Northfield escaped the 'Tunnel-Backs' of the Industrial Revolution

Birmingham's Middle Ring (written in 1941 (10s = 10 shillings + 10d = 10 pence))

  Miles of "tunnel-back" houses line the roads of the Middle Ring. Up-to-date in their day, they had an interior water supply and outdoor W.C. and later, during the early years of this century, this type of house was equipped with hot water for a bath and sink—a great attraction to tenants. The rents of this type of house—of which there are well over 50,000 in Birmingham—vary, but are generally 10s. to 11s. The "tunnel-backs" are clearly seen in the lower picture.

The Tunnel-Back House

  The insistence of the early building by-laws on a minimum air space on at least two sides of every dwelling, compelled the speculative builder to develop another type of working-class house. This is known to housing reformers as the "tunnel-back" house. It is an ingenious means of crowding houses on to a site and of reducing the necessary roads to a minimum while keeping within the law. The plan on the next page shows a typical house of this type.
  Miles of streets in the Middle Ring contain a monotonous repetition of this type of house. Each has approximately the same accommodation, and the same external appearance. The housing density is usually from 20 to 30 per acre, an improvement upon that adopted by the builders of back-to-back houses, but still too high to permit convenient planning and adequate daylight illumination.
  The tunnel-back house became the basic plan for almost all town houses, with inclusive rentals (in 1914) varying from 6s. 6d. to about 12s. 6d. per week. It therefore catered for the artisan and the black-coated worker, while the unskilled labourer still remained in the lower rented back-to-backs, which were let at rents of 35. to 6s. per week.

  Later, many slight variations of the basic plan were adopted. The earlier houses of this type were built on the road frontages without front gardens, but subsequently, as a result of the regulation of building lines, small plots were provided. These so-called gardens were of little use for cultivation, but they provided space for the bay window, which was the sine qua non of respectability in the latter half of the nineteenth century. In those days the tunnel-back house with a bay window in front had a social status equivalent to that of the semi-detached villa to-day.
  The smallest form of the tunnel-back house was reasonably compact because the stairs were arranged between the front and back living-rooms, thus avoiding waste space in halls and landings. Where the accommodation was increased by the provision of an entrance hall and separate kitchen and scullery, a long dark passage, lighted only by fanlights or borrowed lights, gave access to the various rooms. Gloom was the chief characteristic of this type of house, despite the fact that its window space and natural ventilation were controlled by model by-laws.

The "Universal" Plan
Just before the beginning of the twentieth century the Garden City movement attracted considerable attention, and the planning of small houses was considered as a worthwhile effort. Insistence upon the merits of open development led to the construction of large numbers of houses, built in pairs or blocks of four or six. The standard accommodation was two living-rooms, a small scullery, three bedrooms, a bathroom, lavatory, coal-store and larder.
  The usual plan of the small three-bedroom house is more or less the same throughout the whole country, and for that reason it is known to architects as The "Universal" Plan. (See Plan)

    In comparison with the two earlier types, this plan possesses decided advantages, but unfortunately it is used in its standard form without consideration of aspect, with the consequence that some rooms are sunless, and larders often face due south.
  The compact planning of these newer houses, combined with the improvement in daylight illumination, and in ventilation, appealed particularly to those housewives whose husbands were earning rather more than the average worker's wage. It consequently superseded the "tunnel-back" as the house of the black-coated worker and artisan, who moved out to the new houses and still further way from their work in the Central Wards
Speculative builders were quick to realise the possibilities of this type of dwelling, but they were not prepared to adopt the low density and comparatively wide frontages used by Garden City planners.
  They soon built in the outer suburbs of Birmingham thousands of these "Universal" houses, dressed up in a variety of external treatments ranging from pseudo-Old English to the flat-roofed ultra-modern. These variants do not represent intrinsic merit, but are ostentatious additions that serve merely to justify higher rents, and also satisfy the desire of the individual to live in a superior-looking house.
  These attempts to make up for lack of proper site planning and grouping by the introduction of ostentatious features have only made matters worse. Uniformity may be monotonous, but no officer would expect to improve the effect of a parade of soldiers by issuing a variety of headgear ranging from an Indian turban to a busby.
  This disturbing restless vulgarity, which is common in suburban housing, has been carried out despite the powers for the control of elevations provided in the Town and Country Planning Act. But do not blame the builder alone—he is providing what his customers demand. They are willing to pay more for something "classy".
  The "Back-to-Back", the "Tunnel-Back", and the "Universal Plan"— these are the standard types of Birmingham houses built by private builders. It remains to describe the dwellings erected by the Municipality.

MUNICIPAL HOUSING
  In Birmingham, the houses built by the City Council, particularly on the more recent estates, are superior in planning and architectural treatment to the average work of the private speculative builder. More attention has been paid to the needs of the tenants, and orientation has been taken into account. Several typical examples are shown in the illustrated section, Nos. 10-13 and 40.
  Such defects as they have lie not in the planning of the houses themselves, but in the more subtle details relating to the choice of building materials, layout, street design, and the provision of communal facilities. But in general the city's estates provide good, substantial homes for the tenants; their elevations are "well-bred" without the fripperies or pretentiousness that are so common in speculative building.

10

Birmingham's Outer Ring

Allen's Cross Estate at Northfield is typical of the earlier large municipal estates. There is little variation in design, but the layout provides variety and retains many of the natural features. It contains over 2,000 houses let at weekly rentals of 10s., 11s. 2d. and 16s. 6d., and is about six miles from the centre of the city, which can be reached in about three-quarters of an hour by bus to the Bristol Road and thence by tram. (10) Shows atypical road; and (11) an approach to the shopping centre.

11

12

Birmingham's Outer Ring

Weoley Castle is one of the later estates and is slightly nearer the city than Allen's Cross. These two pictures show that a considerable advance has been made in architecture and site layout in the intervening years. The main criticism one might offer of this fine estate is the lack of a compact centre. The shopping centre surrounds a very large green (see No. 33), and the schools, public houses and cinemas are scattered over the estate.

13

39

Northfield continued

The speculative builder cares nothing for preserving the amenities of the district he develops. In the top picture you can again see Northfield Church (top left) and how it is hemmed in by incongruous and untidy building. The lower picture was also taken within a mile of the Church and shows the very different treatment by the municipality in its care for the preservation of natural amenities—even in cheaper houses—from the speculative building shown above.

40