Last week, my friend asked me why I was interested in these buildings called “Panelki” (Panel Buildings). I openly told them that I didn’t know the origin of it, but I was intrigued academically and personally. They suggested that I might like them because I had never lived in them. Truthfully, I must have romanticized these structures, as I had never lived in them and had only entered a few times. On the other hand, my friend had spent a significant part of their childhood in one of these buildings. They told me, “As a little kid, I would see liquor bottles and syringes in the apartment hallway. [подъезд]” They were justified in not liking these buildings because our experiences shape our emotions. Now, these buildings, which are deteriorating due to neglect and resemble patched-up sacks, were once an important step taken to solve a major problem. They were scattered abundantly across a vast geography to solve the seemingly endless housing problem. We can say that they only partially fulfilled their purpose. The revolution promised a future to the citizens of the Russian Empire. In this future, there was also living in conditions befitting human dignity for the millions of poor. However, the attention of some city planners and those interested in the subject is once again drawn to these panel buildings and the landscaping around them. I leave it to you to determine whether these panel structures and the landscaping around them, which are now falling apart due to neglect, have delivered on the promise of the revolution or not.
Timeline
1917 — Revolution
1918–1920 — Civil War
1921 — New Economic Policy, a temporary shift to a more open economy
1924 — Death of Lenin
1928 — First Five-Year Plan
1939 — Start of World War II
1941 — Germany invades the USSR
1945 — USSR enters Berlin. End of the war
1953 — Death of Stalin. Khrushchev becomes the First Secretary of the Communist Party
1964 — Brezhnev becomes the First Secretary of the Communist Party
1977 — Brezhnev becomes the President of the USSR
1982 — Yuri Andropov succeeds Brezhnev
1984 — Konstantin Chernenko succeeds Andropov
1985 — Gorbachev comes to power
1991 — The end of the USSR
Tsarist Russia and the Revolution
Before the incredible industrialization efforts of the Revolution and the Stalin era, the economically lagging Russian Empire had millions of citizens who largely sustained their lives through agriculture, living in quite poor conditions. Prior to 1917, most housing in cities consisted of small, single-story wooden structures, and only two cities had a population exceeding one million: Moscow and St. Petersburg. Khrushchev, who had started as an metalworker and later took construction education, was considered a skilled laborer, allowing him to own an apartment as early as 1914; however, the situation was different for millions of citizens of the Russian Empire. Although we do not have precise data for approximately, for the 24.7 million citizens living in cities of the Russian Empire around the period of 1912–1914, the per capita living space was about 5.5 square meters.
As can be seen from the table, it is quite difficult to speak positively about the post-revolutionary situation. Although the Revolution promised a bright future for millions, housing policies during the Revolution and the period of civil war were quite low in the priorities of the authorities. During the civil war from 1918 to 1921, the workers living in now divided apartments that used to belong to Russian elites and bourgeoisie would dismantle the floors and door frames, burning them to keep warm as they lacked fuel. In 1921, municipal resources were insufficient even for new constructions and repair projects (Morton, 1980). Between 1923 and 1940, despite the urban population increasing from 21.4 million to 61 million, the amount of living space did not even double. Consequently, the per capita living space in cities had decreased from 5.85m² to 3.59m². This was a distressing for those who had given their lives for the revolution. Soviet Russia seemed to be lagging behind the Tsarist Russia because the industrialization efforts brought millions of people to the cities, but failed to provide sufficient living space for these people. Khrushchev expressed his discontent regarding this matter:
“We destroyed the monarchy and the bourgeoisie, we’ve won our freedom, but people are living in worse conditions than before. Some say, ‘How is this freedom? You promised us heaven; maybe we can reach it when we die, but at least we would have liked to taste it a little in this world. We don’t ask for much, just give us a corner to live.’” (N.S. Khrushchev, 1974)
According to Khrushchev, in a country that had gone through a world war, a revolution, and a civil war, it could be forgiven for housing construction and policies to temporarily be overshadowed by military and industrial investments. However, while this situation could be forgiven immediately after the civil war, it was unforgivable that the situation had not improved even decades after the revolution. During the New Economic Policy (NEP) era from 1921 to 1928, despite providing support and credit opportunities for private constructions, it was not sufficient. The young Soviet administration could not provide housing for ordinary citizens, Red Army veterans, or newlywed couples; instead, they directed them to dormitories and barracks if possible.(N.S. Khrushchev, 1974) This serious problem would not be seriously addressed until Khrushchev’s administration.
Stalin Era
The Stalin era evokes many associations, including World War II, a unique industrialization effort, and millions of people living under a harsh dictatorship. Stalin’s reign began with a significant collectivization and industrialization effort realized through the First Five-Year Plan (1929–1932). Millions of people migrated or were forcibly moved to cities to work in heavy industry and factories, triggering an incredible housing crisis.
