Teresa Snaith: Why we need to be building inclusive, not exclusive developments | #ForAccessibleHomes News

Teresa Snaith is Development Director at Lovell Later Living, which builds homes for older people. In this blog Teresa outlines why we need accessible homes; why, looking forward to the next decade, the M4(2) and M4(3) standards need to go from the margins to the mainstream; and why developers need to shift the focus from the home to the place. 

We all know that we have a population that’s ageing rapidly and will continue to do so over the coming decades. With already over 22 million people aged 50 and above , and more than 11 million aged 65 and over , it should be natural for housebuilders and developers to create homes targeted to that vast potential customer base – many of whom are living in properties that no longer meet their needs.  Yet the sector hasn’t fully risen to the challenge, or the opportunity. 

We can see older people’s housing requirements being met in affordable-led extra care and ‘high end’ retirement villages, accessible homes and communities are delivered, but what about the vast majority of that demographic who sit somewhere in the middle?  And whilst we perhaps typically focus on the needs of older generations, what about the rapidly increasing need to ensure those of all ages with learning and physical disabilities have a home that meets their needs?

Accessibility adding value

Lovell’s mantra is to create a place for everyone, and that means providing homes that can support wellbeing, independence and dignity at every stage of someone’s life. It was a natural progression for a partnerships business to evolve from delivering extra care with our Local Authority and housing association partners to looking at how we can mainstream accessibility within our own mixed tenure developments. It has a business as well as societal benefit – we tap into a different customer base, can accelerate our absorption rates on site and can create communities that are genuinely mixed and mutually supportive.

We view accessibility, when done well, as potential ‘value-add’ (meaning a product that has been enhanced so that its value has been increased) rather than a cost burden as others may treat it when being forced to adopt the standards for planning compliance. Yes, we can accommodate the features such as level access, wider doorways, flexible layouts to support mobility – but we do it in a design-led way that provides stylish homes that do not feel remotely ‘institutional’. They are contemporary, attractive and built to foster connection and independence. 

The ‘adaptations’ we offer are not only traditional assistive measures such as grab rails or lifts to support mobility and independence, but for the emerging ‘silver surfer’ digitally literate generation, the homes can be equipped with smart tech to support remote monitoring, communication and independence.

Solving resource constraints

However, delivering accessible homes is not without its challenges. As meeting the M4(3) wheelchair user dwelling standard requires larger footprints, which can increase construction costs and the amount of land needed in a highly competitive land market, developers may often view that as high risk. Planning policy – particularly in urban areas – will usually prioritise higher density development, which doesn’t always suit accessible housing. However, as Lovell is presently working with Westminster City Council to deliver a high density extra care development on a very constrained site, it can certainly be achieved and to a very high standard.  And whilst Local Plans increasingly reference accessibility, enforcement remains inconsistent due to resource constraints.

So, what should happen next?  With the 10^th anniversary of M4(2) accessible and adaptable dwellings and M4(3) wheelchair user dwellings standards being introduced into Building Regulations, we can see the positive impact they have had in terms of ensuring developers do accommodate accessibility into the homes they deliver. Hopefully the next 10 years will see the shift from them being at the margins to the mainstream and from the focus on the home to the place. 

Could we see more consistent use of Section 106 agreements to ring fence for accessible or adaptable homes? This would help unlock underused family housing and ensure provision is embedded in planning consents and reflected in the land valuation.

Inclusive, not exclusive

Perhaps public sector-owned land, particularly NHS and Local Authority, could prioritise adaptable homes when they are disposing. Surely there’s no move from ‘best value’ on disposal if, by helping people live healthier and independently for longer, it generates evidenced savings for NHS and social care budgets.

Could we dare to dream that instead of marketing ‘exclusive developments’, the focus shifts on ‘inclusive places’?

Habinteg’s Accessible Homes Week is a powerful reminder that housing is more than bricks and mortar—it’s about creating places that support people to live well. Lovell Later Living is proud to be part of that journey.

Images: top: Lovell Later Living's Spinnaker View in Gosport, Hampshire, an extra care development with Places for People in partnership with Hampshire County Council, which has one and two bedroom apartments for affordable rent with communal facilities; middle left: Teresa Snaith.