Essay Part 1 | Essay Part 2 | Essay Part 3
Berthold Lubetkin's Highpoint development in Highgate, north London which featured in the show stands as an example of how Modernist-style living was supposed to be - family friendly and community-minded, the "social condenser" of the architect's aspirations. The longevity of Highpoint's residents is seen as, in no small way, due to the vibrant atmosphere of the development and its facility for life and leisure, ranging from swimming pool to roof terrace intended for exercise class. The hefty compendium of entries for this year's Housing Design Awards is a tribute to the aspirations of today's architects who wish to create Highpoint-style thriving communities, whether they are building private homes or social housing or a combination of both. The winning entries are those that have achieved the best balance between accessibility, aesthetics, costs and suitability for context, while meeting environmental standards. Unfortunately, however, such factors do not seem to loom large with every house building business, with many apparently only concerned to pack as many anodyne and poky homes as possible onto a single plot. This short sighted policy creates a distrust of all new developments, whatever their quality and gives weight to the arguments of those factions that would wish to prevent all new construction projects.
Opposition to such unlovely and high density per hectare developments is Nimbyism at its most positive – and its most vocal. A reader of my newspaper, a senior executive at a mortgage group expressed his view about a small-unit ghetto development in his neighbourhood thus: "I personally like most modern architecture: each age should be creating its own styles. But the plan to build 24 flats on a site on which just one house now stands seems to me to be a folly - cramped two bedroom apartments are not the homes that most families want to buy." "The Edwardians solved their housing shortage with mansion flats that gave space and some privacy to their occupants. Why should we tolerate shoddy solutions to our housing problem?
The developer is blaming the Government for the density of homes on the site, saying that planning guidance requires this number of properties on the plot. But, so far as I'm concerned they are just finding excuses for their own lack of flair and ingenuity. Remember that planning guidance is just that - guidance. " It seems that these concerns about quality and overcrowding are shared by planning professionals. At around the same time that I saw this year's entries to the Housing Designs Awards, a study conducted by the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) and the magazine Planning landed on my desk. Planners were asked about their dealings with housebuilders; it appeared that relationships between the two sides were often fractious, or worse. The anonymous responses indicated many planners were finding themselves presented with schemes, where, in some cases, no architect had been involved and no thought given to appearance or sustainability. Planners who dared ask questions about such environmental modifications as solar gain or water recycling, sometimes faced derision, or even aggression. Some housebuilders appeared to be focused only on their bottom line and unconcerned that they were producing formulaic and shoddy homes in bland styles that failed to take account of "the local setting – or even the site itself." The developer bullyboy squad also seemed contemptuous of upstart planners who dared to raise objections. So, when next you meet a planner, be kind, for his or her working life can be hard.
Back to top
Essay Part 1 | Essay Part 2 | Essay Part 3 |