Archive for August, 2009

It’s Not About Looks: Good Design Works

Peacock

BBC2 ran a series called ‘Home for Life’ recently, where brand consultants, Jamie Anley and Phil Nutley, helped homeowners move past the bland Magnolia School of Interior Decor and put a personal stamp on their homes. Watching the first of these programmes, where a couple struggled with the living room of a fairly typical home, I was struck by another problem aspect of modern housing – are we more concerned with how our homes look than how they work?

Do we even think about how our homes work? We pick one that seems to have the right amount of space for the things we want to do – eat, sleep, play etc., then decide which rooms will do what and put Stuff in – easy!

On the face of it, yes, it sounds easy but where we put Stuff and, indeed, the size, shape and location of the rooms have a bigger  impact on how we use them than we might realise.

Maybe you never got further than ‘Will I be able to fit everything in?’ or ‘Can I see the TV from there?’ But when it comes to planning a room, a number of factors play a part:

  • What do you want to use the room for?
  • Who will be using it?
  • How often is it used?
  • How much space do you really have?
  • Can you move around easily?
  • Is it pleasant to be in?
  • Are there any safety issues?
  • Is there enough natural light and ventilation?

And there are less tangible forces at work too. Think about your living room or bedroom design – where is the sofa or bed? In a typical home, they’re most likely positioned against the wall with the most free space and there is a simple psychological reason for this – we feel safe when we have something solid like a wall behind us.

I see this all the time in my local cafe where half the tables are arranged along the side walls and half are located in the middle of the room. I’ve never yet seen a customer pick a table in the middle of the room, if a table along the wall was free!

It’s a defensive measure, something that’s hot-wired into our psyche as part of our ‘fight or flight’ instinct – if we can’t see what’s behind us we may be vulnerable from that direction but when we know exactly what’s back there, we can focus our energy elsewhere. It’s particularly true of the places where we want to relax and rest – why do you think our ancestors made their homes in caves?

Ancestors put personal stamp on Home Interior..

Early Ancestors put a personal stamp on their Homes..

The threat of large, toothy predators having somewhat diminished in recent years, this basic instinct nevertheless holds true. At a purely practical level, in a living room design, locating a sofa against a wall means we’re less likely to have the wits scared out of us by someone brushing past unexpectedly while we’re sitting there.

Wall space then is one of the most valuable parts of a room – it dictates how we use it and how flexible it is to change. But, in our homes, there is a lot of competition for this usable space – doors, windows, chimneys, radiators – all of these can restrict how and where we place furniture when planning a room and how useable it is as a result.

The other crucial factor determining how much useful and usable space we have in our homes is movement through and between rooms – circulation. As more and more homes skirt the dividing line between open plan and traditional layouts – by knocking down walls or opening them up to link rooms together – the impact of bad circulation on our homes has increased.

The golden rule with circulation is that it should happen around the main function areas of a room, not through them. Where a circulation route cuts across the activity area, it limits the way that room can be used – more circulation means less usable space.

kitchens_circulation

A Typical Kitchen - Bad Circulation v. Good Circulation

In this example of a Typical Kitchen, both sketches show the various routes that someone might take through the kitchen to the garden at the top of the plan or to a utility room at the side.

On the left, almost every route interferes with the use of the kitchen. Why is this a problem? Well, given that this is where we handle sharp knives, hot pans and kettles of boiling water, the last thing we need is the smaller members of our family careening about in our path.

On the right, a different kitchen design in the same space makes it possible to move through the room without interfering with either the working area of the kitchen or someone sitting at the table. The island unit also allows us to keep an eye on kids playing at the table or chat to friends, instead of working facing away from the room.

What I noticed, watching that first episode of ‘Home for Life’, was that the living room – the room in which the family spent most of their free time – was a perfect storm of unusable space. The drawings below show the approx. floor layout for the house – circulation routes are shown by the dotted lines & blue arrows and the red lines show usable wall space in the living room.

Home for life_before

Floor Plan - Before Makeover

Before the makeover, the living room had virtually no usable wall space, as each wall is interrupted by a window, a chimney, doors etc. The sofa ended up in the only spot available – forming an island in the middle of the room, surrounded by activity on all sides – hardly an ideal spot to relax!

Floor Plan - After Makeover

Floor Plan - After Makeover

After the makeover, the situation is not much better – the redundant chimney has been removed to create some usable wall space but the other problem areas haven’t been tackled. The furniture is now lined up along the one usable wall, like a waiting room, and anyone sitting, watching TV is still likely to be disturbed by others moving about the house.

Now the aim of the programme wasn’t to improve the value or solve design problems but it seemed to me to be a lost opportunity – when carrying out extensive decorative work anyway, it would have been the ideal time to fix the problem and make their home work.

Here’s what I would have done:

Floor Plan - Quick Fix Option

Floor Plan - Quick Fix Option

See the difference?

The Quick Fix blocks up the door from the living room to the dining room and creates a new door from the kitchen instead – a relatively simple job that would certainly have fit within their budget for the makeover. The living room is no longer the centre of a spaghetti junction and instead becomes a destination within the house. Now the family can:

  • Move through the house without having to cross the living room,
  • Sit comfortably or have a conversation without being disturbed and -
  • See what’s going on and who’s moving about instead of sitting with their backs to the rest of the house.

With a bigger budget, they could have gone one step further:

Floor Plan - Max. Value Option

Floor Plan - Max. Value Option

The Maximum Value option takes the partition wall between the kitchen and dining room away altogether (subject to a structural survey), creating a large open plan kitchen dining room adjacent to the garden – a requirement that is top of the family home buyers’ wish list. It gives double the value – the family have the use and enjoyment of this space while they live here and it has ready-made appeal to their target market, if they ever decide to move on.

The Quick Fix option could easily be upgraded to the Max. Value option at a later date, as need and funds dictate. And for a Deluxe version, knock the wall between the window & door in the kitchen (this would require structural support) and insert sliding, bi-fold doors to open the whole room up to the garden.

The beauty of all these options is that they don’t require planning permission.*

Try these simple exercises on a floor plan of your home to identify usable wall space & circulation routes – you may be surprised at what you find!

On ‘Home for Life’, the finished house looked lovely and the owners were delighted with the change but the basic problem of how they use their front room remained unresolved. By focusing on how the room looked instead of how it worked, they missed an opportunity to add value to their home and improve their overall quality of life.

I think this is one of the most misunderstood aspects of design:

Good design is how something works, not simply how it looks.

I applaud the ‘Home for Life’ series for encouraging homeowners to think of their homes as places that reflect who they are, not just what they’re worth. As the sketches above illustrate, small changes can reap big rewards and needn’t cost the earth. I firmly believe now, more than ever, it’s important to ensure that the money we spend on our homes improves our experience of them and, in doing so, adds value.

Note: I have no connection to the ‘Home for Life’ programme and these observations are made simply as a viewer of the series.

* These changes could be carried out under Exempt Development in the Republic of Ireland – if carrying out similar work, please check with your local planning authority.

If you enjoyed this post, you may also be interested in:

The Elephant in the Room 1: The Bad Extension

The Elephant in the Room 2: Spaced Out

Is Your Home an iPhone or a Model T Ford?

Did you find this article useful? Do you have any any pet peeves about housing? Please leave a comment with your thoughts on this subject or any other home improvement or design issues you’d like to know more about.

Add to Technorati Favorites

Is your home an iPhone or a Model T Ford?

Model T Ford

The Model T - 'Any colour... so long as it's black'

Back in 1909, when Henry Ford was asked what colour his new motor car – the Model T – was available in, he replied, ‘Any customer can have the car painted any colour he wants, so long as it’s black.’

A hundred years later and things have moved on. It’s the age of the iPhone – a multi-media communication system that can be an entertainment centre, with access to our favourite music & movies, or a mobile office, allowing us to conduct business whenever, wherever – all at the click of a button. Now, what colour of button would you like?

Unlike ole Henry, Apple puts the customer firmly in the driving seat – we pick the phone, choose the applications – hey presto, we get what we want.

When it comes to buying our homes, however, we’re not so lucky. New research by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) shows that much of new housing built in the UK is not fit for the demands of 21st Century living. When we spend the largest part of our lives in our homes, isn’t it about time we approached the way we design and build them less like a Model T Ford and more like an iPhone?

Courtesy of Apple iPhone
Courtesy of Apple iPhone

According to the survey, based on 2,249 new houses built in the UK from 2003 – 2006, 44% of owners found their kitchen too small for cooking, 37% don’t have enough living space and a whopping 57% don’t have enough storage space in their homes. Providing adequate storage in new housing has long been a bugbear of mine, so don’t get me started. British houses are now the smallest in Europe and the CABE report identifies a need for higher space standards enforced by local planning departments.

But are bigger houses really the answer?

Building bigger presents other problems in a time of scarce materials, rising fuel costs and an increasing need for sustainable use of land. In a recent post, The Elephant in the Room 2: Spaced Out, I talked about a 40sqm apartment in Paris that is home to a family of 4 and their dog – it’s a beautiful home that has been designed to work for them and where every square inch of available space is put to good use.

Courtesy of Apartment Therapy
Courtesy of Apartment Therapy

Is the problem then with new housing lack of space or simply poor design?

CABE point to physical size as the culprit here yet the survey itself is not based on the vital statistics of houses but on how homeowners feel about the space they have – it measures the quality of the experience of living in their homes, not their size.

And when has size ever been a measure of quality, anyway?

