So, how is the CABE doing? Has it persuaded the government, clients and the public to aspire to good design? Has it overcome the obstacles it faced when it was set up 鈥� its location within the relatively powerless Department for Culture, Media and Sport, its lack of resources (a paltry 拢1.5m a year), the legacy of the RFAC鈥檚 鈥渋vory tower鈥� image and a Treasury that favours budgetary savings over good design?
The first two difficulties persist. Arts minister Alan Howarth has unsuccessfully lobbied for an increase in the CABE鈥檚 budget from 拢1.5m to 拢10m. Lipton, while still campaigning, is sanguine about the issue. 鈥淟ook, I鈥檓 the new kid on the block,鈥� he says. 鈥淚 have no doubt that as we get more people on board and expand our base and workload, we will get more funding.鈥�
Meanwhile, the CABE鈥檚 activities have been restricted by lack of resources, particularly the establishment of a regional network of architecture centres, with links to the RIBA centres and the 鈥渃ultural consortia鈥� within the eight new regional development agencies.
The DCMS has been slow to make appointments to the CABE. Only eight commissioners have been appointed so far out of a total of 15, and those eight are shouldering a heavier workload than expected. Lipton has been devoting two-and-a-half days a week to the commission, although he plans to reduce this when former urban taskforce secretary Jon Rouse becomes chief executive in October. Each commissioner works a one-day week.
Only three out of six committees are up and running: design review, government procurement and project enabling. Two other committees, dedicated to the regions and education, will be launched in the next few weeks.
Lipton says the CABE鈥檚 greatest success has been to create a modern, plural, proactive image, 鈥渃hanging the viewpoint, showing that we鈥檙e here to work with people, not talk at them; convincing people that good architects and good clients make great projects; and being helpful, friendly and knowledgeable as well as architecturally distinguished鈥�.
Anecdotal evidence bears this out. Architects say design review sessions at St James鈥� Square are no longer a one-sided 鈥済rilling by the headmaster鈥�. Under deputy chief executive Peter Stewart and commissioner Paul Finch, formerly editor of Architects鈥� Journal, design reviews are more of an open discussion. Tim Hamilton of architect Hamilton Associates, whose 拢75m scheme at Knightsbridge Green passed before the RFAC and the CABE, says: 鈥淭here is a huge change. The CABE is more friendly, more democratic, more of a genuine public service, less of an exercise in personal power. Before, if you were 鈥榠n鈥�, you were in; if you were a commercial architect, you were going to the rack.鈥�
Laurie Chetwood, whose 拢80m redevelopment of Romford town centre went through the RFAC and the CABE, concurs: 鈥淲e got a much more reasonable and logical response the second time around [with the CABE].鈥�
After September, design reviews will be held in the more accessible location of the top floor of Elizabeth House, above Waterloo Station. 鈥淚t has a great view of London, and it鈥檚 in an area of great regeneration and opportunity,鈥� says Lipton. But he adds: 鈥淚t is short term as we hope eventually to occupy a new, modern home.鈥�
With design review a reduced part of its remit, (it reviews about 80 projects of national and strategic importance, compared with the 350-odd seen by the RFAC), the CABE has concentrated on improving government procurement and project enabling.
The government procurement committee chaired by Lipton has certainly produced results. Prime minister Tony Blair has gone on record urging government departments to improve the quality and design of public buildings. At a cross-departmental group of ministers, convened last month as a result of Lipton鈥檚 lobbying, group chair Lord Falconer asked each department to produce examples of current and proposed projects and to invite a senior minister to be design champion.
The CABE has contributed to two government guides: How to Achieve Design Quality in PFI Projects, published by the Treasury in March, and By Design, a guide for planners on using planning structures to promote urban design, published by the DETR last month. Soon, it will participate in an NHS Estates seminar on how design lessons learned from the second wave of private finance initiative hospitals can be applied to the next wave. The CABE has joined with the new Office of Government Commerce to set up design workshops for government clients. 鈥淭he idea is to get them together with architects, contractors and funders to think through how quality can be achieved,鈥� says CABE senior executive officer Robert Bargery.
CABE鈥檚 project-enabling committee has also had significant impact since it was launched in January. Chaired by architect Sunand Prasad, the committee has so far matched design professionals on its panel with 10 fledgeling projects, private and public, ranging in value from 拢70 000 to 拢50m. Panel members advise clients on brief writing and procuring a design team. Projects include several major government initiatives, such as the Department for Education and Employment鈥檚 拢540m Sure Start programme. The CABE is involved in four out of the 12 Sure Start pre-school education and health centres, in Leicester, Nottingham, Haringey and Plymouth.
The commission is also set to assist with a new generation of job centres to be launched after next year鈥檚 merger between the Employment Service and the Benefits Agency. Bargery says: 鈥淲e are looking at how good design might impact on service delivery. With these schemes in government, you can kill a lot of birds with one stone. With an exemplar or model project, you can create a benchmark to be exceeded on 100 or 200 individual schemes.鈥�
Bargery acknowledges that the CABE is targeting projects related to social inclusion and quality of life. He says: 鈥淚f we can prove that architecture can deliver the kind of society the government wants, we are more likely to get funding for these initiatives.鈥�
Bargery, who worked for the RFAC before the CABE, sums up the difference between them. 鈥淭he RFAC was limited in what it could do by the late stage at which it looked at projects. The CABE set up the enabling panel to get to schemes early, so they don鈥檛 have to come back to the design review committee. It鈥檚 idealistic, but we aim to nip bad design in the bud.鈥�
