The

EMPEROR’S NEW

HOUSING

In 2009, Boris Johnson instigated a Housing Design Guide for London and with it the emergence of a new vernacular. But while standards are raised, guidelines don’t provide housing diversity. Has the promised

golden era arrived?

The Guide

The London Housing Design Guide1 was a response to the overdevelopment of sites with substandard apartments. The unintended consequence of a policy of densi� cation, this was overseen by a previous (left-leaning) mayor wanting to increase housing densities and remedy a� ordability issues through supply. The LHDG can therefore in one sense be read as a politicised (right-leaning) reaction to the previous mayor’s strategy.

At another level it can be generalised as an argument of quality over quantity. In that regard, it has doubtlessly improved basic housing standards across the board. At the heart of the guide are minimum room and dwelling sizes that are loosely derived from the legendary Parker Morris standards born in the welfare reform era of the 1960s.2 The new mayor’s standards have been popularly referred to as the ‘Parker Boris’ standards, with the byline that they improve on the 1967 space standards by 10%.

The LHDG also considers a full remit of concerns including the layout of apartments within a block, amenity space, disabled accessibility, tenure and climate change. But it has contributed the most in its prescriptions for individual apartment layout.

The Vernacular

At the end of 2012, the New London Architecture forum curated an exhibition of 138 large housing projects currently proposed or recently built in the capital.3 The aim was to help inform the debate about how London is to deliver a quantity and quality of new homes. The exhibition provided a snapshot of housing design that betrayed a uniformity of site approach, form and materiality. This was both welcome from the point of view of some, and surprising from those who thought that London as a creative and competitive place would give rise to a greater diversity of architecture.

Inherent in the Mayor’s Housing Design Guide was the hope of an emergent ‘new London housing vernacular’. This exhibition was evidence (albeit curated) that a vernacular, or rather a kind of typological framework, had indeed emerged. The characteristics of this ‘vernacular’ were duly summarised by a tract published by Urban Design London.4

It includes features that fall directly out of the LHDG like front doors facing onto streets and a minimum number of units sharing circulation. Interestingly, there are also a series of characteristics manifesting themselves externally

that are much more related to stylistic preference than anything driven by the LHDG. These include brick cladding, parapet roof lines, portrait-oriented windows arranged in a regular grid, deep window reveals and recessed balconies.

If the guide only goes some way in explaining this convergence of design, then an origin for these largely aesthetic tendencies can be found when imagining why the parties at play within the procurement of housing would each in their own way support this vernacular. Here we witness a startling consensus:

• Local planners like the vernacular’s easy contextual answer to London’s stereotypically brick neighbourhoods.• The Mayor likes the grandness of an aesthetic legacy across London.• Housing associations who procure and manage social housing like its low maintenance require ments.• There is an anecdotal majority preference among architects for the Georgian over the Victorian or Edwardian periods of architecture from which to draw stylistic and compositional reference.• Some sections of the architectural media have championed those architects sympathetic to the new vernacular.

In 2009, London’s mayor Boris Johnson instigated the London Housing Design Guide and with it the beginnings of a ‘new vernacular’. But while this document raised standards, guidelines don’t easily provide housing diversity. Has the promised era of great housing arrived?

EMPEROR’S NEW HOUSING

London Housing Design Guide

INTERIM EDITION

“WE CALL IT THE “NEW VERNACULAR”. IF YOU

HAVEN’T NOTICED IT YET, YOU WILL SOON SEE IT

EVERYWHERE.”

70%3 OUT OF 5 OF “NEW VERNACULAR” CHARACTERISTICS

3 OUT OF 5 OF

CHARACTERISTICS

1

64%64%PREDOMINANTLY PREDOMINANTLY CLAD IN BRICKCLAD IN BRICK

1 Susan Emmett, Director of Residential Research, Savills, quoted in The Times, 16 Nov 2012

• While house buyers will weight their decision on location and internal characteristics, their aes thetic choice is more likely to be conservative.• House-builder developers like the vernacular’s simple unadorned forms and relatively cheap materials.

Put this way, it seems inevitable that housing has turned out the way it has in London, yet of all these various actors, the volume housebuilder currently yields the most power. Of all new homes that are built in the UK, a third are built by the top four housebuilders and 1 in 9 are by Barratt Homes, the UK’s biggest.5 The e�ect is a cartel of developers that controls housing supply and therefore house prices, government policies and their interpretation within the planning process, as well as the actual products that are put to market. Their �nancial models are defended by teams of professional consultants, lobbying organisations and architects under threat of dismissal if they don’t fall into line. Rather than an even-handed consensus, there seems an unwitting conspiracy to aid housebuilders in their aim to deliver mass housing at greatest pro�t.

Uses and Abuses

Developers have established an optimum range of apartment types where the capacity of development sites is maximised within the con�nes of LHDG compliance. Discussion of a new London housing vernacular has paralleled this proliferation of optimal layout. The sameness of so much new housing is linked to the sweet spot for delivering the greatest number of compliant and pro�table apartment units.

We dispute the guide’s assertion that “the best housing comes from robust guidelines in planning and regulation”.6

In fact the best housing has nothing to do with regulations. Regulations help drag up the worst housing to acceptable standards. The best housing responds to changes in the market. It adeptly meets the needs of context and client irrespective of its adherence to industry wide minimums.The LHDG is a valuable document. It has raised standards and created quality in sectors of the market where it has been lacking. We agree that the guide’s principles are sound, and that the prescriptions should be adhered to in most situations. However, the best housing will not be designed with a mindset of adhering to minimums, risking a mindless adherence to it as a pattern book and a narrowing of the design horizon. Rather we think the guide can be used as a platform for making radically better new homes and exploring new types. This is relevant more than ever

given the rise of new household living arrangements and the not unrelated issue of a�ordability.

We are interested in what possibilities emerge when some regulations are reinterpreted, relaxed or altogether abandoned. The promise is for a diversity of products to meet the requirements of a diverse city.

Emperor’s New Housing 7

The new housing vernacular is the Mayor’s impetus to provide great housing for London. At the core of its philosophy is an insistence that we should aim to provide a ‘background’ non-iconic architecture, in a sense unremarkable or ‘invisible’ within the urban landscapes of the social villages that comprise our city.

While it raises standards, it presupposes the status quo in terms of basic apartment types.

The new London housing vernacular like a morality tale tells of the danger of consensus, the peculiar attraction of something inconspicuous, and the disappointment of an approach to housing that promised so much more.

Sources

1 London Housing Design Guide Interim Draft, GLA, 2010

2 Design Bulletin 6 - Space in the Home, Ministry of Housing, 1967

3 Housing London, New London Architecture, 31 Oct - 21 Dec, 2012

4 A New London Housing Vernacular, Urban Design London, 2012

Urban Design London is an organisation set up and part-funded by Transport for London (an agency with the Greater London Authority)

to promote good design in London through the provision of training, advice and information.

5 Measured by completions in 2011. Source: http://www.house-builder.co.uk/issues/index.php?page=article&id=6385&magazine_section=&orig=default

6 London Housing Design Guide Interim Draft 2010, p.5

7 With apologies to Hans Christian Andersen, The Emperor’s New Clothes

?

Dummy’s guide to the new London housing vernacular

10

Subdivide blocks into sectionsLHDG 3.2.1 NLHV p.17 [xv]

Make entrances accessible from streetLHDG 3.1.1; NLHV p.14 [i]

Divide into medium-scaled blocks

LHDG 5.2.1

Establish perimeter blockLHDG 2.1.1; 1.1.2

Clad buildings in brick

NLHV p.14 [iii]

NLHV p.14 [iv]

Arrange windows in a regular gridNLHV p.17 [xi]

Set back windows into deep revealsNLHV p.17 [xii]

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9Orient windows portrait, and full-height

NLHV p.17 [xi]

333

5

6

8

7Compose elevation into base, middle, top

Express roodline as a parapet

NLHV p.14 [ii]

“Many of [the new housing vernacular] core characteristics re« ect expectations in

the Mayor’s Housing Design Guide.”Richard Blakeway

Dep Mayor for Housing

“Mayor’s housing design guide... spelled out a formula for improving new homes’ urban design and amenity.”David BirkbeckCEO, Design For Homes

aesthetic legacy across LondonMayor

conservative aestheticsHouse buyers

ease of constructionHousebuilder developers

contextualPlanners

Georgian stylistic preferenceArchitects

low maintenanceHousing

Associations

categorisablePress

“Doing Dickensian vernacular isn’t enough.”

Zaha Hadid Zaha Hadid Architects

“The design of new residential development across London

is converging.”

David BirkbeckCEO, Design For Homes

“Several people have remarked that‘all the projects look the same’.

I take this to be a good sign.Andrew Beharrell

Pollard Thomas Edwards Architects

“I fear that ‘new London vernacular’

will equal ‘new pastiche.’”

Joe MorrisDuggan Morris Architects

“New housing that favours laconic, background architecture would o� er coherence to our developing neighbourhoods.”Alex Elymae Architects

“

“I have no use for rules. They only rule out the

brilliant exception.” Ed McCabe

Founder ad agency Scali McCabe Sloves

Who is it for?Extended families

How does it work?For couples with the responsibility of look-ing after more than one generation within the family, mere space is only one of the issues to overcome in housing provision.

The apartment operates as two units in one, much as a traditional terrace house might have a granny � at on another � oor with separate entrance. It enables two main zones of living and thus privacy for more than one family member.

Sound insulation to party wall standard is

Who is it for?• Investment bank interns who spend little time at home.• Young professionals who do not cook regularly, but who on occasion want to entertain.

How does it work?Other areas can also be shared, as with special requirements for childminding facilities, or even guest rooms.Each apartment contains bar fridge, microwave, full bathroom suite, retractable bed, and small sitting room. The shared living space contains commercial kitchen, canteen seating, and large outdoor terraces.

1. SANDWICH HOUSE

2. SHARE HOUSE

The Sandwich Generation:the 3 generation household is predicted to triple in Britain over the next 20 years.1

The principle of a house adaptable to various life stages should take into account multi-generational households.

By overcoming the assumption of a single entrance to a unit, privacy, room hierarchy and � re egress arrangements are all liberated.

Shared areas can alleviate the need to provide individual kitch-en/living/dining areas in each apartment. A bigger living area can serve a cluster of 4 or 5 apartments and still be less overall � oor area than if individual kitchen living areas were provided to the minimum space standards. Just like the corner pub pro-vided a convivial ‘living room’ away from home.

7

*Dwellings should account for varied

household arrangements.

provided between the second living space and the rest of the apartment.

Bedrooms can now open directly o¢ living room spaces as long as they have a secondary means of escape through a protected hallway.

The ‘second’ living space could be used for co-habiting adults, extended family, sublet to lodgers or used as a workspace. Just as � exible as a garden shed or conservatory extension!

• A group of friends wanting aff ordable accommodation as a ¦ rst investment• Small co-operatives joined by unique needs, eg childminding

A service charge includes management and weekly cleaning costs. The living space can be used on an informal basis or booked out for special events.

Individual private space is exchanged for excellent urban location, and a buy-into convivial mode of living. This is all provided in a management package comparable to a serviced apartment.

1 living2 kitchen3 bedroom4 bedroom accessed from studio5 bathroom

1 sleeping/retractable bed2 sitting3 amenity cupboard4 bathroom

5 living6 commercially ¦ tted kitchen7 entertaining terrace

6 main entrance/storage/laundry7 studio entrance8 extra living/studio9 wintergarden/extension space

1 in 4 British would prefer to buy a tiny London studio fl at as opposed to a six bedroom Scottish mansion.2

13

4

52

6

7

5

8

9

12

34

5

6

14

4.1.2 Dwelling plans should demonstrate that dwellings will accommodate the furniture, access and activity space requirements relating to the declared level of occupancy. Refer to appendix 3 for design standards for wheelchair accessible housing.

A

4.2 Flexibility and Adaptability

4.2.1 Dwelling plans should demonstrate that dwelling types provide flexibility by allowing for alternative seating arrangements in living rooms and by accommodating double or twin beds in at least one double bedroom.

A

4.3 Circulation in the Home

4.3.1 The minimum width of hallways and other circulation spaces inside the home should be 900mm. This may reduce to 750mm at ‘pinch points’ e.g. next to radiators, where doorway widths meet the following specification:

Where a hallway is at least 900mm wide and the approach to the door is head-on, a minimum clear opening door width of 750mm should be provided [Lifetime Homes Criterion 6].