The way we read space can be changed and manipulated, even if we don’t realise it. A room with a dark colour on the walls will appear smaller than one with a light colour; lots of natural light makes a small room look spacious and low ceilings make a large room seem cramped. The current trend for bulky ‘corner’ sofas is a case in point – it may give off the sophisticated Manhattan loft vibe, a la ‘Friends’, in the furniture showroom but in the average home it becomes more like an assault course on the Krypton Factor.

Light and dark affect our visual perception of a space

Light and dark affect our visual perception of a space

The way we feel about the space we live in is another moveable feast, influenced by factors that often have very little to do with its size:

  • Did we live in a larger or smaller house prior to this one?
  • Are we experiencing lifestyle changes that also change our expectations from our home – getting married, the birth of a child, becoming self-employed or unemployed?
  • Do we like the neighbourhood and the neighbours?
  • Have the neighbours we don’t like just extended their house to make it twice as big as ours?

Any one of these can change how we feel about our home on a given day.

Another problem with minimum space standards is that there is more variety in our lifestyles than ever before and this is not addressed by the traditional labels we put on our homes – bedroom, living room, dining room. When our housing options include studio apartments, lofts, work-live units, houseboats, warehouses, community housing and countless other unorthodox types of home, do we need to think about ‘rooms’ at all?

I remember reading once about a man who bought a broom cupboard in the Dakota Building, overlooking Central Park in New York (the building, that is, not the cupboard) – it had enough space for a bed & his clothes and that was all he really needed for his City stopovers. It’s a great example of lateral thinking and for the fraction of the cost of an apartment he lays his head and collects his mail at one of the most exclusive addresses in Manhattan!

Location Location Location!

Location Location Location!

It may seem extreme, even a little Harry Potter-esque, but he’s not alone. TV programmes like Channel 4′s ‘Relocation, Relocation’, with Kirstie Allsopp and Phil Spencer, focus exclusively on homeowners down-sizing in city locations to create a higher quality (there’s that word again) of life for themselves in the countryside. Shouldn’t we, as buyers have the choice to opt for compact living arrangements, particularly in areas with highly competitive housing markets, if that’s what works for us?

The challenge now, as it has always has been with housing, is how to:

  • create home environments that we enjoy living in, regardless of size -
  • that work the way we need them to work -
  • are sensitive to environmental issues, both at a local and a global scale -
  • are flexible enough to meet the wide range of demands and expectations we have of them (these varying from person to person and changing all the time) -
  • and do all of this across different age groups, family sizes, income levels and social brackets…

Sounds impossible, doesn’t it? Well, the typical housing developer would most likely agree and few of them even try. It’s more cost-effective for a developer to build as few ‘types’ of house as possible and much easier to convince us to buy what they build, than to figure out how to build the kind of houses we might want to live in – and still make a profit. Developer-built modern housing is the Model T Ford – not what we want but what choice do we have?

One –off housing, designed for a specific owner, is more successful in hitting the quality criteria and often more innovative in its approach. Japanese architect, Kazuyo Sejima, designed ‘House in a Plum Grove’ in Tokyo, ignoring traditional room conventions, and arranging the layout around the number and type of activities that would take place there, instead. Each activity space is linked so the whole house acts like one large room with lots of smaller spaces off – the family can interact or withdraw, as they choose.

Photo by Axel Vansteenkiste (via www.denda.be)

House in a Plum Grove, Tokyo (Photo by Axel Vansteenkiste)

Our Future ‘iHomes’ probably lie somewhere in between – where developers will construct the exterior of a building, we’ll choose how much space we want based on square footage instead of rooms – rather like slicing up a cake – and then customize the inside to suit our own needs, more than likely using flat-pack ‘room pods’ we’ll buy off-the-shelf at IKEA.

Imposing minimum space standards based on the number of ‘rooms’ in each type of ‘house’ doesn’t create higher quality homes or come close to addressing the complexity of the issues involved in designing modern housing – that requires a different type of thinking altogether. If we do what we’ve always done, we’ll get what we’ve always got – only bigger.

We may not have the answers yet, but – with the housing market on pause and housing developers no longer dominating the conversation – it’s the perfect time to be asking the question:

Where do we want to live?

Did you find this article useful? Do you have any any pet peeves about housing? Please leave a comment with your thoughts on this subject or any other home improvement or design issues you’d like to know more about.

Add to Technorati Favorites



I'm Angela Carr - a fully qualified Architect with a passion for good housing design - and I believe creating a beautiful, functional home needn't break the bank.

As well as providing design and planning advice here on the blog, I conduct home design consultations and seminars, and also write for Interior & Home Improvement magazines.

If you'd like my help with your home, please drop me a line at the address below - I'd love to hear from you.

contact living:room:

bloglovin

Bookmark livingroomblog

Blog Stats

  • 19,391 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.



Home Design Inspiration:

Twitter Updates @livingroombuzz

Irish Blogs