Building News is an information portal for all professional building specifiers. Here you can find all of the latest construction news from around the UK and the rest of the world.

Rebuilding Britain – is it fact or fiction?

A brief overview of the book that is challenging the widely held view that it is impossible to achieve a better future, suggesting that there is a real choice in how society develops.

Rebuilding Britain is the brainchild of Hugh Ellis (head of policy at TCPA) and Kate Henderson (CEO of TCPA and visiting professor at the Bartlett School of Planning, university college London.) The book aims to dissect some of the most common issues that face modern Britain in its social journey into an unsure future.

Historically, scholars, governing bodies, planners and developers alike have discussed the search for Utopia. With this quest seemingly abandoned at present, has the ethos of utilising the good qualities we already have at our disposal, summarised in WW2 as “make do and mend” devolved into simply “make do…?” Have we become too big and is it too late to implement real, positive changes or with the assistance of modern technologies and higher education is the possibility of a Utopian society finally within our sights?

You may ask yourself why two successful planners would decide to write about the decline of community values experienced by our nation as of late – after all preserving communal identity is arguably one of the primary responsibilities of planners and developers alike. Indeed, how can you lament the days when children played together outside on the village green within a safe environment when the village green has long since been levelled, concreted and turned into an overspill car park in the name of progress? Hugh Ellis and Kate Henderson believe strongly in looking retrospectively at where we have come from and how we did it, from the earliest days of Britain becoming mobile and accessible for all, with innovative infrastructures successfully creating new communities from the seemingly irreparable damage caused by two world wars, economic disasters and industrial scars; the darker side of Britain’s long and illustrious past.

This book is refreshingly honest and open, the appeal lying in its ability to look at the successes of the past and learn from our mistakes. After becoming virtually bankrupted by war, the priorities of British planners shifted towards being more economically driven. It was in this period that quality and standards became lower and by the 1960s the search for Utopia was no longer relevant within the construction industry. Small, close-knit communities were set aside as we reached for the skies with an eye on the figures, in cheaply built high-rise buildings and expanding concrete jungles. Hugh and Kate suggest that during this shift from a socially driven style of town planning to a more austere, money-focused practice that perhaps the most important element was left out – Humanity. The first section of the book focusses on the rhetoric; how are we going to live? Why should we care about the future? The section boasts the slightly antagonistic but punchy title “we are not a poor nation but we are badly organised.” This title sets the tone and immediately promotes intrigue in the reader. The book continues in this fashion.

The second part of the book is entitled “the lie of the land” and covers how basic demographic and geographic aspects of Britain can affect planning projects and distract us from the pursuit of Utopia. Many challenges arise when looking at developing a town within Britain, such as varying regional economic performance, unemployment figures and cuts to public investment varying from North to South – the North South divide. Also – although less commonly associated with Britain – the effect of climate and extreme weather needs to be taken into account in regards to construction. In some of the key British coastal towns such as Portsmouth, Hull and multiple towns across Devon, poor planning has been made particularly evident by this year’s flooding.

Another big topic which has had a drastic impact on town planning is the shortage of adequate homing for people, personified by British media as the housing crisis. This has played a big part in driving down the quality of housing (both social and private) out of a necessity for quick builds. Often poorly designed and lacking in all basic comforts deemed unnecessary by many modern designers, these houses lack human touches which are incredibly important to the wellbeing of a society, such as gardens, windows overlooking green spaces and adequate parking facilities. This new culture of cutting corners and overlooking all but the bare essentials in order to provide for society has an almost counterproductive impact, serving as only a quick fix for now but presenting more problems further down the line.

The book is not all doom and gloom about how we have lost our way; it merely aims to bring some important and slightly uncomfortable truths to light in order to allow us to focus on achieving our full potential as a Nation. Britain has many outstanding assets, despite recent recessions and monetary inflation it still remains an economic world power and is also one of the most culturally rich and diverse places on Earth.

Outlining these positive accolades the book then develops in the latter stages, describing how we can harness our potential and change the way we plan to ensure a brighter future. By prioritising a difficult but not impossible plan of action, Kate and Hugh suggest that we must strive for a fair and efficient society.

