Balfron Tower
Social Housing to Social Pariah
Balfron Tower, an iconic structure in the East End of London, was designed by the renowned architect Ernő Goldfinger (in collaboration with London County Council architect Hubert Bennett). This Brutalist masterpiece has had a turbulent history, reflecting broader societal changes and the evolution of public housing policy in the UK.
All of the photos are HERE
Origins and Design
Balfron Tower was conceived during the post-war period, a time when Britain faced a severe housing shortage. The government carried out an ambitious building program to address this crisis, and high-rise (city in the sky) buildings became a favoured solution due to their ability to house many people on relatively small parcels of land. The tower, completed in 1967, is part of the Brownfield Estate in Poplar, an area heavily bombed during World War II.
Ernő Goldfinger, a Hungarian-born architect, was heavily influenced by the modernist principles of Le Corbusier, which emphasized functionality, and the use of raw concrete. Balfron Tower exemplifies these ideals with its stark, bold lines and emphasis on communal living spaces.
Goldfinger believed that “The success of any scheme (Brownfield Estate as a whole) depends on the human factor. i.e.: The relationship of people to each other and the frame to their daily life which the building provides. These buildings have the advantage of having, as tenants, families with roots in the local neighbourhood”. Of the 160 families rehoused into Balfron Tower all but two were from Tower Hamlets.
Standing at 84 meters tall, the 27-story tower is characterised by its separate but connected service tower, which houses elevators and other utilities, linked to the main residential block by walkways on every third floor. The service tower was also intended to cut down on noise pollution within the main building.
The tower’s 146 flats and maisonettes were first occupied by tenants of the Greater London Council (GLC) almost all of whom qualified for subsidised rent. These families used to live in the houses demolished to make way for the Blackwall Tunnel Approach roads. When ownership of the tower transferred from the GLC to Tower Hamlets Borough Council in the 1980s, these 146 residents became council tenants. Following the introduction of the Right to Buy, as part of legislation passed in the Housing Act 1980, some tenants took the opportunity to buy their flats from the council to become leaseholders. Some leaseholders lived in their flats, some moved and rent their flat out to private tenants.
Early Years and Goldfinger's Experiment
Goldfinger's vision for Balfron Tower was not merely architectural but also social. He believed that high-rise living could foster a sense of community if designed thoughtfully. To this end, he included communal laundries, lounges, and even a rooftop garden.
To understand the lived experience of his design, Goldfinger and his wife moved into a flat on the 25th floor for two/three months in 1968. This period allowed him to engage directly with residents, gather feedback, and demonstrate his commitment to creating a habitable and pleasant environment. Goldfinger and his wife Ursula hosted parties and social events, fostering a sense of community among the residents. This experiment is often cited as evidence of Goldfinger's genuine interest in the social aspects of his architectural work. Goldfinger later spoke of it: “I never heard a voice, a wireless or a plumbing noise from another flat, with one exception. If I had a bath about 6 in the evening I would hear a distant child’s voice, through a ventilator I suppose, but not clearly enough to hear what was said and never the parent’s voice”. He used the experience to identify improvements and incorporate them in the design for the later Trellick Tower.
Decline and Neglect
Despite its innovative design, Balfron Tower faced significant challenges in the following decades. By the 1980s, the tower, like many other high-rise buildings of its era, had fallen into disrepair. The once-celebrated communal spaces became neglected, and the building's concrete facade began to show signs of wear. Issues such as crime, vandalism, and antisocial behaviour plagued the tower, reflecting broader societal problems in the area.
The decline of Balfron Tower was exacerbated by cuts to public spending on housing and maintenance. As the local council struggled with limited resources, the building's condition worsened, and its reputation suffered. By the late 1990s, Balfron Tower was seen by many as a symbol of the failure of high-rise public housing projects.
Ownership of the Brownfield Estate was transferred from Tower Hamlets Council to Poplar Housing and Regeneration Community Association in 2007 under the condition they bring all dwellings in the estate up to decent homes standard as part of regeneration works.
Regeneration and Controversy
The turn of the 21st century brought renewed interest in Balfron Tower, spurred by a broader re-evaluation of Brutalist architecture. The building's historical and architectural significance was increasingly recognized, leading to its listing as a Grade II* structure in 1996. This designation highlighted its importance as an example of mid-20th-century modernist design. In the 1996 listing description, English Heritage identify Balfron as a "well planned and beautifully finished" tower with a "distinctive profile that sets it apart from other tall blocks" accommodating marble and tiled interiors that are "unusually well thought-out", "revealing Goldfinger as a master in the production of finely textured and long-lasting concrete masses."
In the early 2010s, the major regeneration project was initiated to refurbish Balfron Tower. The project, led by a private developer in partnership with the local council, aimed to restore the building's original features while upgrading its facilities to modern standards. This included new heating systems, improved insulation, and the restoration of communal areas.
However, the regeneration project has been fraught with controversy. Original residents were displaced during the refurbishment, leading to accusations of "social cleansing." Critics argue that the upgraded flats, which were marketed at higher prices, were no longer affordable for the tower's original working-class residents. The displacement of long-term tenants in favour of wealthier newcomers has sparked debates about ‘gentrification’ and the loss of affordable housing in London. One resident, Katharine H, said in 2014 “I’m afraid that at this point I think it's unlikely that I will still be living in Balfron Tower by the end of this summer, as the building is due to be refurbished, at which point all the tenants will have to move out”. She continued “Sadly I won't be able to move back after the refurbishment! Or not unless I get a lot richer in the meantime!”.
The refurbishment is finished and at the time of writing (June 2024) it is 25% occupied. The are renting some units to “…broaden the range of possible occupants”, although given the rental costs it is debatable how. Bedrooms are small. In the two bed flat the 2nd bedroom only has room for the bed, no storage. The legacy flat I visited only really differed by using 60’s/70’s furniture. The tower, as was originally intended, contains the amenities as well as carrying out a social function. A small cinema room and a dining room are both available for occupants to book for private use. The underground car park remains, more useful now perhaps than when originally built. One nice touch was to use the copious notes made by Goldfinger’s wife to create a font for the internal signage.
Legacy
Today, Balfron Tower is a complex symbol. Architecturally, it remains a striking example of Brutalist design and a testament to Ernő Goldfinger's vision. It is an important part of the broader story of post-war public housing in Britain—marked by lofty ideals, subsequent neglect, and contentious regeneration.
As London continues to grapple with housing shortages and debates over urban development, Balfron Tower's story serves as a reminder of the challenges and potential pitfalls of large-scale public housing projects. It also highlights the enduring importance of considering both the physical and social aspects of architectural design. The tower's future will undoubtedly continue to provoke discussion and reflection on these critical issues.
It is still an iconic structure in the East End of London, stands as a testament to the architectural and social ambitions of the mid-20th century.
An often asked question is “What would Goldfinger think?” In this authors opinion he would probably have been tolerant of the internal refurbishments. As his own house at 2 Willow Road showed he loved clever use of space, with none wasted. Also the retention of communal spaces in the tower and on the roof would likely have met with approval along with the external green spaces. However given his commitment to social housing for the ‘working classes’ of the day, would he have liked it that flats sold for upwards of £600,000 and rented for £3500 plus per month?…
