Home builders are creating non-standard housing schemes with poor living conditions, although councils have the power to block them, according to a new study.
The national planning policy framework was amended in July to allow councils to reject “development that is not well designed”. A study by University College London found that the Planning Inspectorate, which handles builders’ complaints, is now three times more likely to support councils that reject development on design grounds. But he also found that the vast majority of those blocked are in the southeast, suggesting that elsewhere councils are not using the new powers.
Professor Matthew Carmona, who conducted the study, said the advice, exhausted by austerity, often lacks design experience to take on large developers with good resources.
“Local authorities in the southeast are usually more involved in development and are more likely to have their own local design policies and hire urban designers. “They’re just more inclined to challenge developers,” he said. “Councils in the south-west, the Midlands and the north tend to see less development and are more reluctant and perhaps a little nervous to call out bad design.
A survey last year found that 41% of councils do not hire urban designers and 76% do not have access to any architectural advice.
The change in the country’s planning rules was part of a package of measures that ministers say will ensure that new housing is “beautiful and well-designed”. The government is setting up a “Place Office” to help “communities promote what they find beautiful and reject what they find ugly.”
The report, published by the UCL-based Place Alliance, highlights 12 schemes rejected on design grounds last July. The inspectorate found that proposals for an unattractive block of 15 apartments on the site of a ruined parking lot in Crowley, West Sussex, would offer “unsatisfactory living conditions.” Some apartments had limited natural light, and the outdoor areas were close to roads and railways. Others lacked solitude, as the windows were next to people walking down the sidewalk and close to cars lining up in the traffic system.
The inspectorate also backed efforts by the Braintree District Council to block two mansions on the outskirts of Essex villages, where developers were trying to squeeze large numbers of houses by shaking nearby houses. Authorities also rejected an appeal against five towers of a block of the former Westferry printing house in East London. It was decided that the scheme – which led to a dispute over media mogul Richard Desmond’s contact with ministers in charge of planning decisions – would be detrimental to Greenwich’s assessment of the World Heritage Site.
Carmona said the big developers have been on their way for decades, but the masses are starting to turn around. “The main builders of houses managed to get a lot of poor quality construction along with the local authorities. But this study shows that councils can now be much more confident in exercising quality control, “he said.
Profits for Britain’s largest builders continue to rise, although they routinely produce low-quality housing and fail to meet the UK’s expected housing needs. UCL researchers rated three-quarters of major developments in England as “mediocre” or “bad” in 2020.
They found soft architecture, with properties dominated by access roads and parking lots at the expense of green spaces and playgrounds. Other disadvantages include low public transport links and a lack of amenities such as shops, pubs and cafes.
Carmona said it is possible to increase the number of houses built without compromising on design factors that allow a new community to thrive.
“We are in desperate need of housing, but that doesn’t mean we have to build poorly designed, unsustainable places,” he said.
Add Comment