It was a pompous remark by world famous architect Lord Rogers which brought it home to me. The housebuilding industry robustly put its case ahead of the General Election and subsequently the Emergency Budget. It spoke of the need for continued funding to deliver affordable housing, as well as a planning system fit for purpose to allow the building of new homes to meet chronic demand and drive economic recovery.
But clearly what the industry has not done well enough over the years is convince the public, from the parish councillor through to self-styled arbiters of taste, that actually new homes done well look good; deliver a precious commodity in dangerously short supply and promote a sense of community.
Every year the What House? Awards remind us that there are some outstanding housebuilders out there, producing top quality new homes, be they cutting edge designs in landmark locations, or in the vernacular, respecting local aesthetics.
But according to Lord Rogers, housebuilding standards in the UK are “very low.” Speaking at a recent Movers & Shakers property event in London, the multi-garlanded architect said UK housebuilding had suffered from a restricted number of developers and that Britain should look more towards Europe.
“We have not developed the language you see in Scandinavia or Holland. There is a very small number of house builders, but there have been some breakthroughs. For example, we developed homes built out of wood waste in Milton Keynes in just two weeks. But it’s difficult to get larger housebuilders to be more interested in such methods. They do what they do: small, two storey units that are very behind,” said Rogers.
The arrogance, not to mention the sweeping generalisation, is breathtaking. One man’s meat is of course another Prince’s Chelsea Barracks and Rogers, like the Prince of Wales, is entitled to his opinion. But at least Prince Charles looked at Rogers’ plans for the controversial £3 billion Chelsea Barracks scheme before labelling the modernist design “brutalist.”
How many new home developments has Rogers seen? Is he aware of the massive eco strides being made by the housebuilding industry, pioneering low carbon homes and in most cases taking a sizable hit on them?
“Small’ may be a fair accusation to throw at some new homes, squeezing the pips from the expensive acres they have spent months if not years trying to get planning on. But “Two storey units” I think you will find Lord Rogers are called houses that people want to live in. Rogers is pandering to a stereotype that went out in the 1980s, when soulless, amorphous housing estates were put up by box builders.
Planning or economics - or yes sheer greed for the bigger margin - may prevent big league developers from being architecturally bold, but there have been huge improvements over the last 20 years. Also it is a foolish, and probably broke, builder who puts up houses without researching his market and a detached house, traditional in style, with a front door and a back garden, is the box the buyer invariably ticks. Equally, housebuilders, as What House? award-winning homes testify, can do spectacular one-off properties, daring apartment schemes and sensitive conversion work.
Lord Rogers you are cordially invited to the 2010 What House? Awards at the Grosvenor House hotel, London. The reception will be as warm as the bread rolls likely to head your way. In your world my Lord a room full of housebuilders is a case of Rogers and philistines. I shall invite the Prince of Wales too. Let the barracking begin.
![[Post to Twitter]](http://www.rupertbates.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter.png "TAKE A SEAT AT THE WHAT HOUSE? AWARDS LORD ROGERS"){kind=icon}
