A picture caption in the report of the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission refers to a piece of research in which students were asked to rate 12 buildings. The least popular building among the non-architects was, of course, the most popular among the architecture students. This is one of the few instances of architect-bating in a report that has come a long way from its arcane origins in the bowels of the Policy Exchange.

At one point the report bemoans the fact that “consciously adopting an old style is often felt to be somehow fake” but it also celebrates contemporary architecture. Indeed it accepts that the best buildings today are as good as, if not better than, those of the past. It is just that the “median” has fallen: the average housing estate, commercial scheme or retail development today is worse, by some margin, than its equivalent from years past.

Given the recent findings of the National Housing Audit, it is difficult to argue with this. The commission’s real target is the unthinking design, or non-design, of many modern buildings and places – the crap that encrusts our towns and cities. Having defined beauty in the interim report, the final report is less concerned about what beauty looks like and much more concerned with how beauty is achieved.

…