THE trick, it seems, is to recruit enough people willing to seriously and sincerely pledge their commitment - not least with legal documentation and hard cash.

In pursuit of resident-designed housing, it is always going to be a case of whether the numbers stack up.

Having once been involved in a local cohousing group, one thing that became apparent was people’s seeming reluctance to share their financial details.

While a good number of people were prepared to contribute £250 towards the costs of hiring professional advice, there seemed to be a certain reticence - among those who owned their own homes - to share details of how much they could afford, to move into a new development.

In fairness, it was perhaps a question not asked clearly or forcefully enough, since property valuations are hardly the world’s best-kept secret.

But the sum total of the exercise was not quite knowing how much money could be ‘brought to the table’.

One site that is likely going to be soon available is an office block on Buckstone Terrace.

Owned and operated by Scottish Water, it is currently subject of a planning-in-principle application (here, ref: 26/02900/PPP), which - assuming it is approved - will be the ‘green light’ for it then being marketed for sale.

What is being asked for is in-principle permission to demolish the building - renovation understood not to be an option on account of the building’s cladding and the existence of the so-called ‘crumbling concrete’, Reinforced Autoclaved Aerated Concrete (RAAC) - and replace it with housing.

As many as 124 homes are being envisaged, which might be too small a project for a major house-builder, but too big for a residents-designed neighbourhood (but you never know, if enough people were to express an interest).

At the other end of the spectrum is a site in Currie, noted in the latest BuildEdinburgh news update, here. It has planning permission for nine flats and is available for offers over £500,000.

Large or small, no plot of land (or ‘residential development opportunity’) is ever going to take off as resident-designed housing until the prospective residents begin to declare themselves.

This website has already advanced several ideas (here) as to how a resident-designed apartment block might be fashioned, including the creation of private, safe, sanctuary-like courtyards.

Among the serving suggestions: super-secure door entry; high acoustic insulation; potentially underground or semi-underground secure car parking; balconies; elevator access (albeit a ‘passenger lift’ is mandatory - here, clause 4.2.5 - for anything over four storeys); guest bedrooms; community garden, adjacent apartments for families with caring responsibilities; gym equipment, common insurance; and shared resources (such as cars and power tools).

In addition, this website has given serious thought to the possible elements in not just a single apartment block but a whole neighbourhood. Here.

It should come as no surprise that there is quite a bit of overlap in the thinking for an apartment block as there is for a neighbourhood.

And it might be that whoever builds on the Scottish Water site would entertain a single apartment block - in among their own efforts - that has been resident-designed.

Or set aside a plot of land for residents to just get on with it.

But until those prospective residents physically come together - under the guidance, most likely, of an architect who can articulate what is possible - one will never know.

Ideally, these self-same prospective residents would pitch up, with a willingness to (1) share details of how much they might be able to afford, (2) sign - when the time comes - a legal document committing themselves to an apartment, and (3) pay an upfront (likely non-returnable) sum to commission early-stage professionals.

With at least a vague idea of how much provisional money might be available to play with, an approach could then be made to the developer.

BuildEdinburgh.com is happy to co-ordinate such a group exercise.

All you need to do is email editorialbuildedinburgh [at] gmail [dot com]. Mark the subject heading, ‘Resident-designed’.

And we will find a venue to discuss possible next steps forward.

Mike Wilson is editor of BuildEdinburgh

Image details: Scottish Water building, Buckstone Terrace, Fairmilehead; copyright Mike Wilson

OVER the years, the Scottish Design Awards have showcased architecture projects, including the categories, ‘single home’, ‘multi-unit’, the more catch-all ‘residential’ and ‘affordable housing’.

In other words, for an inspiring collection of ‘affordable’ housing design ideas, there can be few places better places than the awards winners and nominations, from over the years:

2026 - Here - Says the awards blurb: “The first phase of the Victoria Infirmary redevelopment, in Glasgow, comprises 136 new-build flats and 11 retail/commercial units set within a new landscaped public realm.” Architects: Collective Architecture.

2025 - Here - Says the awards blurb: “The Standard building is the first phase of the Midsteeple masterplan, a community-led and owned regeneration project which aims to revive Dumfries town centre.” Architects: ARPL Architects.

2024 - Here - Bedford Street, Laurieston, Glasgow. Says the awards blurb: This development of 24 flats for social rent occupies a prominent and important position within the Laurieston regeneration area in Glasgow, sitting between a first phase of the masterplan and the A-listed Old British Linen Bank, the last remaining structure from the original old Gorbals and a distinctive tenement designed in 1897. Architects: Anderson Bell Christie.

2023 - Here - North Gate, Gorbals, Glasgow. Says the awards blurb: “North Gate develops a longstanding vacant brownfield site, providing a new residential city landmark that completes the Gorbals masterplan [in Glasgow]. It contains 31 homes, comprising of one and two-bedroom flats for 100 per cent social rent and is designed to suit the needs of primarily older residents.” Architects: Page/Park.

2022 - Here - Fielden Street, Camlachie, Glasgow. Says the awards blurb: “A landmark development which signals a gateway into the Camlachie neighbourhood [in Glasgow]; knitting together a historic industrial area and newer housing stock. This is the final phase of a 20-year programme of regeneration in the Camlachie area.” Architects: Anderson Bell Christie.