With optimism the authors speak of how it is crucial that planners regain the trust of the people of Britain, namely by taking it back to the visionary and artistic discipline it once was. By involving the community in the development of their homes and towns and listening to what they want rather than what is deemed necessary will help create a proactive, two-way communicational approach to essentially making Britain better. What we don’t need is housing estate upon housing estate with no regard for leisure and fun. Planners have for too long been building units, serving merely to tick boxes. These feel more like a person is being ‘stored’ in a container rather than living in a home where they can thrive and interact with their surroundings. The planning authorities have become detached from the idea that what they are providing is not a ‘product,’ it is a space where an actual living person will exist. It is time to bridge this gap and remember what we are planning for, or perhaps who we are planning for. It is widely documented that poor housing choices can have a direct impact on children being able to access to rewarding work that can define a person’s wellbeing. We need to be able to inspire the younger generation to want to be part of the solution rather than stored in a prefab house where their development can be severely thwarted.

Though our ideas of ideal housing may vary from a modern studio apartment in the happening city to a quiet cottage in a hamlet within the countryside we all share one common interest – we all want to live in positive, healthy and vibrant communities. With the implementation of the following garden city principles there is no reason why both tastes cannot be accommodated for. The principles are as follows:

  • the community have a direct say in planning their future
  • the community gets income from the profits of development
  • shops and schools are easily accessible
  • sports, hobbies and nightlife are promoted
  • communal gardens and allotments are available for all
  • there are adequate green spaces implemented in the design
  • local employment prospects negate or lower the need to commute, taking revenue away from the community.

You may be thinking that all of this sounds like blue sky thinking and a frighteningly expensive investment but by managing funding and budgets wisely, deterring from multiple cheaper buildings and raising the quality of existing builds this shouldn’t cost more than what we currently spend on housing and town planning. It is merely a wiser spend! Good practice shouldn’t cost the Earth and this book makes you think that if we don’t change our ways we just might ultimately pay that price.

The book finishes with a section entitled “Tomorrow’s pioneers.” This section describes just what Utopia might look like. This is my favourite section of the book as it describes warm houses powered by renewable energy from a local community cooperative or local council, stable energy prices and carbon positive communities, exporting more energy than they use. Rooms will be big and there will be space for families to be able to eat dinner at a table together, for children to play and also ample storage for all of life’s baggage. This all sounds lovely and perhaps a little blissfully ignorant but let us not forget that this is constantly backed up throughout the book with facts and figures from an educated source. Hugh and Kate claim that the current climate crisis alone would warrant a dramatic restructure of British resources and lifestyle, they conclude the book by saying that we can either go into this new world ill-prepared or with clear and concise planning, taking advantage of this opportunity to change and shaping the county into one we would all want to live in. They suggest that we should “greet the future with optimism and excitement, for there is no human enterprise as worthwhile as the pursuit of Utopia.”

Readers of Rebuilding Britain could be forgiven for at times confusing this book with The Communist Manifesto, but Marxist similarities aside it is written from a very informed angle with statistics and examples to back up even the most radical of principles. It seems that Rebuilding Britain serves less as a political agenda or mere agitprop and more as a self-help book for a powerful nation that is perhaps currently floundering somewhat. Is it time to look to the future? Definitely. Is Rebuilding Britain the answer? Possibly.

Reviewed by Joe Bradbury.

Joe is leading journalist for Building Specifier – focusing primarily on the latest news within the construction sector. With a keen interest in eco-friendly practices within the industry, he seeks out stories of innovation, responsible building methods and renewable energy sources; adding a level of human interest into his articles.


Further reading

Right to buy – Right to stay?

Right to buy is a scheme designed to give many tenants living in secure social housing the opportunity to purchase the home they are living in at a heavily discounted rate. However, with UK housing prices in flux and many ageing council estates being demolished to make way for newer builds the volume of compulsory purchase orders on council estates has never been higher.

Local authorities are required by law to reimburse those displaced by future development plans; however it has recently come to light that often homeowners are being forced to accept sums far lower than market value.

Nationally, the average age for first time buyers to purchase their homes is currently 30+ years old. This alarming statistic could prove to rise significantly higher if people can no longer feel confident that ploughing their money into property is a secure investment.

