April 2014: Where is the daylight in new housing?

For those of you who are engaged with the building industry currently you will know we are experiencing significant shifts with regard to changes to planning and building regulations.  The most recent changes to be published are those to housing standards (https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/providing-effective-building-regulations-so-that-new-and-altered-buildings-are-safe-accessible-and-efficient/supporting-pages/technical-housing-standards-review) which will see a significant reduction and simplification of the existing framework.

The degree to which this will reduce the quality and sustainability of new housing or improve the delivery, given the huge demand of housing in the UK remains a contentious issue and one I will not dwell on.  But rather I would like to talk about a standard that was never included and indeed is not proposed to be included which may well surprise you.

The standards I am interested in is daylight and sunlight.  Given the importance of sunlight and daylight for our physiological and physical health as well as providing free energy (either through windows or onto surface mounted renewable technology) it is somewhat surprising to find there are no mandatory minimum standards in building regulations or planning for either access to sunlight or minimum daylight in buildings.  There are however some guidance documents and there are some standards in non-mandatory codes but nothing universal.

So why is this the case?  Well a small research project in collaboration with Light Up analytics (http://www.lightup-analytics.com/) and the Master of Architecture students at Plymouth University which examined 10 award winning housing developments and their adequacy for daylight and sunlight revealed, at least in part, the reason for this.

Image credit: Matthew Clarke, Plymouth Master of Architecture Student

Having examined all these housing projects we found that none of the projects universally met all the guidance for good daylight and sunlight despite them being award winning schemes.  In some instances it was clear that daylight was not adequately considered but in others there was clearly a conflict between daylight and other desirable factors such as density (a very important criteria for sustainable development), site constraints such as topography or vegetation, or achieving privacy in individual units.  Additionally daylight is a very complex thing to measure and quantify as it is constantly changing and the methodologies are not always consistent. 

What we may learn from this is that it may not always be appropriate to have universal minimum standards as they come at a cost of other desirable outcomes.  Also daylight although important is not the only consideration when we design buildings. However we do need to encourage better practice with daylight as a relevant consideration in the design process while not allowing the development of poorly daylight houses that are bad for the occupants and the environment.  The balance of how to regulate, encourage better practice and what should be a minimum continues to be a challenge for Architects and policy makers alike.

Simon Bradbury is a Lecturer in Architecture (Sustainable Design) at Plymouth University

November 2012: City Sustainability – can we learn from other European Cities?

With 50% of the world’s population now classified as urban (approx. 3.5bn) and, according to the Hard Rain’s Tour exhibition some 6 to 7bn urban dwellers expected by 2050, life on Earth depends upon achieving sustainable towns and cities.

For the past 7 years I have led the Academy of Urbanism’s assessment of cities which have been shortlisted for its European City of the Year Award and last week I attended a ceremony in which Antwerp was announced as this year’s winner having seen off strong competition from Hamburg and Lyon.

The Academy’s award process seeks to identify and share learning from successful places ranging in scale from individual streets and neighbourhoods to towns and major cities. There is no standard formula for success. Indeed in our increasingly global world places need to remain true to their history and culture and promote their distinctiveness as a means of attracting and retaining human and financial capital – think Amsterdam and Barcelona.

What European cities do face however is a common set of challenges, such as:

• preventing the continued outward spread of population; the land area of many European cities has doubled in the past 50 years driven by a desire to consume more space and increased mobility.
• reducing the dominant use of the car in urban environments; the installation of mass public transit (trams and metro systems) emerges a key tool of urban transformation, although increasingly cycling is being promoted as a key means of urban mobility - Copenhagen shows what can be done –with more than one third of all journeys to work taking place by bike.
• reusing former industrial and waterfront land to create new sustainable communities which mix housing and employment - Hafen City, Hamburg, Le Confluence in Lyon, and the former shipyards in Gothenburg are just some examples of how our cities are restructuring.
• accommodating a growing number of immigrants from less prosperous parts of Europe and indeed further afield. Successful cities are increasingly multi-cultural cities with London as the prime example. It has to be recognised, as a visit to Oslo last year demonstrated, that in some societies achieving this is not without its challenges.
• mitigating and adapting to the challenge of climate change. Membership of the EU is driving concerted efforts to reduce carbon emissions and develop renewable sources. Combined Heat and Power is standard in Helsinki, and other Scandinavian cities and Freiburg has built an exemplar ‘green economy’ around the development and use of solar power. Flood management is now a key consideration in urban planning and cities such as Amsterdam, Hamburg and Valencia are having to find ways of living with a higher level of risk.

I am inspired by the enthusiasm and commitment with which European cities are addressing the challenge of making our cities sustainable for the 21st Century and the evident signs of progress. More than anything I am impressed by the quality of both political and technical leadership which is driving change under difficult economic circumstances.

I am convinced that the UK and the rapidly urbanising world can learn from successful European cities. However we face a real challenge in practical delivery as a result of weak city governance and over reliance on market based solutions. We know what to do…but can we do it?

Professor Chris Balch – Professor of Planning and Chair of ISSR Management Team