2021 - Here - There were two winners: Gannochy Lifetime Neighbourhood (by Anderson Bell Christie) and Fraser Avenue, Inverkeithing, Fife (by 7N Architects).

2020 - Here - The winner was a refurbishment of an 1890s, now ‘B-listed’ former industrial building in Glasgow. The work on Bell Street Stables was carried out by Collective Architecture.

Image details: Primrose Street, Alloa - a silver award winner in the 2023 Scottish Design Awards; copyright Mike Wilson

OVER the years, the Scottish Design Awards have showcased architecture projects, including the categories, ‘single home’, ‘multi-unit’ and the more catch-all ‘residential’.

In other words, for an inspiring collection of multi-house design ideas, there can be few places better places than the awards winners and nominations, from over the years:

2026 - Here - The winner was Pine Place, for the New Gorbals Housing Association in Glasgow, which comprises ten terraced, large family homes and 18 flats, including two accessible flats at ground level. Architects: Reiach and Hall.

2025 - Here - Says the ‘gold medal’ blurb: “Dundashill [in Port Dundas, Glasgow’ is a vibrant, climate-resilient, creative destination where community living blends with canalside adventure.” Architects: Stallan-Brand and Ann Nisbet Studio

2024 - Here - A housing development in the foothills of the Ochil Hills, Athron Hill, was a joint winner in the ‘residential category’ - designed by Fraser/Livingstone Architects. The other joint winner was a single home, Caochan na Creige, in the Outer Hebrides, designed by Izat Arundell.

2023 - Here - Winner of the ‘multi-unit’ category was Simon Square - designed by Fraser/Livingstone Architects.

2022 - Here - In the ‘residential’ category for this year, the winner, the commendations and nominations were all ‘single home’ entries.

2021 - Here - Winner of the multi-home category was Spencer Courtyard, Finchley, London - designed by architects, Kennedy Twaddle (which has an office in Dundee).

2020 - Here - The winner of the ‘residential’ category was three individual townhouses: Havenfield Mews, in Portobello, Edinburgh - designed by Sonia Browse Architects LLP. Commended was Maryhill Locks, by jmarchitects.

Image details: Annandale Street, Edinburgh; copyright Mike Wilson

OVER the years, the Scottish Design Awards have showcased architecture projects, including the categories, ‘single home’, ‘multi-unit’ and the more catch-all ‘residential’.

In other words, for an inspiring collection of single house design ideas, there can be few places better places than the awards winners and nominations, from over the years:

2026 - Here - The winner of the awards’ ‘single home’ title in 2026 was Grianan (Gaelic for sunny place), in Stirlingshire. The architects were Cameron Webster.

2025 - Here - Joint winners this year: (1) on the Isle of Skye (architects: Dualchas) and (2) Rock Cove, on the Roseneath Peninsula (architects Cameron Webster).

2024 - Here - A single house was the joint winner of the ‘residential’ category, along with a housing development in the foothills of the Ochil Hills (here). It was Caochan na Creige, in the Outer Hebrides, designed by Izat Arundell.

2023 - Here - The winner of the ‘single home’ category was Ceangal House, in South Lanarkshire - designed by Loader Monteith.

2022 - Here - The winner of the ‘residential’ category was a ‘single home’: Ostro Passivhaus, designed by Paper Igloo Ltd.

2021 - Here - There were two joint winners of the ‘single home’ category: (1) Lower Tullochgrue, a refurbishment and extension of a house in the heart of the Cairngorms National Park - designed by Brown & Brown Architects; and (2) House in Bearsden - designed by McGinlay Bell.

2020 - Here - The winner of the ‘residential’ category was three individual townhouses: Havenfield Mews, in Portobello, Edinburgh - designed by Sonia Browse Architects LLP.

Image details: New home in West Linton, Scottish Borders; copyright Mike Wilson.

IT’S at times like this when the depth of one’s ignorance becomes all too obvious.

Let me set the scene…

Up near Fairmilehead crossroads, there’s a modern, fairly large and standalone office block, that’s owned by Scottish Water.

For various reasons - not least because of home working by many of its staff - it has been deemed surplus to requirements.

A Proposal of Application Notice (PAN) has been successfully submitted - here (ref: 26/00798/PAN) - with two in-person, public consultation events having already been hosted.

The proposal reads: “Demolition of all existing buildings and the proposed erection of a residential-led (Class 9/Sui-Generis) mixed-used development and other associated works and infrastructure - including car parking, servicing, access arrangements and landscaping.”

The next steps are a planning-in-principle application, and - assuming that is granted - for the site to be put up for sale.

It is just one of several residential development opportunities dotted around the city.

But if any community group was to entertain the idea of developing any of them - along designs agreed in advance by prospective residents - the chances of it coming off are always going to be remote.

Assuming it was even possible to gather a list of local people potentially interested in moving into housing on the Scottish Water site (a gargantuan task in its own right), there are so many skillsets required to translate community aspirations into reality, it can prove just too daunting.

It’s a lucky community group, indeed, that has, among its ranks, any legal, architectural, planning, financial, chartered surveying, residential development, quantity surveying or construction expertise.

