Presentation overview

Our legacy

History of Building for Life

Policy context The 20 criteria

Some examples: good vs. bad

How Building for Life is being used Some questions raised

Our legacy

But quality is improving

Design quality is getting better - but it is still inconsistent 55 Building for Life Standards this year New development will need to prove itself an asset to Local Communities. - Nearly three out of four (73%) said they would support more homes if they were well designed and in keeping with the local area (NHPAU, Public
Attitudes to Housing 2010)

MPs attack 5bn government bill for 'grotty' new housing

The Homes and Communities Agency is under fire for bailing out sub-standard private sector projects Will Hurst The Observer, Sunday 10 January 2010 The government risks repeating the mistakes of the postwar housing boom by wasting hundreds of millions of pounds on funding "grotty" new homes, say MPs. The Homes and Communities Agency, the national housing and regeneration body for England, which has an annual investment budget of more than 5bn, has admitted that 27 of the private-sector projects it has bailed out scored five or less out of 20 on the industry's Building for Life benchmark, with two scoring just 1.5. Homes failed on a range of basic measures, including poor space standards and over-reliance on single-aspect dwellings; inflexibility; low sustainability standards; and poor compatibility with neighbouring properties.

The Building for Life Partnership

Led by: CABE Home Builders Federation (HBF) Design for Homes

Formally launched in September 2001 with a three year commitment to the following aims: Celebrating best practice in home and neighbourhood design; Understanding the needs and aspirations of home buyers; and Identifying the barriers to good design and campaigning to remove them

Sharing and Promoting best practice

Building for Life standards 165 Standards have been awarded since 2003 69 Gold 96 Silver 2010 has seen a record 55 standards Berkeley group achieved 16 Building for Life Standards (5 Gold, 11 Silver) and 7 Building for Life Awards

Lime Tree Square, Street, Somerset

The south west picture

West Midlands East Midlands South West

very good 3% good 12% average 38% poor 47%

very good 3% good 0% average 42% poor 55%

very good 3% good 12% average 38% poor 47%

very good 3% good 0% average 42% poor 55%

very good 0% good 6% average 76% poor 18%

Making the case for good design

What is good design?

Firmness Will it last?

Functionality Does it work?

Delight Does it look good?

Best practice: the policy framework

PPS 1:
Sustainable development as the core principle underpinning planning

PPS 3 & CSH:

Housing

Manual for Streets

Collaborating on design across departments

PPS 12:
Integrating sustainability appraisals into the planning process

Transportation Advice

Transportation Advice

PPS 1 PPS 3

Building for Life

Code for Sustainable Homes

Lifetime Homes

Secure by Design Safer Place Local LDFs Local SPDs

The 20 Criteria

Environment and Community Character Streets, parking & pedestrianisation Design and Construction
Use Use Amount Amount Layout Layout Scale Scale Landscaping Landscaping Appearance Appearance Access

Thinking it through:

Character

Sense of place

Thinking it through:

Design and construction

Architectural quality

Thinking it through:

Streets, Parking & Pedestrianisation

Appropriate street design

Thinking it through:

Streets, Parking & Pedestrianisation

Overlooked public space

Thinking it through:

Design & Construction

Well-designed public space

Realising the vision

How does a Building for Life assessment gain status in the planning process?
1. 2. 3. 4. Structured Dialogue from pre-app through to construction Gather and reference evidence from the documentation Reference Local and National Policy and Guidance Look to Best Practice
Local planning policy Evidence

Best practice

PPS 1

PPS 3

CSH

Secure by Design

Safer Place

Lifetime Homes

Local LDFs

Evidence Evidence

Building for Life

National planning policy

Local SPDs

Evidence

Accredited Assessors:
CABE are committed to developing a Network of 500 staff formally trained and accredited as Building for Life assessors within Local Authorities by 2011
Number of local authority officers trained
(Pulled from Pivot table 2 i.e. participated in the training workshops held)

497 298 192

*Number of local authority officers accredited (Pulled from Pivot table 1) Number of local authorities (LPA) with accredited assessors (Pulled from Pivot table 1) *Number of accredited local authority officers by Region EE Total EM Total GL Total NE Total NW Total SE Total SW Total WM Total YH Total

27 44 26 15 53 39 50 27 17 298

Accredited Assessors: What they do

look at a proposed designs for new housing development and assess their potential to meet the Building for Life criteria input into assessments of completed housing developments for Annual Monitoring Returns

embedded assessors do this as part of their work on a proposed development. They will do this as part of their everyday job.
independent assessors support embedded assessors in their work. Their work on BfL will be paid separately.

Accredited Assessors: What they do

The assessors work will usually conclude with an evaluation report.

This report might be referred to by:

planning officers or by the planning committee funders or landowners who have committed to a minimum standard the researchers, panel and final judges for the Building for Life awards

Frequently asked questions

Isnt the answer to these questions subjective? Isnt this a tick box process?
Firmness

Aim for objectivity by: relating comments to specific features of the design using the evidence provided making references to policy Remembering the balance between Functionality, Firmness and Delight

Will it last?

