Nearly 50 years ago, a Conservative government published a report called Homes for today and tomorrow. Alongside a sister publication, Space in the home, which followed two years later in 1963, this report fundamentally changed the way homes were built in Britain for a more than a decade, as they led to the introduction of the acclaimed Parker Morris space standards.

The present often feels more prosaic than the past. But the Homes and Communities Agency’s consultation on a new standards framework for all publicly funded housing, which closes on 17 June, could be equally momentous. It takes place just as London mayor Boris Johnson and the Greater London Authority consider what should be done for the capital through its own enquiry in public. This year could make or break the design quality of our homes.

So, why has this been such a problem? This week the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment sets out its analysis of the issue. Its report, Simpler and better: housing design in everyone’s interest, suggests there are five main issues that plague the quality of our homes.

First, some developers argue that they are just retailers of housing units and any additional obligations are a burden of regulation, policy and taxation. Second, some people think that quality is entirely subjective or that it can’t be judged. Third, some builders and economists say that we simply can’t afford better quality. Fourth, the quality of a house has often become subordinate to its value as a financial investment. And finally, some suggest that we lose quality as the consequence of an industrial structure that turns the agenda for competition, financing and production against improving quality.

Part of the remedy, CABE believes, is a radical overhaul of housing standards. The current mix required by building regulations, planning policy and funders desperately needs rationalisation. What we have at the moment is complicated, overlapping and inefficient. But since the market itself has proved unable to deliver consistently well designed housing, we still need sufficient regulation to ensure every home is good enough.

That suggests there is a deal to be struck - a simpler set of standards in return for a minimum quality of design. CABE wants to see a single set of requirements by which homes are designed, judged and developed through the planning system. Separate the standards that can be delivered through the planning system into those that relate to the layout of the entire development and those that relate to the design and performance of individual homes. Let’s have a system that demonstrates a clear link to an enforcement process and that prevents unnecessary compliance.

This is not an expensive or divisive proposal. Quite the opposite. Strategically, it holds the prospect not just of better quality housing delivered consistently for everyone, but an increased supply of new homes produced through a leaner, cheaper process. Sounds good, doesn’t it?

Matt Bell is CABE’s director of education

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment