Super models?

PLAN A

Name of plan
Acer
Supplier
Space4 (part of Westbury Group)
Type
Two-bedroom, three-person flat
Area
61.3m2

This layout, from a company called Space4 (part of the developer Westbury), just scraped through the Housing Corporation’s accreditation procedure, with a housing quality indicator score of just 41% – the minimum required to pass. To add to the challenge of providing accommodation for three people in a small floor area, the plan includes a winding central corridor that seems extravagant with space. Clive Clowes, the corporation’s assistant director of investment and champion of the development standard, says the irregular plan is designed to make the best use of the site’s shape by “going round the corner”. “I work on the basis that if a private developer has designed these things, they do it as economically as they can,” he says. As well as some strangely shaped rooms and very restricted storage space, the windows are small so the flat would feel dimly lit as well as cramped. On the other hand, argues Clowes: “It’s all in the eye of the beholder – a private buyer might say, ‘I love the sense of space in the main hall.’” What the panel said
DR: The dog-leg hall is a really unattractive space and the windows look very small. The amount of glazing in the living room is minimal – two small openings at either end of a long space does not look attractive. We [Peabody] just wouldn’t build an apartment without a balcony. Also, it’s got an internal bathroom, but it’s better to have the bathroom on external walls because mechanical fans tend to break down. Rating out of five: ** tg: It’s typical. If we designed a flat in that configuration, we’d open the whole thing up so not a square millimetre of space was wasted. We have carried out a lot of market research that shows our purchasers are keen on flexibility, so they can use the room in the way they want. This is a very cellular plan: to have a corridor is just a waste when it could be incorporated into the living room. Rating: *** AO: There have been many interesting trends within the last few years in the way dwellings are designed, with activity zones and greater flexibility. I can’t help noticing that the plans, including this one, appear rather conservative and do not reflect modern living. This appears to be part of a block of flats that is site-specific rather than a standard solution, which can be adjusted and modified. The projections [of wardrobes into rooms] are arbitrary, the layout rather conventional and cellular. There is a long circulation space but this doesn’t create a pleasant hallway. The dual aspect living space creates a pleasant environment with flexibility for orientation. Rating: ***

PLAN B

Name of plan
Individual Gallery
Supplier
Yorkon
Type
One-bedroom , two-person flat
Area
55.4m2

Of the newly accredited plans, this one by prefab manufacturer Yorkon is probably the simplest. It is a fairly large flat for a single person or a couple without children and consists of four rooms and a large hallway. According to the corporation’s housing quality indicator, it scores highly (79%) for unit size. The plan is based on two of Yorkon’s standard modules, which are constructed in a factory and lifted onto site from the back of a truck. It has already been used on the Sixth Avenue development in York for Yorkshire Housing. All the rooms lead from a large central hallway, with a cupboard at one end. Occupants might find it a little annoying that the living room and kitchen are furthest away from each other and, as everyone on the panel pointed out, the bedroom is much larger than the living room, which seems odd. The kitchen is unusual in having space for a table. It might be useful as a place for children to sit while parents are preparing food … except this is a flat for people without children. There’s plenty of storage in this design, with a 2.2m2 walk-in store that leads off the hall, but one wonders whether that space would be better appreciated if it had been added to the living room’s floor space. What the panel said
DR: It’s just daft having the bedroom larger than the living room, and there’s a funny cupboard in the corner. On the positive side, it is a generous size, but overall I don’t think this plan helps the case for modern methods of construction. We used the same module by Yorkon at Raines Court [a recently completed Peabody development in north-east London], and I’m surprised they haven’t applied that experience to this layout. The clever thing we did there was to overlap the modules at each end to create two balcony areas. One acts as an entrance and the other is a balcony to the living room, with a fully glazed wall. It’s a simple thing to do, but there doesn’t seem to be any of that kind of creative thinking here.  Rating: **** TG: I was amazed that the bedroom is bigger than the living room. It’s absolutely crazy. I’d flip them over and open up the living room to the kitchen. It just seems to be a waste of space. The hallway is enormous – I’d be thinking about how to squeeze the best use out of the space. This layout could easily be improved.  Rating: ** AO: This appears to be a very innovative concept for factory-produced volumetric housing. There is a large floor area, which is positive, but this is not taken advantage of as there seems to be an imbalance between the sizes of individual spaces. It would help if the living room was larger than the bedroom and related to the kitchen. This would provide better cross-ventilation and more flexibility. The bathroom window should not be located above the bath.  Rating: ***

PLAN C

Name of plan
Borrowdale
Supplier
Advance Housing
Type
Four- bedroom, six-person house
Area
100.8m2

This house might commonly be called a “Barratt home”. Unsurprisingly, the supplier is a joint venture between Barratt Developments and Terrapin International, a manufacturer of prefabricated pods made from a mixture of brick and panels. The house might not win any design awards, but it does have the advantage of offering fairly generous space and the option of a conservatory on the ground floor to connect the living and dining rooms. This could offer families the flexibility that many of the other plans lack. Upstairs the house has four bedrooms – two of them quite large – but just one tiny bathroom. This would be unthinkable in the private sector, even though homes are generally underoccupied. Clowes explains that Advance Housing approached the Housing Corporation because it wanted to make sure that the house type – intended for sale in the private market – would also be appropriate for social housing. “They satisfy our standards,” says Clowes, “but that’s all we’re saying.” What the panel said
DR: This plan is reasonable. If it had a conservatory it could be quite nice. It does have a separate dining room and is quite spacious. A downside is that it doesn’t have a kitchen/dining room, which we always like to see in homes with more than three bedrooms. When you’ve got children doing homework, you need a room without the TV on. There’s also no sense here of cooking and eating being an important part of family life, which is a shame. Upstairs there are two double bedrooms: why no ensuite bathrooms?  Rating: **** TG: The average purchaser would be looking for something better than this. Expectations have changed and we’re finding people are interested in contemporary designs. This plan has an enormous empty roof space, which seems wasteful. More could have been done with it to provide a playroom, den or study. I think people do appreciate the extra space. In a four-bedroom house we would provide a shower room as well as a bathroom, and there is space for that here. Purchasers these days are looking for an ensuite bathroom in the master bedroom, even in a two-bedroom flat – it’s always really important.  Rating: *** AO: The overall layout is conventional – thousands of homes like this are being built across the country. The modular principle does not seem to come across in the geometry. There is only one bathroom for four bedrooms, probably insufficient for modern living. The dining room is isolated from the lounge with little indication for possible connection. A good point is the potential for a semi-integrated conservatory.  Rating: ****

The panel

Dickon Robinson is development director at the Peabody Trust, a registered social landlord that has pioneered off-site manufacturing and is well known for its high standards of design. Its latest development of flats, Raines Court in north-east London, consists of prefabricated units manufactured by Yorkon. Trisha Gupta is a director and group chief architect at Countryside Properties, a developer best known for its innovative housing at the Greenwich Millennium Village, but also working with well-known architects to build homes for sale and rent on sites around the UK. Andrew Ogorzalek is a director of PCKO Architects, a practice that was founded in 1980. PCKO has designed award-winning housing, with special expertise in innovative technologies, and sustainable building techniques and materials.