Not to mention an intimate knowledge - should the opportunity exist (such as with the Scottish Water building) - of how to potentially take advantage of community empowerment legislation (stretching back to 2015), which could provide a community right-to-buy opportunity, including via a Community Asset Transfer.

The sad reality of trying to knit a patchwork of skillsets together - by contacting individual skills and information providers - can often end up in not even receiving the courtesy of a reply.

The city council is not averse to setting up pilot projects - it did so, relatively recently, in October, with a ‘right-to-grow’ project agreed by the city council’s Culture and Communities committee (here, agenda item 7.1).

The job description for any possible council member of staff - responsible for supporting community-led housing - might well be to look for a generalist (perhaps with an intimate knowledge of community empowerment legislation), who is able to make good links with all the various other necessary specialists.

Alternatively, an organisation might be somehow funded, so that it is able to attract volunteer expertise.

Planning Aid Scotland seems to have somehow ‘cracked that nut’, and it could provide a template as to how to establish a similar, sustainable organisational structure.

Another possible template is Zero Waste Scotland, which is a not-for-profit environmental organisation and a company limited by guarantee that is primarily funded by the Scottish Government.

The truth is community-led housing sounds great in theory. In practice, the challenges can be legion.

This website has published several articles extolling the virtues of resident-designed housing (here).

Among the possible elements of a potential tenemental development: car and bike sharing, recycling and refuse, a residents’ handbook (as in here, on BuildEdinburgh), communal gardening, power tools sharing, gym facilities, ‘later living’ requirements, communal laundry facilities, litter picking, storage space, social and meeting space, repair and maintenance, wildlife havens, acoustic and thermal insulation, elevator access, outdoor games courts, acoustic and thermal insulation, super-secure door entries, outdoor seating and lighting, secure car and bike parking, guest bedrooms, children’s play park, bulk buying of provisions, adjacent properties for extended families (not least for those with caring responsibilities), trees, common insurance, dedicated indoor space for young people, book clubs, crafting space, spring flowers, sanctuary courtyard, solar panels, balconies, ground floor retail, co-working space, treatment rooms and offices, etc, etc.

They represent little more than serving suggestions, with some elements offering the distinct possibility of saving people money.

Because, after all, it would be for the community to decide.

Mike Wilson is editor of BuildEdinburgh

Image details: the Scottish Water offices at Fairmilehead; copyright Mike Wilson

IN resident-designed housing, there might be a strong demand to share washing machines - and with good reason.

Arguably, the most obvious reason for sharing machines is the prospect of cost savings.

Another is to help reduce the number of machines that require to be manufactured, ie helping save the planet.

Where an individual household might be tempted t…

Read more

THE concept of the ‘20-minute neighbourhood’ is all about providing important local amenities within a short distance from where people live.

And, clearly, that requires relatively dense housing. Four-storey apartment blocks hugging narrow, intimate streets - anyone?

Edinburgh now operates a city plan - City Plan 2030, adopted in November two years ago - that explicitly includes the ‘20-minute’ neighbourhood principle (beginning on page eight of the document).

Back in 2021, the Royal Town Planning Institute was recommending (here) 65 homes per hectare, a figure that has been often referenced since (including here and here).

And there is no reason to believe that this position has since changed.

To get a sense of what 65 dwellings per hectare might look like, there is a handy set of examples compiled (here) by the now-closed Manchester design practice, Urbed (that has since enjoyed something of a renaissance, as a Trust, here).

Under the heading, ‘low density’ (ie 40-50 dwellings per hectare), cited as examples are Water Colour (Redhill, Surrey), Selwyn Street (Oldham, Greater Manchester), Trafalgar Street (Rochdale, Greater Manchester), Donnybrook Quarter (London), and Chimney Port Park (Salford, Greater Manchester).

Meanwhile, under ‘medium density’ (65-75 dwellings per hectare): West Side Street Housing (London), Sharrow Point, Cemetery Road (Sheffield), Temple Quay (Bristol) and Western Harbour (Malmo, Sweden)

And in the high density section (120-160 dwellings per hectare): New England Quarter (Brighton, East Sussex) and Hammerby Sjöstad (Stockholm, Sweden).

Mike Wilson is editor of BuildEdinburgh

Images details: Copenhagen, Denmark, apartment block, set at 90 degrees to the pavement and guarded by a buzzer-controlled gate; copyright: Mike Wilson

A ‘REVOLVING loan fund’ - provided, say, by the Scottish Government, to support a group of people build their own housing - would save households having to cash in any property they might own and, in the meantime, move into temporary accommodation.

But there seems to be a reluctance to make it happen, with the government’s self-build loan fund - here - aimed at individual households, rather than clusters of them.

If that’s because collective self-build is considered too risky, relatively-recent census data suggests it might be far from it.

Particularly if the self-build housing was to be aimed primarily at older people, the census held in March four years ago found (here) that around two-thirds of Scots householders, aged 65 or over, owned their own homes outright.

The finding is part of a wider figure that 34 per cent of all Scots households own their own home outright.

In other words, the risk of anyone defaulting on a commitment to self-built housing has to be considered extremely small.

But the ownership data is only one of several sources of information why government - either local or national - might consider the funding of housing that has been designed by the residents themselves and then moved into after it has been completed.

