The significance of Byker was manifold but the
facts of its achievements have been eclipsed by its
mythology. The project was such a progressive and
optimistic counterpoint to ‘normal’ urban redevelop-
ment at the time that the successes of Erskine’s pro-
ject team were touted as panaceas for almost all urban
problems. Apart from the successful design, the two
main accomplishments
publicized by most commen-
tators were citizen involvement in the rehousing
process and in the retention of population in the
community. That the facts themselves demonstrate
something different takes little away from the efforts
and achievements of the architects.
Apart from one preliminary exercise, residents
were not involved in detailed design decisions.
Instead, their participation evolved to a more general
level of forming strong bonds of trust between archi-
tects and residents – to an
extent unusual in any such
relationship. Erskine wanted to elevate the residents
to the status of primary clients, but his contractual
relationship with the city, and the city’s complex
bureaucracy made the task unfeasible. This led to
some ambiguity regarding Erskine’s ability to fulfill
all his promises to the local people.
But there was no such doubt regarding the role the
architects’ office played in the community. The old
corner shop became an
informal community resource
center. It was a focal place in the life of the neighbor-
hood, where residents could obtain information and
see the designers of their community at work. This
level of mutual respect allowed the architects a rela-
tively high level of freedom to interpret the commu-
nity’s needs into three-dimensional forms and spaces.
As shown in Figure 1.6, they developed an original
architectural language for the new buildings, having
more to do with Erskine’s personal aesthetic than
local
precedent, and created an intimate ‘jumble’ of
urban spaces instead of the long bleak streets.
Demolition of Byker’s housing stock began in
1966, two years before Erskine’s appointment, and
by 1969 the population had dropped from nearly
18 000 to 12 000. Normally, areas like Byker, covering
81 hectares (202 acres) were demolished in one fell
swoop. Residents were rehoused permanently in
other
parts of the city, and the web of community
connections and relationships was destroyed, along
with all physical traces of old buildings. Instead of this
soulless process, Erskine persuaded the Newcastle city
authorities to clear away the old rows of ‘Tyneside
flats’ on a much smaller scale, only a few streets at a
time. This more selective schedule was intended to
mesh with the phasing of rebuilding,
so that residents
could be quickly rehoused in new dwellings. Erskine
planned to accommodate 9000 of the resident popu-
lation in new homes at a density of 247 persons per
hectare (100 per acre) – in American terms, about
38 dwellings per acre. This was considerably lower
than the original housing densities, but allowed also
for 1.25 car parking spaces per dwelling. The city
authorities expected the remaining few thousand res-
idents to relocate elsewhere by their own choice.
Despite
these good intentions, substantial construc-
tion delays dislocated this intermeshing program of
demolition and rebuilding, and toward the end of the
project the number of original residents rehoused
within their community numbered nearer 5000
(Malpass, 1979). Even though the architects did not
achieve all their intended social goals, they did save and
refurbish several
important community buildings,
including schools, pubs and clubs. One of these, the
Shipley Street baths, was incorporated into the now-
famous Byker Wall that bounds the northern edge of
the community for a distance of one-and-a-half miles,
dramatically following the topography (see Figure 1.7).
Erskine’s Byker redevelopment provided a viable
alternative to standard planning procedures and the
architectural vocabularies of British urban redevelop-
ment. But other
changes were in the works in
Britain in the early 1970s. A book with the poignantly
polemic title
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: 