A

4.3.2 The design of dwellings of more than one storey should incorporate potential for a stair lift to be installed and a suitable identified space for a through-the-floor lift from the entrance level† to a storey containing a main bedroom and an accessible bathroom [Lifetime Homes Criterion 12].

A

4.4 Living, Dining and Kitchen Areas

4.4.1 The following combined floor areas for living / kitchen / dining space should be met:

A

4.4.2 The minimum width of the main sitting area should be 2.8m in 2-3 person dwellings and 3.2m in dwellings designed for four or more people.

A

4.4.3 Dwellings with three or more bedrooms should have two living spaces, for example a living room and a kitchen-dining room. Both rooms should have external windows. If a kitchen is adjacent to the living room, the internal partition between the rooms should not be load-bearing, to allow for reconfiguration as an open plan arrangement. Studies will not be considered as second living spaces.

A

4.4.4 There should be space for turning a wheelchair in dining areas and living rooms and basic circulation space for wheelchairs elsewhere [Lifetime Homes Criterion 7].

A

4.4.5 A living room, living space or kitchen-dining room should be at entrance level [Lifetime Homes Standard 8].

A

Minimum clear opening width of doorway (mm)

Minimum approach width (when approach is not head on) (mm)

750 1200

775 1050

900 900

Designed level of occupancy

Minimum combined floor area of living, dining and kitchen spaces (sq m)

2 person 23

3 person 25

4 person 27

5 person 29

6 person 31

*Individual kitchens are not required

where communal facilities exist.

Who is it for?• Those wanting self-build/custom build but can’t a¢ ord land costs

Who is it for?Any user with a preference for space and light

3. TRACT HOUSE

4. VOLUME HOUSE

12

3.0 From Street to Front Door Priority 1 Priority 2

3.1 Entrance and Approach

3.1.1 All main entrances to houses, ground floor flats and communal entrance lobbies should be visible from the public realm and clearly identified.

A

3.1.2 The distance from the accessible car parking space of requirement 3.3.4 to the home or to the relevant block entrance or lift core should be kept to a minimum and should be level or gently sloping [Lifetime Homes Criterion 2].

A

3.1.3 The approach to all entrances should preferably be level or gently sloping [Lifetime Homes Criterion 3].

A

3.1.4 All entrances should be illuminated and have level access over the threshold. Entrance doors should have 300mm of clear space to the pull side, and clear minimum opening widths of 800mm or 825mm depending on the direction and width of approach. Main entrances should have weather protection and a level external landing [Lifetime Homes Criterion 4].

A

3.2 Shared Circulation Within Buildings

3.2.1 The number of dwellings accessed from a single core should not exceed eight per floor. A

3.2.2 An access core serving 4 or more dwellings should provide an access control system with entry phones in all dwellings linked to a main front door with electronic lock release. Unless a 24 hour concierge is provided, additional security measures including audio-visual verification to the access control system should be provided where any of the following apply:

more than 25 dwellings are served by one core•the potential occupancy of the dwellings served by one core exceeds 100 bed spaces•more than 8 dwellings are provided per floor. •

A

3.2.3 Where dwellings are accessed via an internal corridor, the corridor should receive natural light and adequate ventilation.

A

3.2.4 The minimum width for all paths, corridors and decks for communal circulation is 1200mm. The preferred minimum width is 1500mm, and is considered particularly important where corridors are double loaded (they serve dwellings on each side) and where wheelchair accessible dwellings are provided.

A

3.2.5 For buildings with dwellings entered from communal circulation at the first, second or third floor where lifts are not provided, space should be identified within or adjacent to the circulation cores for the future installation of a wheelchair accessible lift.

A

3.2.6 All dwellings entered at the fourth floor (fifth storey) and above should be served by at least one wheelchair accessible lift, and it is desirable that dwellings entered at the third floor (fourth storey) are served by at least one such lift. All dwellings entered at the seventh floor (eighth storey) and above should be served by at least two lifts.

A

3.2.7 Every designated wheelchair accessible dwelling above the ground floor should be served by at least one wheelchair accessible lift. It is desirable that every wheelchair accessible dwelling is served by at least two such lifts.

A

3.2.8 Principal access stairs should provide easy access* regardless of whether a lift is provided. Where homes are reached by a lift, it should be fully wheelchair accessible [Lifetime Homes Criterion 5].

