Further evidence of the new topicality of ‘community’ in relation to architecture? I read in AJ 27.03.15 (p.18) Paul Finch reporting on a rumour that – as a result of the Farrell Review – governmental responsibility for architecture is to be moved from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport to the (more powerful) Department for Communities and Local Government, where it will sit alongside housing, planning and sustainability: just weeks before the election but good, from the profession’s point of view, as it was DCMS who scrapped CABE in April 2011, whereas DCLG were relatively supportive of CABE (aiding its merger with the Design Council “where the flag is still flying for architectural and urban quality.”
In the same issue (p.22), it is noted by Hattie Hartman that the Newcastle University MArch students’ ‘Stargazing Pavilion’ in Stonehaugh (recently shortlisted for the AJ Small Projects award) was “noteworthy for the students’ extensive engagement with local villagers throughout design and construction.”
And on p.51, Meredith Bowles (of Mole Architects, Cambridge) observes that “for centuries buildings were made as they were required, which Paul Oliver describes as ‘by the people, but not for the people.’ The resulting houses, streets and neighbourhoods are delightfully human in scale. It is these places that people seek while travelling – places that are good to walk in and for meeting and observing others... Unfortunately, the author proceeds to argue that “good design can only be achieved by good designers, and then only if they are employed early enough to make a substantial difference...” – the technocratic (designing around the principles of walkable neighbourhoods – as advocated by Jan Gehl and the New Urbanists) returns to displace the democratic.