On March 20 four years ago - the day of the 2022 Census - some 70.3 per cent of all Scots households (equivalent to 1,763,000 households) were considered to have more bedrooms than ‘required’.

In other words, if sold, those ‘bigger’ properties might well yield an income that at least approximates to the cost of constructing smaller (but arguably more attractive) replacements.

Potentially, again, little risk of a loan not being paid back (to then be returned, into the system, ie making the loan ‘revolving’).

Of course, any revolving loan fund would need the resources necessary for it to be vigorously marketed.

And according to a report (here) published even more recently (on November 26 2024) than the details of the Census 2022, there is genuine work to be done in making sure that people - particularly older people - know that a collective self-build option even exists.

Concluded a taskforce set up by two UK Government departments (Health and Social Care and also Housing, Communities and Local Government), there is a lack of good-quality information when it comes to older people choosing what housing to potentially move into next.

Says (here) Our Future Homes - Housing that promotes wellbeing and community for an ageing population: “There is a clear need for accessible, impartial and good-quality information, advice and advocacy for senior citizens, their families and carers to ensure they understand the range of housing options available to them, can appraise these against their own priorities and can pursue their preferred solutions – with help, if needed.”

Of course, a revolving loan fund can be accompanied by other forms of support, including architectural and planning input and funding to carry out some basic administration (such as the hire of meeting rooms or the setting up of an eNewsletter account).

Plus assistance with any later management of a project, such as the equity system that prevails in housing structured as a Mutual Home Ownership Society.

It should not have to the case that every resident-designed housing group has to first walk through fire before it can get even close to succeeding.

As if anyone needs reminding, collective self-build can help make people feel valued, establish and strengthen bonds of trust between neighbours, reduce loneliness and deliver informal social care. Plus encourage the sharing of resources (such as power tools and perhaps even cars) and make sure there is a robust maintenance and repair regime in place.

And before anyone accuses collective self-build as a middle-class construct, regulation insists that a significant fraction of new housing developments is made available at an ‘affordable’ price or rent.

Indeed, The City of Edinburgh Council is now asking for a minimum 35 per cent of new homes - as revealed (here) in its city plan for the year 2030 - be ‘affordable’, up from the previous 25 per cent.

These ‘affordable’ homes don’t necessarily have to be reserved for older people - though, of course, they could be.

Should prospective residents demand to live in a multi-generational setting, there’s nothing to stop them; because collective self-build is about residents deciding: what they want from their homes in terms of both design and their management.

Mike Wilson is editor of BuildEdinburgh

Image details: Pilton Drive; copyright Mike Wilson

IT can be enormously reassuring, knowing exactly how one’s home has been put together, how it has been designed to function and how it might be repaired.

As public information adverts used to say on TV, when the weather was especially cold: it’s handy to know where the water stop cock is located.

When telling the story of one’s home, it is remarkable just…

Read more

IF trying to make the case for resident-designed housing - as opposed to the take-it-or-leave-it housing that currently prevails - the key question has to be to what extent there is an appetite for it.

In comparison to take-it-or-leave-it housing, the possibilities of resident-designed housing are almost infinite.

But it is one thing to imagine, it is ano…

Read more

ALMOST 200,000 households in Scotland had applied (as at the end of March last year, 2024) to social housing providers for housing or to be re-located - according to figures just released.

Says the Scottish Government, here: “177,264 applications were recorded on 26 local authority or common housing register housing lists. This was a 1.2 per cent increase compared with March 2023 (2,172 more households).”

And it adds, by way of a qualification: “It should be noted that people can apply to more than one local authority, and they also can apply for both council and registered social landlords, leading to multiple counting on housing lists.”

Among other findings:

• As of March 31 two years ago, there were 2.7 million dwellings estimated in Scotland. Of these, 60 per cent were owner-occupied, 3.7 per cent were vacant or second homes, 13.2 per cent were privately rented or lived in rent-free, and 23 per cent were social rented properties;

• New housing supply was 20,364 in 2023-24, a decrease of 3,984 homes (-16.4 per cent) since 2022-23. The majority of new housing supply in 2023-24 was new-build (97.9 per cent), with small proportions of rehabilitations (0.3 per cent) and net conversions (1.8 per cent);

• New-build completions decreased by 16.1 per cent from 23,778 in 2022-23 to 19,943 in 2023-24;

• Rehabilitations of properties decreased by 50 per cent from 114 in 2022-23 to 57 in 2023-24;

• There was a 20 per cent decrease (-92 homes) in net new dwellings created by conversions in 2023-24 (364 homes) compared with 2022-23 (456 homes);

• In 2023-24, 6,038 local authority scheme of assistance grants were paid to householders, a five per cent decrease (or 315 fewer grants) than 2022-2023. Scheme of Assistance grants totalled almost £37 million;

• The majority of these were for disabled adaptations, 4,194 grants which is nine per cent less than the 2022-23 figure of 4,602. Disabled adaptation grants in 2023-24 totalled £22.2 million which is an increase on the 2022-23 figure of £21.7m;

• As of March 31 last year, there were a total of 15,274 houses in multiple occupation licences in force, a decrease of 160 (one per cent) since the previous year;

