The children that time forgot: Reframing housing standards to incorporate children's needs

This paper presents the findings from a recent study funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation examining the housing and neighbourhood needs of 44 visually impaired children. Our research found that disabled people’s needs have been too narrowly based on ‘accessibility’ criteria, which do not take into account the health and safety issues so important for children. Indeed, the home environment is the main site of accidental death or injury for young children under 4 years, and children from low income families are particularly susceptible to burns, scalds, falls, swallowing foreign objects or poisonous substances within it (CRDU 1994). As disabled children are statistically more likely to be in low income families, this places them at high risk. If ‘accessibility’ is to be reconceived as design for usability throughout the lifecourse, this challenges us to move beyond the pragmatic but limited application of design prescriptions for disabled people as a separate and adult group, and to re-think all of the dimensions of the housing quality framework in the light of this expanded approach.

Regulation and innovation: Rethinking 'inclusive' housing design

The Lifetime Homes (LTH) concept initiated in 1989 by the Helen Hamlyn Trust, and subsequently promoted by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, emerged at a point when there was growing awareness of the decline of both private and public sector housing quality, especially in relation to floorspace standards (Karn & Sheridan, 1994). LTH were intended to offset the concerns of first, the house buying public of the appearance and affordability of homes suitable for successive generations, second, the private house building industry of the cost and marketability of incorporating 'inclusive' design features, and third, Registered Social Landlords (RSLs), who had to balance cost constraints with addressing the needs of a growing number of households with older and/or disabled people. Approved Document Part M of the building regulations was extended in 1999, from public buildings to private dwellings, and currently requires that all new housing meet minimal 'visitability' criteria. Indeed, although the signs are that Part M will be incrementally extended to comprise LTH principles, the paper argues that in their existing form they are insufficient to act as a key component of the government's 'new agenda for British housing'. This paper therefore explores how they might usefully be expanded from an approach, largely based on compromise, to one that inspires innovative, flexible and inclusive house forms, which also challenge design conventions.

Housing supply and planning controls: the impact of development control processing times on housing supply in England

The National Housing and Planning Advice Unit commissioned Professor Michael Ball of Reading University to undertake empirical research into how long it was taking to obtain planning consent for major housing sites in England. The focus on sites as opposed to planning applications is important because it is sites that generate housing.

Is housing good for the economy?

Not surprisingly housing researchers and practitioners frequently call for more resources to be devoted to housing. But governments in recent years have devoted fewer resources to housing rather than more. One of the reasons is that housing expenditures have to be seen in terms of the overall resource constraints on the economy and in many instances this requires a macro‐economic perspective. This paper reviews the macro‐economic arguments for and against housing expenditures, particularly through the use of a quantitative policy simulation model.