Builders reject space proposal

This week the government published the long-awaited outcome of its building standards review, which proposed slashing regulations by 90 per cent – from 100 to 10 – and cutting 1,500 pages of guidance to fewer than 80, to reduce red tape for developers.

The government said it was ‘inviting views on minimum space and access standards that would allow councils to seek bigger homes to meet local needs, including those of older and disabled people’.

However, house builders claim this would increase building costs, undermining efforts by the government to increase supply.

Persimmon warned a space standard would lead to a 20 per cent cut in the number of non-grant affordable homes it could build.

Last year it built 900 non-grant funded affordable homes.

Ashley Lane, group partnerships director at Persimmon said: ‘We are opposed to space standards. We believe demand should be market driven. The implication of a space standard is it would enlarge homes so require more land. It would lead to fewer homes per area – particularly on publicly funded land.’

John Slaughter, director of external affairs at the Home Builders Federation, said he welcomed the government’s aim to tackle ‘unnecessary and expensive’ red tape which has held up the construction of new homes.

But he added: ‘Minimum space standards, which run counter to these eff orts, would be very damaging. Introducing minimum sizes will make homes more expensive and remove choice for consumers, especially those struggling to afford a home, and it would have an adverse effect on overall housing supply at a critical time.’

The proposal for a minimum space standard was welcomed by the Royal Institute of British Architects and the National Housing Federation.