• The total social sector housing stock increased by 6,102, reaching 633,030 dwellings as of March 31 last year, compared with 626,928 dwellings in the previous year. There were 325,477 local authority dwellings and 307,553 housing association dwellings as of March 31 last year;

• In March last year, there were 21,085 supported houses for older people and 29,813 supported houses for people with physical disabilities provided by local authorities. There was an increase (1.2 per cent) in supported housing for older people and a decrease (-1.2 per cent) in housing for people with physical disabilities between March 2023 and March 2024;

• During 2023-24 there were 25,423 permanent local authority lettings made, an increase of 1,773 lets (7.5 per cent) compared to the previous year. Of all the local authority lettings made in 2023-24, 49 per cent were to homeless households, 26 per cent were to those on a housing waiting list, 21 per cent were transfers to existing tenants, and three per cent classified as other; and

• There were 16,640 notices of eviction proceedings in 2023-24 relating to council tenants, an increase of 10.2 per cent since 2022-23. The latest figure is 32.2 per cent lower than pre-pandemic levels (2019-20). There were 561 proceedings resulting in evictions or abandonments in 2023-24, with the majority (91 per cent) of these due to rent arrears as opposed to antisocial behaviour or other reasons, this percentage is higher than in 2022-23 (85 per cent).

Image details: Leith, Edinburgh; copyright Mike Wilson

IF it has been ever thus that Scotland’s colleges take today’s young people and teach them to become tomorrow’s joiners, electricians and plumbers, it has also been ever thus that they require to keep abreast of changing technologies.

One such educational institution that can reasonably lay claim to being among the more far-sighted is West Lothian College, in Livingston.

Its standalone ‘ECOHOUSE skills centre for sustainable living’ (here) is a clever response to the list of growing demands that we, as a country, are beginning to make of our new housing.

You find ECOHOUSE at the very entrance to the college, one part externally finished in brick, the other in fibre cement.

The split is more than purely aesthetic. They speak of a before-and-after division, one half of the building showcasing what can be achieved, the other half all about how to physically deliver it.

Officially opened 18 months ago, ECOHOUSE has always been a teaching resource, aimed at students pursuing the college’s many built environment courses (here).

But, given that it’s all about the latest in carbon and resource-efficient technologies, it helps to keep fully abreast of the latest innovations.

On entering the ‘fully finished’ half of the building, two doors immediately to the right lead to ‘plant room’ cupboards. One of them is taken up by a large hot water cylinder which is part of an air-source heat pump system, and which serves room-by-room underfloor heating and the water for the house.

The other room looks like a 3D relief map of all that’s possible in the modern-day home, including solar panel controls, mechanical ventilation heat recovery and internet-enabled access and lighting. Waiting to be installed is an energy storage battery and accompanying ‘inverter’, to store surplus solar energy in an useable form for the house.

In the kitchen area, the plan is for it to become fully wheelchair-accessible, to enhance the learning experience of the college’s health and social care students.

The second half of the building is like a real-world construction site, with insulation boards waiting to be fitted, a heat pump to be installed, underfloor heating pipes at the ready, window and door voids to be filled and joins to be taped to help ensure air-tightness.

Begins Steven Morrison, director of Computing, Engineering and the Built Environment at the college: “The whole house sits within a thermal envelope - there is insulation in its foundations and both internal and external wall insulation, plus in the ceiling and roof space.

“It has been built to Passivhaus standards.

“Air tightness is crucial; the slightest hole can have a huge impact on your energy efficiency.

“There is no gas coming into the house, a lot of the energy required is self-generated, and we hit platinum or gold level on all the building standard section headings such as emissions and water use.”

Some of the kit has been provided by locally-based operators, such as the air-source heat pump by Mitsubishi and a real-time data analysis panel provided by J-TEQ EMS Solutions.

But for all that the building footprint is well over 100 sqm, at a build cost of almost £500,000 (back in 2023), the question remains: might Morrison’s students be graduating with skills that no-one can afford to employ?

Morrison is emphatic: “One hundred per cent no. These skills are vital as we continue to raise standards and make homes more sustainable to achieve the country’s net [carbon emissions]-zero targets.

“While not every new house in the future will be built exactly to the high standards of ECOHOUSE, we want to inspire our students to keep raising the bar.”

Partners in the project included Glasgow-based architects, MAST, and Ayrshire-based building firm, McTaggart Group.

Says Morgan Stephen Milne, associate and project architect at MAST: “In the coming years, we will likely see significant changes in building regulations aimed at improving energy efficiency and reducing carbon emissions.

“Achieving these new targets will require considerable upskilling across all levels of the workforce. The ECOHOUSE is equipping students with the skills, knowledge and hands-on experience essential for the success of sustainable construction and technology.

“By preparing the next generation of professionals, they are ensuring we have the expertise needed to meet future regulations and enhance the energy efficiency of our buildings.”

Adds Ross Hammell, manager, corporate social responsibility, at McTaggarts: “The ECOHOUSE project isn’t just a dwelling; it’s a blueprint for a sustainable future.

“Not only does it demonstrate what’s achievable in building a net-zero carbon economy, it’s actively cultivating high-value green jobs, upskilling our workforce, and placing West Lothian at the heart of sustainable development.

“Moreover, it is pioneering smart technologies for independent living, ensuring a legacy of innovation and skilled workers for the housing sector.”

Continues Morrison: “So far, it is only our construction skills students that are being taught in the ECOHOUSE - albeit, we have hosted several Open Days over these last 18 or so months and have frequently welcomed visits from ‘the industry’. But soon enough, we expect them to be joined by our health and social care students.

“We increasingly require to recognise that housing needs to work for us at all stages of our life.

“We are so fortunate to have this great facility at the college to support our students develop the necessary and vital skills for what is an ever-changing construction industry and help achieve our net-zero targets.”

Mike Wilson is editor of BuildEdinburgh.com

Image details: copyright Mike Wilson

AN increase in the quantity of high-quality housing for older people has been recently called for by an UK ‘taskforce’, looking at ‘housing that promotes wellbeing and community for an ageing population’.

• Please note, this article was first published on another website run by Mike Wilson (editor of BuildEdinburgh.com) in November 2024. So, for BuildEdinburgh (even though not launched until May 2025), this publication date recognises both sites.

Says a report published (here) by the taskforce - focussed primarily on England and launched by two UK Government departments (Health and Social Care and also Housing, Communities and Local Government): “Put simply, we need to offer senior citizens greater choice, particularly as their lifestyle and health needs evolve in later life. Ensuring suitable, accessible and affordable housing for later living is a societal obligation on which the current housing market falls significantly short.”

In addition, the taskforce says the ambition should be to “ensure [that] senior citizens, families and professionals working with them can access free, timely, trusted information, advice and advocacy on housing options, locally - including support to stay in their own home, ‘rightsize’, or move into community-led housing, service-led housing (supported living and assisted living), or care homes (nursing and non-nursing)”.

It continues: “Specialist financial advice, including on benefits, should be [also] available to assist people in planning for the future, as well as legal advice. And we need to develop, use and popularise a clear, shared understanding (across public and professionals) of common terminology for the different types of older people’s housing / later living homes.”

The taskforce’s report, ‘Our Future Homes’, has been endorsed - here - by the Centre for Ageing Better.

• Please note, this article was first published on another website run by Mike Wilson (editor of BuildEdinburgh.com) in November 2024. So, for BuildEdinburgh (even though not launched until May 2025), this publication date recognises both sites.

Image details: Just off Ferry Road, Edinburgh; copyright Mike Wilson

IT is a housing model that is still at the “pioneering stage”, according to its inventor.

And, in truth, Paul Chatterton confesses to being “a little disappointed” that, after over ten years of operating pretty much without a hitch in the cluster of houses (called LILAC) he now calls home, his ideas have yet to become mainstream.

Chatterton is now a professor at the University of Leeds, and, indeed, at first glance, it might feel that a PhD in mathematics is required to make sense of it all.

• Please note, this article was first published on another website run by Mike Wilson (editor of BuildEdinburgh.com) in July 2024. So, for BuildEdinburgh (even though not launched until May 2025), this publication date recognises both sites.

But, if the challenge is to find that snappy slogan, one could do worse than: ’Want to live in a home costing no more than 35 per cent of your net income?’

Because LILAC does not make any great claims about providing ‘social rent housing’ or being the complete answer to the country’s housing crisis.

Instead, it sees itself as a possible answer to that ‘middle cohort’ of people who are not conventionally poor but are still finding it almost impossible to get on the ‘first rung of the housing property ladder’.

Everything else is almost beside the point (except they are huge for the LILAC residents themselves), such as the fact that the principal building material for the houses is straw, OR that a ten per cent deposit is required to begin to secure a property, OR that the houses are designed to near ‘Passivhaus’ energy efficiency standards, OR that the residents choose to live in a sharing and caring way under the auspices of what is best described as ‘Cohousing’.

It’s not for nothing that LILAC stands for Low Impact Living Affordable Community.

It is the mechanics of getting the show on the road in the first place - and then keeping it going for year after year - that similar ‘housing pioneers’ should be most interested in.

It was in 2006 that Chatterton helped start a cohousing group in Leeds, looking for land to set up their own housing.

They found it in a site west of the city centre, that had previously been occupied by a primary school.

The breakthrough thought was arguably interrogating people’s seeming obsession with the idea of ‘ownership’.

Because, at LILAC, its residents don’t own their individual homes; instead, they own the right to live in a LILAC home, so long as they can keep up with their 35-per-cent-of-net-income payments.

And whether it’s a lump sum that has been put into LILAC by - say - a retired couple who have sold an existing property, or a ’35 per cent’ monthly payment, it all converts into equivalent £1 equity units in the organisation, which can be cashed in on moving out.

There’s a fair bit of tweaking here and there, to help make some of the numbers stack up and to ensure fairness, such as accounting for depreciation of the properties and ongoing care, maintenance and insurance costs. And there is no such thing as a ‘void’ house; ie no-one gets their money back until they are able to sell their equity units to the next occupant of their home.

But broadly-speaking, the ‘ownership’ that many people might crave is in the whole entity - known legally as a Mutual Home Ownership Society, a membership co-operative registered as an Industrial and Provident Society with the Financial Conduct Authority.

And it was that entity - the MHOS - that was successful in securing a 70 per cent mortgage from Triodos Bank, to pay for the land purchase (Chatterton says he is grateful to Leeds City Council for being flexible in when it had to be paid) plus the subsequent groundworks and house-build.

Says Chatterton: “Because it was the MHOS that took out the loan with Triodos, we saved quite a bit of money compared to each household having to take out their own, individual mortgage.

“The remaining 30 per cent [between the Triodos loan and what was finally needed] was made up by people forward-buying equity units.”

In total, it was a £2.4m build (land included), begun by requiring members of the cohousing group that Chatterton helped start paying an upfront, pretty much non-refundable £5,000, to pay for solicitors, surveys, planning permission and other preliminaries.

The £5,000 had the additional effect of smoking out people who, ultimately, were not up for it. Adds Chatterton: “It can be emotionally very tiring setting up a MHOS; you need people who are committed.

“And you need that initial commitment to continue, since there is ongoing financial management of the scheme, for which we have a dedicated task team, made up of volunteer residents.”

And on those rare occasions when a resident is unable to pay their ’35 per cent’ monthly payment (which can be otherwise described as a ‘monthly charge that buys equity units’), there are reserves that have been built up to ensure that never will a month go by when the mortgage cannot be paid.

As to why, 35 per cent? It was, and is, considered a reasonable ask, especially when compared with how much many people are having to find each month to provide a roof over their heads.

A minimum net annual income is required to be considered eligible for the ‘35 per cent’ facility; for instance, a combined minimum of £30,000 (net, and depending on the size of the deposit lodged) for a two-bedroom flat.

Chatterton continues: “We have built up reserves because there are some residents who can purchase more shares than they technically need, to buy the lease to their home.

“When it comes to valuing the equity units should anyone leave - and we have had a handful of people leave us since we all moved in together, in 2012 - we use wage inflation as opposed to the much higher house price inflation figure as a measure of the increase in their value.

“In other words, the really exciting aspect is that an MHOS builds in ‘permanent affordability’, from one lease to the next.

“And the fact that only a few households have moved out since we all moved in says everything you need to know about how cohesive the community is and what a fantastic environment it is to bring up children or to grow old.”

There are 20 homes on the site, each built mainly with straw (by Bristol-based Agile Homes - who happen to feature a photo of LILAC on the front page of their website).

There’s a communal garden - with a thriving pond - and a common house comprising a kitchen, dining room, a guest room and a ‘parlour’ for games, meetings and cinema. The oldest resident is in their late 80s, the youngest is under one.

Not surprisingly, the mix of Cohousing and mutual home ownership makes LILAC something of a trailblazer.

It regularly hosts ‘open days’, where prospective MHOS projects can find out more; the next one scheduled to take place in the autumn.

There is a book too, penned by Chatterton himself (here).

And, while not averse to providing individual consultancy, he is in negotiation with Agile Homes to provide a ‘turnkey’ package for prospective groups.

While housing developers have yet to embrace the concept in the way that Chatterton would have liked, scores of projects around the country have taken elements, and at least one firm of solicitors (such as Wrigleys, which has offices in Leeds, Sheffield and Newcastle) has been convinced, offering legal advice to anyone looking to set up a MHOS - in Wrigleys’s case, in England only.

Mike Wilson is editor of BuildEdinburh.com

• Please note, this article was first published on another website run by Mike Wilson (editor of BuildEdinburgh.com) in July 2024. So, for BuildEdinburgh (even though not launched until May 2025), this publication date recognises both sites.

Image details: LILAC, Leeds; copyright Andy Lord / LILAC

IF it is at all possible to bring together a group of people who are all up for getting their hands dirty, physically building their own homes (in the best traditions of the self-build architect, Walter Segal, or even the Harrison Ford movie, Witness), then there are at least a couple of, essentially, flat-pack options available on the market.

• Please note, this article was first published on another website run by Mike Wilson (editor of BuildEdinburgh.com) in June 2024. So, for BuildEdinburgh (even though not launched until May 2025), this July 2024 publication date recognises both sites.

One of them is London-based U-Build, which has featured on the Channel 4 self-build homes programme, Grand Designs.

Thanks for reading Collective self-build housing! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.

Broadcast on April 25 2019, the TV episode involved a group of people screwing together dozens of wooden ‘cassettes’ (mainly 120cm in length, 60cm wide and 30cm deep) that could be then locked together to form the walls and floors of a two-storey home for a resident in the well-known self-build housing community of Graven Hill, in Oxfordshire.

Clearly strong enough to support a first floor, the boxes - made of Spruce plywood timber - were so finely sawn that the client even chose to have them comprise their interior wall finish.

With locally-sourced sheep’s wool insulation packed into the cassettes and the elevations protected by a fire-rated, waterproof membrane and timber cladding against the elements, which still allowed the building to breathe, it took just ten weeks to erect something that was wind and watertight (the foundations having already been laid) and ready for the creation of functioning rooms.

By the end, the house was eventually 95 sqm in size, detached and comprising a lounge, a kitchen, dining area, bedroom and bathroom.

The biggest effort was primarily putting the cassettes together, carried out under a large tent to prevent rainwater damage to the wood. In total, some 450 cassettes, of varying sizes, were needed for the house and it took 15 people approximately 160 hours to put them all together.

