
There is iconography and symbolism in the facade. Robin Hood Gardens is of a rough concrete
structure, which contrasts to Residence Buffalo's monumentality.
It suggests a way of life.
The modulation of Robin Hood Gardens’ facades; their slab blocks were handled, by the
Smithson’s with skill and confidence; using a system of repetitive concrete elements to create a
lyrical play of vertical fins along the length of the blocks.
The two housing blocks were deliberately juxtaposed, not only to enclose the landscaped central
space, but to create a charged space possessing the same monumental qualities as the crescents of
Bath. Even the central grass mound is loaded with meaning - referencing to the primitive origins
of man.
The intellectual concepts and the intentions behind the scheme, some say, failed as a place for
human inhabitation. Its hard concrete aesthetic and its huge forms alienated itself from its context,
resulting in the formation of a 'ghetto' of the lower classes.
The Smithson's created this building, almost completely against, or opposed to, the established
Team 10 premise that "a building's first duty is to the fabric in which it finds itself"

6. Maybe, this contradiction is due to the Smithson's earlier belief that contemporary society was so
radically different from the society which previously proceeded it, which, they believed resulted
in the 'obsolescence of the existing city', and it must have been this that led them on to their
continuing search for radically new forms of habitation6
Pouillon achieved the same sense of familiarity the Smithson's sort after; in an approach, which
was very different; he appealed to the public’s sense of monumentality. Unlike the Smithson's, he
did not search for something completely different; something revolutionary, which in more times
than not, would result in it being deemed as 'radical' or alien, but Pouillon has his truth rooted in
the past, and instead of being at the for-front of design trends; he promoted and communicated, in
the designs of his buildings, something, too, substantial, but specifically monumental, which, in a
sense, was revolutionary, because it was, by no means, not complying with the present status quo
of buildings being created in that time in Paris.
In Post War Paris, lots of housing schemes were being built, and being built – fast. Speed of
construction was very important, at the time, therefore there were lots of prefabricated elements
consistent to many buildings. Pouillon acted, or designed, in response to this monotony.
Parisians are nostalgic for the old inner city. The humanism of Fernand Pouillon's residences
finds a contemporary echo in the search for an atmosphere, of large monumental buildings, such
as; the Place des Vosges.
Fernand Pouillon's architectural intention was "to build cheaper and better than anyone."
His own created organization; the Comptoir National Housing (NLC), which buys land, develops
the project plan and then he leads and oversees the project on the site.
Residence Buffalo is one of the first two housing schemes in the Paris region with the 'Comptoir
National Housing', the other being located in Pantin.
The Pantin and Buffalo projects were executed in unusually short periods of time; with studies
and research taking only a few weeks, and he completes the build in 1 or 2 years, with a relatively
low price given the quality of building.
Residence Buffalo is a low-key architecture, traditional, but with no extremes, comfortable in the
details; however, it is luxurious in Parisian in the sense of the word.
Fernand Pouillon was inspired by buildings of Seventeenth and Eighteenth neighborhoods of the
city and they were also inspired by the mundane, common place, yet charming houses in the
Fourth or the Sixth District, which were only worth their size and proportions and stone; they
were not extravagant or luxurious.
Despite a high density, of Residence Buffalo, the most surprising quality of the complex is its
intimacy of the place; the quiet side of the complex (its interior), gives sensations almost identical
to those of a foray into a major property with its courtyards, large or small, always grounded.
These feelings do exist in Paris; at the Palais Royal, Place Dauphine or the Place des Vosges.
With the noise of the city on the outside, but within these enclaves, mostly what we hear is
6
WEBSTER, H. 1997. Modernism Without Rhetoric; Essays on the work of Alison and Peter Smithson. Academy
Editions. London. 77.

7. silence; a world in itself.
In Residence Buffalo there are 2 openings in the complex; in two of the corners of the site. This is
for the interest of both the residents and the people of the neighborhood. The openings are there,
as to, not to completely enclose the residence. Breaking apart the residential complex, leaving
two gaps, again, psychologically or perceptionally giving the people a feeling of space and
implies a welcoming aspect; a way in, and also a way out.
If you look at the plan of Residence Buffalo, the principles of geometric composition that the
design achieves responding to its urban effects; Pouillon fits everything together so well, whilst
he allows it to be seen as a singular form; it creates an urban enclave, which is; a self sufficient
structure of merged different scales inside the same entity; the apartment, the gardens and the
complex.
There is a harmonious balance between the tall building (the seven story tower), the lower
buildings (three and four floors), and the open space. The dimensional space is reduced for plants
and trees and open space, creating environments allowing for various uses, within its open
(secondary public) space. The many open spaces within the complex are all varied. Every passage
or opening becomes an opportunity to insert fragments of landscape into the composition. Along
the gardens and paths of movement there is a highly scenographic and unexpected order and
unity. Within the residence there is an intimacy of place; situated within the city - this inner place
is silent and calm; a world within itself.
Both projects are dealing with the public realm, which are resolved in different ways.
Like Residence Buffalo, Robin Hood Gardens creates a tranquil environment by arranging the
two slabs (the buildings) protectively around the site, which acts as a noise protection barrier
against the heavy traffic in the neighborhood. The centre remains open for the hilly, landscaped
park. The buildings are fronted by additional noise protection walls and rows of trees. The private
access road has been lowered to provide naturally lighting and ventilated parking spaces beneath
the buildings and the park, as well as a sense of psychological space.
There is a communication in terms of access
How the transition is made from the city to the ensemble, and vise versa; the relationship between
the outside space and the inside space, and the position of the building - how they are orientated;
creating a boundary, a separation, with clear limits, to what is inside and what is outside
Conclusion
The Robin Hood Gardens project can be seen as a lineage of thinking of contemporary housing,
which started with the Golden Lane competition entry (1951-1952).
In contemporary writing about the Robin Hood Gardens scheme the Smithson's discussed their
continuing concern with the reformulation of a 'hierarchy of association' in line with the
contemporary condition' and in particular with the reinterpretation of the traditional street into
'streets in the air'. Their translation of these concerns into architecture form, were manifested in
the Robin Hood Gardens.
The key concepts they used were, ‘identity’, and ‘association’. Every form of association, they
argued, has an inherent pattern of building that can be used to reinforce identity and community.
They were looking for a new sense of order, a structuring system of relationships that would
overcome the anonymity and loss of place in the city that destruction of both bombs and

8. unimaginative reconstruction had created.7
However, before the design of Robin Hood Gardens it had already become apparent that high-
rise, deck access living produced both social and practical problems.
Evidently, now this is contradicted because Robin Hood Gardens’ ‘streets in the sky’ is in many
ways a great success; allowing people to gather and children to play, behaving in a way you
would not be able to see in a corridor in, a hotel like, apartment building. There is life here, a
strong sense of community, and it is very interesting.
At the time of the build, Robin Hood Garden was not widely accepted, even now an eyesore,
threatened with demolition, but at the time was strongly opposed, disliked and not respected; both
by the public and generally its residents.
What the Smithson's failed to realize, or overlooked, in this project was that; existing fabrics hold
memory and therefore value, people accept change very slowly, and that cities themselves, too,
are slowly evolving organisms.
Contrastingly, Pouillon; in his approach solved the matter of contradiction between his concept
(of monumentality) and of consideration of functionality (for the residents), in a low key,
democratic, just and mature way.
What is common to both architectural designs, is; the importance they give to, their intention to
create an environment for the public; whether it is the ‘streets in the sky’, the enclosed spaces (the
‘enclave’) the ‘mall’, the ‘plaza’, or the metaphorical ‘street’.
"The social structure of which the town planner has to give form, is not only different, but much
more complex than ever before. The various public services make the family more and more
independent of actual physical contact with the rest of the community and turned in on itself.."8
Everything that you do in a city or place is a cultural experience: you go out into the public realm,
into the street, you bump into people you might know, you chat with the people in the shops that
you are now familiar with and you might discuss something with them for a brief moment. This is
a civic act, it is a cultural act and it is a political act.
We may all come from different cultures, but what we all have in common, is what we share: the
public street.
There is the relationship between one building and another, and the relationship between the
building and the open public space; the street or the square, and out of that relationship, they
merge and create something in the sense of a 'family', therefore a city can be seen, not as a
mechanical repetition or identical elements, but as a 'family'.
7
METRAUX, G. 1969. BOOKS-Livres, Team 10 Primer. Leonardo. 2 204. UK. The MIT Press.
8
METRAUX, G. 1969. BOOKS-Livres, Team 10 Primer. Leonardo. 2 201. UK. The MIT Press.

9. Bibliography
FRIEDERIKE, S. 1994. Floor Plan Manual, Housing. Belrin. Birkhauser.
NEURATH, O. 2006. Mapping the Modern City, the International Congress of Modern
Architecture (CIAM) and the Poiltics of Information Design.
VOSSOUGHIAN, N. 2006. Design Issues. 22(3). MIT Press.
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/desi.2006.22.3.48 . 9th of November 2010.
BOYER, C. 1945-1960. An Encounter with History: The Postwar Debate Between the English
Journals of Architectural Review and Architectural Design. http://www.team10online.org
18th of November 2010.
SMTHSON, 1953-1984. A. Team 10 meetings. New York. Rizzoli.
SMITHSON
A,
&
P.1952-1960. Ordinariness and Light: Urban Theories 1952- 1960.
London. Faber and Faber.
WEBSTER, H. 1997. Modernism Without Rhetoric; Essays on the work of Alison and Peter
Smithson. Academy Editions. London.
DARKE, J. 1979. The Primary Generator and the Design Process. Department of Architecture,
University of Sheffield. IPC Business Press.
METRAUX, G. 1969. BOOKS-Livres, Team 10 Primer. Leonardo. 2 201-204 UK. The MIT
Press.
LUCAN, J. 2003. Fernand Pouillon, Architecte. Montrouge, Pantin, Meudon, Boulogne. France.
Picard.
LEJEUNE, J-F. 1996. The New Modern City. USA. Princeton Architectural Press.
COHEN, J-L. 1996. Above Paris, The Aerial Survey of Roger Henard. USA. Architectual Press.
Architecture Contemporaine et Design. http://habitatcontemporain.blogspot.com . 22nd of
September 2010.
Wikipedia (France). Fernand Pouillon. http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fernand_Pouillon . 24th of
September 2010.
Fernand Pouillon Architecte website. Les pierres Sauvages de Belcastel, Association Loi 1901.
http://fernandpouillon.com/ , website, 12th of September 2010.