The scheme met critical acclaim at its inception in the 1980s, however there is now a strengthened argument against the right, claiming that not only has it aided the soaring property prices through deferred transaction agreements but it has also conversely resulted in a predominantly large number of council owned properties residing in less-desirable areas, with lower employment opportunities where people are more reluctant to buy. This has led to those who live in social housing within these areas becoming stereotyped and stigmatised further.

Right to buy is set to be abolished in Scotland by 2017. Is this a solution for the UK market or should there perhaps be some degree of safeguarding in place for those who choose to take advantage of the right to buy scheme, such as first time buyers taking that first, tentative step onto the property ladder?


Further reading

“Operation Skylark” – Massive renewable energy project

Multinational construction and Development heavyweights Skanska and Gloucestershire-based green energy company Ecotricity will pair up to invest heavily in UK onshore wind energy. The project will initially unfold in 3 stages, spending up to £500m and beginning in Scotland.

The project will provide a big boost to the UK electricity grid, powering more than 50,000 homes per year.

Dale Vince, outspoken owner of Ecotricity is excited about the joint venture, which will consist of a 50/50 investment from both sides. The company has doubled its number of customers over the past 12 months and for Vince, the future is looking green.

Both parties are keen to get the operation underway as soon as possible. Next year’s general election could have a huge impact on the development, as Conservatives plan to severely reduce onshore wind energy going forward. The belief, however, is that any wind farms in planning before the end of next summer should be immune from political risk.

Despite local and parliamentary criticism, large companies now seem to be getting behind the potential of wind energy; perhaps another blow to long standing Tory critic, John Hayes MP!


Further reading

New nuclear power station funding sparks controversy across the EU

Britain was given approval by EU last week to proceed with the construction of a 24.5bn nuclear power plant, Hinkley Point C in Somerset. This news meets conflicting reviews due to heavy opposition from organised UK protest groups such as Stop Hinkley and Greenpeace.

The power plant is set to house two nuclear reactors and will be built by industry giants EDF Energy. EDF claim that the new site will bring with it a host of benefits, including boosts to local economy, 900+ permanent jobs for the next 60 years and clean, safe energy for 5m homes.

Nuclear power has always been a topic of strong debate, raising not only direct physical issues regarding responsible handling of waste and varying worldwide safeguard quality, but also moral and ethical disputes.

Despite heavy opposition from the British public, 16 commissioners voted in favour of the project, only slightly ahead of the minimum 15 required for the project to proceed.

However, secretary of state for energy Edward Davey said last year that “for the first time, a nuclear station will not have been built with money from the British taxpayer.” This statement now seems poles apart from the announcement made only last week to reduce funding taken from UK taxes.

The incident of Chernobyl and more recently the on-going dilemma at Fukushima have proved historically that despite the new plant being located in Britain, nuclear energy is a worldwide concern. No stranger to controversy, Hinkley Point C raises yet another paradoxical debate about the price that can be paid in the constant endeavour for progress.


Further reading

Slashing red tape could save millions

Measures will save housebuilders and councils £114 million per year by cutting red tape and ensuring homes are built to demanding standards.

The government has recently published a package of measures to save housebuilders and councils £114 million per year by cutting red tape while ensuring homes are still built to demanding standards, particularly on security, wheelchair accessibility and space.

The current system of rules on how new homes can be built encourages wide differences across the country with councils able to select from a range of standards in a ‘pick and mix’ approach that gives an unlimited number of permutations in local rules. This creates cost, uncertainty, bureaucracy and duplication for housebuilders. The government is consulting today on the details of how it will consolidate this mass of standards into a core range of 5 standards.

Communities Minister Stephen Williams said:
We need to build more homes and better quality homes and this government is delivering on both. It’s now time to go further by freeing up housebuilders from unnecessary red tape and let them get on with the real job building the right homes, in the right places, to help families and first time buyers onto the property ladder.

The current system of housing standards creates a labyrinth of bureaucratic rules for housebuilders to try and navigate, often of little benefit and significant cost. We are now slashing this mass of unnecessary rules down to just 5 core standards saving housebuilders and councils £114 million a year whilst making new homes safer, more accessible to older and disabled people and more sustainable.

Current housing standards required of new development can be unworkable, including demands for solar and wind energy sources that can’t physically fit onto the roofs of apartment buildings, or unnecessary including compliance regimes which add thousands to the cost of building a new home without any benefit.

