What a treat it was to see and hear an old friend and colleague at the Architects’ Journal Daylight in Architecture Conference a few weeks back. Hearing the case for a renewed appreciation of the health benefits of daylight was music to my ears. Ruth Kelly-Waskett spoke persuasively on the history of light in homes and how electric lighting altered our age-old relationship with daylight and the outdoors.
With mounting evidence from diverse fields such as neurology, healthcare, education (the list goes on) all pointing at the necessity of a daily daylight dose, its time for a reappraisal of our relationship with natural light. This is particularly important given that the amount of time we are tending to spend indoors.
Daylight ranks third on the list of homeowners’ priorities after energy bills and space. So, it’s about time, daylight rose up the agenda of design priorities. Health concerns around overheating, with their immediate effects on the body, have been used to determine opening sizes to date. The effects of a lack of daylight are more insidious. With a little joined-up thinking, even if the Building Regs don’t require it (yet), it is possible to consider overheating, energy consumption and daylight in the round. This holistic approach is what makes “good daylight design” and is certainly to be recommended.