Carl Vann, Partner at Pollard Thomas Edwards shares his viewpoint from our 'Housing Londoners' report, exploring innovation as the key to solving the capital's housing crisis.

Despite construction’s stubborn resistance to change, innovation is central to our practice at Pollard Thomas Edwards. It’s why we’ve developed a hub of in-house specialists — in sustainability, construction technology and social value — to support our project teams. It’s also why we hold monthly ‘Conference Days’, inviting industry experts to join our citymaking debates on themes ranging from Third Age Living, Village People and Proptech, so that we all learn together.

Publish and take a stand

And it’s why we publish our research: recent books on deck access housing (for Routledge) and estate regeneration (with Levitt Bernstein, HTA and PRP), for example, have sparked new takes on the future of communal living — more so in the light of COVID and Grenfell. Similarly, our Government-backed research into the readiness of industry to deliver zero carbon homes across the UK (Building for 2050) and our live project developing new climate change guidance on external shading for the Good Homes Alliance, play directly into our everyday practice. In essence, at PTE, design and innovation are one and the same thing.

Design follows research

For example, at our Beechwood Village project in Essex, we used an ‘online configurator’ and factory-built, cross-laminated timber construction, to enable resident choice at scale. Once customers had picked their plots and one of five pre-set ‘chassis’, they then customised their plan layouts, external and internal finishes and were able to add features such as a bay window or ‘room-in-the-roof’. We worked closely with sales and manufacturing teams to develop a process which could generate drawings to satisfy pre-commencement planning conditions and technical details which corresponded to the individual customer choices.

Reform now!

Nevertheless, innovation can only make a difference when politics catches up with sentiment. Currently, the regulatory agendas of taxation, building safety, climate change and design quality are not joined up. The result is a string of unintended consequences that are stalling housing delivery. It is essential that legislation is untangled and streamlined. Three initiatives that can unpick these competing interests are:

The first point is obvious. As well as the widely-supported Architects’ Journal Retrofirst campaign  calling for it, so too is the cross-party group on Conservation, Places 
and People. The next Government must act fast on this. The second point is another easy win: If New York city council can approve the use of mass timber for buildings of up to 85 feet (25.9 metres) tall, so can we. If we don’t, the government’s embodied carbon targets will be out of reach. As for point three, most are witness to the waste created through disproportionate tender briefs, excessive participant lists, and discontinuous procurement.

If we can accept the context is always climate change — and what we can do to mitigate its worst effects — government guidance could embrace innovation, be simpler, joined-up and effective.