The millions migrating to cities couldn’t find a place to live. If they were lucky, they stayed in shared housing called Kommunalka; otherwise, they lived in makeshift huts or barracks. Kommunalkas were homes where multiple families shared rooms.
Kommunalkas existed in Tsarist Russia as well. Before the revolution, these were large residences where many families lived. However, after the revolution, homes previously owned by the wealthy and the bourgeoisie were divided and included in the system of communal apartments.
The reason for such a decrease in living space in the USSR was the insufficient housing despite the urban migration and families sharing homes. The rooms in the homes were private spaces for the families, while the kitchen, hallway, and, if available, bathrooms were shared spaces. Right after the Revolution, due to the lack of regulation by the authorities, there were many issues among families sharing the housing. Additionally, facilities such as kitchens, bathrooms, and heating options were quite limited.
As seen in the table, at the beginning of 1939, in the entire Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (RSFSR), 60.5% of living spaces had running water, 43.7% had sanitary facilities, 17.5% had central heating, 1.2% had insulation, 93.8% had electric lighting, 11.7% had a bath, and 3.9% had an elevator.
In these difficult living conditions, the problems of families sharing homes were growing. With no one taking responsibility for the maintenance of shared spaces, homes suffered from poor hygiene, and families argued over bathing times, cleanliness, and other reasons. “Comrade courts” were established to control and resolve such minor problems. However, these courts couldn’t keep up with overwhelming demands and failed to provide a solution to the most common problems, such as arbitrary occupancy of rooms and tenants disappearing. Stalin’s government neglecting the housing problem and directing resources to industrialization in significant proportions further complicated matters.
“The capital investments for housing in the 1930s were determined by two factors. Firstly, the Soviet Union, facing lack of capital, had reached a fragile point in its total investment capacity due to tight restrictions caused by Stalin’s unrealistic high goals. Secondly, in the investment plan, Stalin gave low priority to housing construction (similar to other consumer sectors). Berkeley economist Gregory Grossman estimated that by allowing about a 40% decline in housing standards for urban workers, the Soviet government bought two years in industrial investments.” (Morton, 1984)
The main reason for the housing crisis in the USSR was the relatively insignificant investment in housing construction compared to the national income. Between 1923 and 1928, out of the total 10.9 billion rubles in the national economy, only 1.9 billion rubles were allocated to housing construction. During the First Five-Year Plan (1929–1932), this ratio decreased from 17.4% to 9.1%. Throughout the Second Five-Year Plan (1933–1937), the ratio increased to 11%, but during the Third Five-Year Plan (1938–1942), it dropped to 8.1% (T. Sosnovy, 1952).
The German occupation of the USSR in 1941 further worsened the already difficult conditions. The territories of the USSR invaded by the Germans were destroyed, necessitating the reconstruction of the almost completely destroyed cities. According to Soviet figures, 1710 settlements and thousands of villages were partially or completely destroyed, leaving around 25 million people homeless. Cities like Leningrad, Kiev, Minsk, Smolensk, Stalingrad, and many others had to be rebuilt.
The period from 1933 to 1953 is known as “Stalinist Architecture” for Soviet architecture. In Moscow, seven skyscrapers built in the Stalinist style were named the “Seven Sisters.” Additionally, the few apartments built during this period that failed to meet the demand and were constructed in limited numbers are referred to as “Stalinka.”
Stalinkas, unlike the later apartment styles known as Khrushyovki and Brezhnevki, did not have a standardized design and structure. Alongside structures with lavish exteriors where Soviet elites resided, there were housing complexes of low floors and low-quality materials. The houses built in the Stalinist style varied from luxurious homes to communal housing for workers and simpler structures built by German prisoners of war. Therefore, they did not have widely accepted standards. Pre-war Stalinist-style buildings are generally referred to as “Post-Constructivist,” whereas the structures built after the war are known as “Stalinist Empire.”
Khrushchev Era
Khrushchev’s time in power marked the beginning of approaching a solution to this problem and the first serious consideration of the housing issue. In fact, Khrushchev’s apartments were planned to be built throughout the entire geography of the USSR.
With Stalin’s death in 1953, the totalitarian stance of the state softened. Many prisoners were released, and complaints, especially about the housing problem, began to be voiced more loudly. During the period leading up to Stalin’s death, the problem had grown significantly, with multiple families sharing even a single room. Now, thousands of apartments needed to be built rapidly and at a low cost. We can see Khrushchev’s housing plan in his memoirs:
“No one wants to wait ten or fifteen years for an apartment, and everyone wants an apartment with a bathtub instead of a shower and an elevator. So, you have to decide, are you going to build a thousand average apartments or seven hundred high-quality apartments? Also, would our citizens prefer an average apartment they can move into right away, or a high-quality apartment they will have to wait ten or fifteen years for?” (N.S. Khrushchev, 1974)
Panelki
While Stalin was in power, upon returning from Kiev to Moscow, Khrushchev had numerous meetings with Sokolov regarding “prefabricated reinforced concrete panels.” Professor M. I. Mikailov, the Director of Technical Sciences at the Plekhanov Institute of Economics, also supported this panel idea. Sokolov conveyed this idea, which he opposed, to L. Beria. Khrushchev, not wanting to abandon the idea, had a report prepared by Sadovsky and personally presented it to Stalin, opposing Beria and Sokolov. After receiving approval from Stalin, two production facilities were established to test this idea in practice. At this point, Khrushchev believed that the cement industry was in a terrible state, and he held the Minister of Building Materials, Kaganovich, responsible for this.