A

3.3 Car Parking

3.3.1 All developments should conform to London Plan policy on car parking provision. In areas of good public transport accessibility and/or town centres the aim should be to provide less than one space per dwelling. Elsewhere parking provision should be as follows:

4+ bedroom dwellings: 1.5 - 2 spaces per dwelling;•3 bedroom dwellings: 1 - 1.5 spaces per dwelling;•1 - 2 bedroom dwellings: less than 1 per dwelling.•

A

3.3.2 Each designated wheelchair accessible dwelling should have a car parking space 2400mm wide with a clear access way to one side of 1200mm. Refer to appendix 3 for design standards for wheelchair accessible housing.

A

Lack of natural light and lack of space are the most frequently cited causes for dissatisfaction with homes.4

More than half of UK households would build their own home if barrier to entry were lowered.3

The number of � ats accessed from a single core on each � oor is irrelevant when a standard maximum � oor plate is used. Individual room space requirements are dispensed with, as this arrangement accommodates for bespoke layouts according to resident requirements within minimum building regulations.

Instead of minimum ceiling heights, variable ceiling heights match particular requirements of individual rooms. Human perception is more sensitive to variation in vertical than horizontal dimensions.

67

5.4 Floor to Ceiling

Heights

The height of rooms in a dwelling dramatically affects the perception of space in a home. A small increase in ceiling height can make the difference between a home feeling cramped or generous. When matched with generous window sizes, higher ceilings also improve natural light levels and ventilation, and the depth to which light penetrates a room.

In ground floor dwellings where daylight may be limited, higher ceilings can provide better light levels, a better urban scale to the base of larger buildings, the potential for homes to be used more flexibly, and can make ground floor dwellings more suitable for conversion to non-residential uses.

In habitable rooms, ceiling heights will be expected to be at least 2.5m, with a prefer-ence for 2.6m or more. Rooms with sloping ceilings beneath pitched roofs should achieve the minimum ceiling heights in at least 60% of the area of the room.

For projects creating new dwellings in existing buildings and developments in sensitive historic contexts, including infill developments within conservation areas, lower ceiling heights may be permitted by the local borough.

Standards5.4.1 The minimum floor to ceiling height in habitable rooms is 2.5m between finished floor level and finished ceiling level. A minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.6m in habitable rooms is considered desirable and taller ceiling heights are encouraged in ground floor dwellings.

Sources1 The Telegraph, 02 Feb 20082 The Hu ̄ ngton Post UK, 1 Oct 2013 http://www.hu ̄ ngtonpost.co.uk/2013/10/01/london-studio-scottish-mansion_n_4022619.html 3 http://www.selfbuildportal.org.uk/latest-news/18-millions-of-people-want-to-do-a-self-build-project4 RIBA Case for Space

1

2

3

4

5

1

2

3

*Maximum total area not number of

dwellings per « oor.

*Floor to ceiling heights variable

depending on type of room.

How does it work?Floor area is modularised to accommodate standard facade system dimensions. Users determine and own their portion of external facade.Wet services are provided in an inner zone that enables future adaptability.Provides for greater variety than standard speculative housing products by moving interior design and layout to the user.

After initial inhabitation, modules can be bought, sold and exchanged. Extra ‘plots’ may be purchased to up-size or down-size according to changed living requirements.

• Users with special living requirements, eg. hobbyists• Users who want greater variety than standard development products

How does it work?Mezzanines can come installed or ¦ tted later.A single building can accommodate a range of volumetric con¦ gurations. Overall reduction in saleable area to built volume is compensated in proportionally higher sqm sales rates.Bedrooms become lower and living spaces

become taller. To maintain overall quality, apartments are sold on volume rather than � oor area alone. Developers are incentivised to provide qualities of loft living.Taller spaces allow light deeper into the plan, and may also make north facing aspects acceptable.

1 kitchen/dining/living/loft space2 lower bedroom3 upper bedroom/mezzanine

1 vertical circulation and service risers2 plumbing wet zone3 modularisation of � oor area4 individualised cladding5 notional apartment divisions

Volume House

Emperor’s New Housing

&\also is an embedded consultancy at Hawkins\Brown dedicated to rumination, speculation and provocation in parallel to the commercial activities of the studio.

159 St John StreetLondon EC1V 4QJ020 7336 8030

Hawkins\Brown

© All rights reserved