The remaining core of 5 standards will cover:

  • security: introducing a national regulation on security standards in all new homes to protect families from burglary
  • space: for the first time ever, a national, cross tenure space standard that local authorities and communities can choose to use to influence the size of new homes in their local area
  • age friendly housing: new optional building regulations for accessible and adaptable mainstream housing to meet the needs of older and disabled people
  • wheelchair user housing: the introduction for the first time of an optional building regulation setting standards for wheelchair housing
  • water efficiency: the ability to set higher water efficiency standards in areas of water shortage

This is the first time national standards for security, wheelchair accessible housing and internal space have been drawn up.

The consultation published today seeks views on the detailed technical requirements supporting this new approach to housing quality.

The government proposal is for the security standards to become a new mandatory regulation, and for councils to be able to decide whether to apply the other remaining standards to developments built in their areas.

In addition a new zero carbon homes standard will come into force through the building regulations from 2016, building on the 30% energy efficiency improvements already introduced into building regulations in 2010 and 2013. These changes are already saving householders up to £200 on energy bills.


Further reading

According to a 2007 Foresight report from the Government Office for science, approximately 65% of adults and 33% of children in the England are now obese. It is estimated that over half of the UK adult population could be classed as obese in as little as 5 years. Needless to say, tackling obesity has become a major social, economic, health and financial issue. Does the environment we live in influence our fitness habits?

Put simply, obesity is usually caused by eating too much and moving too little. If you consume high amounts of energy from your diet, particularly from fat and sugars, but do not burn off the energy through exercise and physical activity, much of the surplus energy is then stored by the body as fat.

The environment in which people live can directly influence the decisions that people make; often subconsciously. For the vast majority of people, exercise is merely a by-product of a busy day. We burn calories as we are shop, during our commute, play with our children or walk the dog on a crisp winter evening. The hectic nature of British society leaves people often too tired or with simply too little time to pursue the goal of a smaller waistline.

Can architects and designers become fitness instructors?

As bizarre as this question may seem, there is substance behind it. Bearing in mind that 80% of people are currently not undertaking what experts deem ‘necessary exercise,’ designers could play a vital role in keeping Britain slim by reassessing the environments that we all exist in.

In order to do this, planners would be required to collaborate with a wide range of other professionals across the building and construction sector, as well as fitness professionals and experts within the health field.

With obesity figures so high, where do we start?

So do we need to completely radicalise our infrastructure in order to breed a generation of Usain Bolt’s – with cities interlinked with rubberized running tracks? Surprisingly, no we don’t. Massive changes could be made using only small amounts of effort and a little attention to detail.

The idea would be to maximise the potential for casual exercise throughout the course of a normal day. This could be done by implementing very small changes, such as a well-placed sign indicating the direction of the stairs; all-to-often hidden in many public buildings. If a shop is within walking distance, people are more likely to leave the car behind. Offices can be made more fitness-friendly with the addition of a bike park and a few showers.

By incorporating cycle paths and pedestrian areas into urban designs, people would feel more inspired to walk or cycle to work, tackling the increasing obesity crisis, lowing carbon footprints and taking pressure off our roads, which are the busiest and most congested in Europe.

Parks and other green spaces also encourage people to exercise, as well as generally uplifting a person’s wellbeing.

How do we start?

The Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA) have today launched a resource identifying the potential for planners and public health officers to work together to support people to live lifestyles that will help them to maintain a healthy weight. ‘Planning Healthy Weight Environments’ presents an illustration of how a healthy-weight environment could be planned.

TCPA Chief Executive, Kate Henderson said “as the nation faces an obesity crisis, we can see that planning has an important role to play in helping to create high quality environments that offer opportunities for communities to make healthy choices and live healthier lifestyles. By reuniting public health with planning, and bringing together built environment and health professionals, we can work collaboratively to identify local health needs and tackle the obesity challenge.”

In summary

So could architects and planners halt the nation’s obesity crisis? Not on their own, but they can certainly help. Nobody wants to be obese; in order to reduce the alarming figures above the British public will ultimately need to change their behaviour, not just their surroundings. However, it’s very difficult to implement real change if our environment doesn’t encourage it.