Thus, the production of components for the apartments to be constructed after 1953 began. Although architects were not fond of these ready-made panels, the housing problem had reached an unbearable magnitude, and architecture could not afford to wait. Thus, the five-story versions of these buildings were named “Khrushchyovka,” and the overall term for these structures became “Panelka.”
The Khrushchev administration had to compromise on quality, reduce costs, and accelerate construction speed to solve the housing problem. Additionally, finding skilled workers was a challenging task, so constructions had to be easily feasible. Ceiling height was reduced to 2.5 meters, and rooms and corridors were narrowed. Moreover, the regulations of the time stipulated that buildings without elevators could be a maximum of five floors. During the Sixth Five-Year Plan (1956–60), housing investments were raised to more than double. The number of constructed houses per year, which was 1.5 million in 1956, increased to 2.7 million in 1959. This was a record for the USSR. The speed and ease of construction prevented any delays even during harsh winters, allowing the USSR to build millions of houses every year. By 1980, the use of prefabricated construction materials had risen to 54% (Morton, 1980).
The Legacy of Khrushchyovka: Brezhnevka
By the 1970s, when Brezhnev came to power, the production and construction of panel buildings continued in the same way. However, advancing technology and improved financial conditions made it possible to add elevators to the plans and expand houses and increasing the number of floors. Thus, taller buildings, usually 9 stories high, more comfortable and spacious homes, called Brezhnevka, emerged. However, Brezhnevki were not as standardized as Khrushchyovki, and many differently structured apartment buildings were constructed. Compared to Khrushchyovki, in Brezhnevki, the ceiling height increased, kitchens expanded, homes grew, toilets and bathrooms were separated, and elevators were installed. However, the insulation problem from Khrushchyovki persisted. Nowadays, citizens try to solve the insulation issue by arranging external insulation.
The Soviet Union’s effort in construction significantly improved the quality of life for millions. These ubiquitous apartment buildings across the USSR were crucial for those seeking a better home to live in. While the housing problem was not entirely solved, I believe it was a significant step in the right direction, albeit about 50 years late. Furthermore, the multi-centered cities of the USSR, where one could satisfy the most of an average citizen’s needs within walking distance, stood out with green spaces and children’s parks around the buildings. In contrast, in Turkey, the privileges enjoyed by housing complexes and gated luxury communities were made public and widespread. Moreover, unlike American suburbs, Soviet apartments did not necessitate car usage — owning a car was not easy — which is an important aspect.
Recently
Five years ago, in 2017, Moscow Mayor Sergey Sobyanin initiated a large-scale urban renewal project with the support of President Vladimir Putin. According to the project, 10% of Moscow’s housing stock, mostly the considerably aged Khrushchyovki, would be demolished and rebuilt, with the new apartments being 20% larger than the old ones. I am not sure about the current status of this urban renewal project. However, it is significant that this housing stock, which holds both nostalgic value and has become quite problematic, especially in Moscow, is being replaced for Russian citizens.
- Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeyevich. Khrushchev Remembers: The Last Testament. Edited by Strobe Talbott. Little, Brown and Company, 1974.
- Morton, Henry W. “Housing in the Soviet Union.” Proceedings of the Academy of Political Science 35, no. 3 (1980): 69–80. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1174118.
- Sosnovy, T. “The Soviet Urban Housing Problem.” The American Slavic and East European Review 11, no. 4 (December 1952): 288–303. http://www.jstor.org/stable/2492010.
- Morton, Henry W. “Who Gets What, When and How? Housing in the Soviet Union.” Soviet Studies 32, no. 2 (April 1980): 235–59. http://www.jstor.org/stable/151234.
- http://openleft.ru/?p=4962
- https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/mar/31/moscow-biggest-urban-demolition-project-khrushchevka-flats
- https://www.rbth.com/longreads/khrushchyovki/
- http://konstruktivizm.com/503/other-constructivists/arithmetics-propaganda-poster-1931-by-y-guminer
- https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Сталинская_архитектура
- https://www.landmarkscout.com/german-build-houses-forced-labour-kurgan-russia/
- https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-03-08/the-disappearing-mass-housing-of-the-soviet-union
- https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-news-from-elsewhere-39053740