Functionality Is it fit for purpose?

Delight Does it look good?

If in doubt about how to back up a comment or a score.. . leave it out.

Making it objective
Focus on Functionality and Firmness ( as well as Delight). If you are unsure, examine the design in further detail: Will it work? Look at layout, dimensions, materials, lighting, planting etc. Walk through the plans to understand how you would live there Will it last? How will the materials age? What happens with rain water? How will buildings and spaces be cleaned and maintained? Will the house or the neighbourhood be sustainable?

Evidence: Providing specific detail

yes

? !

1
Yes. The development is within 400m of a primary school, church, public house, a parade of shops, a series of green spaces, footpath network and open countryside. In addition sports fields, the district centre and medical facilities are within a 10 to 15 minute walk of the site and are also on the main bus routes (see also cr. 4: Public transport)

Evidence: Providing specific detail

15. Are public spaces and pedestrian routes overlooked and do they feel safe?
Plots 18 - 22: The architectural liaison officer's letter identifies safety concerns relating to plots 18-22. The developers response asserts that this street will be very active and well overlooked. This is highly questionable, since only five units are accessed via this street, and footfall and traffic will decline towards the eastern end of this road, whilst the south side of the street is bounded by a blank wall (see section aaa). See also cr 17: Public space.

17. Is public space well designed and does it have suitable management arrangements in place ?
Space between plots 18-22, 23-25 and 26. The purpose, ownership, management and maintenance of these areas is unclear. See also cr.15: Safety and overlook.

Evidence: Providing specific detail

17. Do the buildings exhibit architectural quality?
House type X: Access to the kitchen from the front door and from kitchen to dining room is only possible by passing through living room Because of circulation patterns, the usable space in 13 sq m the living room is smaller than the garage. This is unfit for purpose in a house with 2 single / 2 double bedrooms. The space behind the kitchen door is too narrow to allow for a standard 600mm kitchen unit.

17.4 sq m - 7.5 sq m 9.9 sq m

If converted for full accessibility, the dining room is unfit for purpose (see also cr 18: Adaptation)
The blank end gable makes this house type inflexible and misses the opportunity for oblique surveillance of adjoining open space, e.g. at plot 65 (see also cr.15: Safety and overlook)

Referencing the evidence

Will you (or anybody else) be able to look at the assessment report in a years time, and find the evidence to explain and support the score ?

House type H: The ground floor street frontage is entirely made up of front doors and garage doors, minimising informal surveillance of the street.
Architectural notebook, May 2007 p30

Referencing local and national policy

We ask for 30%
affordable

Yes.

Yes. The tenure breakdown is 30% affordable (25% social rent, 5% shared equity) and 70% market sale. This meets the requirement set out in the Housing Strategy (2005. H9) and Housing Needs Assessment (2008. 14/16)

Assessment evidence guidance

www.buildingforlife.org/publications

Communicate effectively

Use the Design and Access Statement Provide objective information: numbers of homes, floor areas, car parking ratios, scaled/furnished drawings Explain how the design responds to relevant standards and policies (dont just quote the policies!) Include informative visual evidence, not pretty pictures

Very helpful

Not very helpful

Aim for good design, well presented as part of application.

Technical and illustrative material
Legible and informative layout plans Character area sketches House types in plan, elevation and 3d scaled and furnished Landscape strategy, refuse strategy, parking strategy, etc.. ...plenty of information, but concise and easy to understand

Its not rocket science!

Wool, Dorset
Scheme designed 2005, Approved 2006 Didnt use BfL Used good urban design principles Assessed 2010

Building for Life and potential in neighbourhood plans

Communities Like Building for Life Detail to follow in localism bill imminently?? This is still likely to be a bit vague! It will probably come to Communities, Local Politicians and LAs to work together on how to use and promote these. Placecheck, Planning for Real, Community Engagement projects already being done. Critical to build up those community links placeshaping. We have already been asked to facilitate sessions. This will present problems who asks, why they ask, who doesn't ask, reduced staff/budgets.

Building For Life as a Community Tool Shaping Neighbourhoods

Building for life at Appeal

Justifying the marks clearly and comprehensively. Pressure test with others DM, Policy and Urban Design. Does the LPA advice on transport and parking link up with the design reasons for refusal? ref Manual for Streets. Make the policy links. Link the reasons for refusal. Avoid it being picked apart point by point holistic approach. Used this year waiting for two appeals. Still looking for appeals decisions (good and bad)?

Reduced Standards for Housing

March will see further building standards scrapped. It does not impact on overall approaches to good design required by planning. The responsibility falls to Communities, Developers and LAs. Many will now have local core strategies and design guidance that underpin these aims. Does BfL becomes a single standard because it incorporates all the others?

Further Reading

Thank you

bfl@cabe.org.uk www.buildingforlife.org