uestiontime
This month’s question:Are the homes we’re building meeting the needs of the people that live in them?
Barely a week goes by when the lack of affordable housing isn’t making headline news. But, not only do we need to build more homes, we need to make sure we are building the right type of homes. Indeed the
HomeWise campaign, spearheaded by the RIBA, is seeking to establish exactly what people living in the 21st century want from their dwellings. As part of this, The Future Homes Commission has been tasked with conducting an inquiry into the quality of newly built housing with the aim of understanding how people live today, what they need and expect from their homes and whether the design of new homes is fit for purpose. As the commission
gathers evidence and opinion from the industry and the public, we ask our panel of experts are the homes we’re building meeting people’s lifestyle needs – and if not why? Are new homes flexible enough to change over time? And how might the house building industry need to adapt to ensure they meet consumer demands?
PETER CHLAPOWSKI DIRECTOR, PCKO ARCHITECTS
At a time when statistics show a progressive decline in space standards, our consumer oriented society means people continue to amass goods and belongings in large quantities. Leisure time and lifestyle activities require space and more storage - which becomes an issue in high-density multi-storey developments. Ever- increasing regulatory standards produce results that ‘tick the boxes’ but do not reflect widely differing lifestyles or cultural requirements, often resulting in poor and unimaginative spaces for living. Additional technical requirements such as plant required to deliver energy efficiency often has a further impact on available space. Consumer expectations are
influenced by the market offering very limited choice. The UK is probably the only country in Europe where quality and lifestyle is defined not in general space and floor area requirements, but by number of rooms, irrespective of their size. Definitions of quality are generally superficial; defined by ‘style’ and number of bedrooms, rather than functionality of rooms and space for living. Solutions prevalent elsewhere are not offered by the UK housing market. The use of the basements for example is considered as expensive. However in continental Europe and the US it is a norm, the cheapest way of achieving very valuable space accommodating storage, hobbies, utility and plant. A high proportion of new UK
housing does not incorporate the basic elements required to provide real flexibility. These are demonstrated by typologies such
8 | Architects Choice |
ArchitectNews.co.uk
as Victorian terrace housing, which employ simple cross wall construction, flexible internal non- load bearing partitions, and a rational service core - all providing a proven model of flexibility for generations and adaptation to changing needs or lifestyle. Has the promise of Lifetime
Homes delivered truly adaptable houses, or has it merely imposed well-intentioned tick box standards that create an illusion of flexibility over time? Some aspects of Lifetime Homes standards are very positive, covering basic accessibility and anticipating requirements for mobility aids over time. Some standards however needlessly inhibit flexible design solutions or lifestyle choice by prescribing living space on the entrance level. The highly cellular nature of UK housing also inhibits accessibility and increases the ratio of space dedicated to circulation. The industry needs to examine how dwellings are constructed to offer the capacity for adaptation, and designed to support consumer lifestyle choice. Improvement in housing quality
has traditionally been driven by regulatory standards, however the housing crisis suggests that intelligent regulation is now urgently required to facilitate the supply of housing. There is a role for planning policy to focus on the efficiency of the planning process reducing the burden of unnecessary cost and uncertainty on development. Regulation should continue to ensure high standards of performance, energy efficiency and sustainability; but could be streamlined to reduce the vast complexity and cost associated with meeting the ever expanding list of standards and criteria now applicable. At the same time there is a role for the
industry to look at new housing products or means of delivering housing that enables investment in real design quality and space standards, within the parameters of commercial viability. But, it is pressure from
consumers that should influence real change in the quality of housing products. The consumer needs to be a lot smarter and be more demanding in respect of quality, performance and their space standards, but should also have choice and ability to reject housing which is not aspirational, does not meet their needs or represents poor value for money. At present the role of the architect in the process is very difficult – the design of most projects is now realised in a culture of low aspirations, risk aversion, and a misdirected concept of ‘value for money’, without a clear vision for the future.
STEPHEN TUCKER DIRECTOR, BARTON WILLMORE
Scotland is facing a housing crisis unless it is prepared to think long-term and build homes in places where people actually want to live – and that might mean building on green-belt land. There are almost 200,000 people on the Scottish housing waiting list. That’s nearly five percent of the population waiting for a decent, affordable home to bring up their family. In 2007 the Scottish
Government’s Firm Foundations paper recommended that we need to build 35,000 homes a year. This was an ambitious target, but the figures did not just emerge in response to pressure from the house building industry, they were
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52