During the following eight weeks, the internal fit-out (kitchen, stair and internal partitions) was completed by Studio Bark Projects (part of the same holding company as U-Build).

While this was happening, other trade contractors installed mechanical and electrical services and a ‘green’ roof.

In other words, entirely do-able over around ten weekends by a group of ten people (albeit professionally supervised), each armed with little more than an electric screwdriver.

But as graphics on the U-Build website make clear, the system can be deployed in a number of housing settings, including a terrace of homes and even a block of flats (up to three storeys).

U-Build produces the architectural drawings and the cassette parts are laser-cut at a precision sawmill in East London.

That said, to date most of the projects that have used the U-Build system have been garden studios.

However, as an answer to the country’s widely acknowledged housing shortage, U-Build’s production manager, Ben Baker, says: “If people are willing to get involved in construction, removing the fundamental labour costs associated, then U-Build is here to provide a system that can be picked up and learned within a few minutes, by most people, aged from four to 104.”

Meanwhile, another flat-pack option is that of designer Alastair Parvin’s WikiHouse, named in recognition of the fact that the system is not only quick to build (The term ‘Wiki’ comes from the Hawaiian word for ‘quick’), but also ‘open-source’. That is, the building technology blueprints are published for anyone to use and improve.

Parvin is passionate about democratising architecture and, to that end, has developed a system that isn’t just simple to build, but also isn’t tied to one company. WikiHouse has a growing network of manufacturers all over the country – indeed, the world.

Like U-Build, WikiHouses also comprise cassettes (into which insulation can be packed) that are linked together with a butterfly-looking tie tapped into position with a rubber mallet.

On the WikiHouse website, a short video shows the upper floor to a two-storey home being installed, essentially by interlocking slots cut into the cassettes.

WikiHouse also doesn’t demand conventional construction skills. A team of four-to-five people can usually put together a wind and watertight building of around 80 square metres in two-to-three days.

It won’t have gone unnoticed that the common denominator to the cassettes of both U-Build and WikiHouse is timber, with its several environmental benefits (locally-sourced, CO2-capturing and renewable, etc).

Says a spokesperson: “Key to the WikiHouse model is the idea that, instead of building large multi-million pound prefabrication factories, we can harness hundreds of existing small, local CNC [computer numerical controlled] workshops that are distributed across the UK, to build potentially many thousands of homes every year, to help address the country’s housing shortage and support local businesses. This is referred to as ‘distributed manufacturing’.

“The WikiHouse system can be used to create anything from small studios to workspaces, educational spaces, single dwellings, or multiple row houses. Indeed, any building up to three storeys.”

Adds Parvin, who is CEO of the WikiHouse parent company, Open Systems Lab: “Although we originally created WikiHouse with self-build homes in mind, it turns out there are a whole range of reasons why people want to be able to make it simpler to build high-performance buildings – and a lot of uses beyond just homes.”

Factfile

Carbon ‘performance’:

UB: Environmental consultants, Atmos Lab, conducted a study to compare the embodied carbon for a U-Build house with that of a traditional house. It concluded that the embodied carbon for a U-Build house would be circa 238 kgCO2/m2 as compared to 550 kgCO2/m2 for an equivalent house built with traditional construction methods.

WH: We collaborated with the Leeds Sustainability Institute on a ‘life cycle analysis’ of a typical two-storey WikiHouse. Their research concluded that the global warming impact of a WikiHouse over 100 years would be 235 kgCO2/m2 compared to 550 kgCO2/m2 for an equivalent brick-and-block house. Interestingly, the report showed if the WikiHouse blocks, and other elements such as cladding and windows, can be re-used after the building’s lifetime then the total carbon impact would be less than zero. That is, the components actually store atmospheric carbon. The full report is available to download from the WikiHouse website.

Thermal efficiency:

UB: All windows of the house were triple glazed. U-values were at ‘passivhaus’ levels, 0.15 Wm2K, and airtightness is also predicted to be at passivhaus levels. The house benefits from a ‘green roof’ and 2kWp solar panel system.

WH: WikiHouse provides U-values of 0.15 Wm2K for walls by default, but it’s possible to add an additional layer of insulation to bring that to 0.12 Wm2K for walls, 0.13 for floors, and 0.11 for the roof, which exceeds the new building regulations Part Lrequirements. With a good-quality vapour control layer and sealing around pipes and vents, passivhaus levels of airtightness are also achievable.

Acoustic efficiency:

UB: Although we don’t have any official readings on the house, the NRC (Noise Reduction Coefficient) rating for the insulation at 100mm is 1.05, the insulation is actually at 300mm deep. Sound reduction - Rw 40dB at 75mm

WH: We’re yet to carry out any general acoustic testing. However, we have tested the acoustic performance of a ‘party wall’ between two semi-detached WikiHouses, which complied with the sound insulation requirements within building regulations.

Insulation required:

UB: 300mm Sheep’s wool insulation, rigid roof insulation.

WH: WikiHouse blocks typically accommodate 250mm thickness of insulation, with the option to add extra if desired. Because it’s a flexible system, you can specify any type of rolled insulation batts such as mineral wool, sheep’s wool or hemp fibre.

Cladding options:

UB: Various - Green timber, corrugated metal panels, recycled plastic tiles, etc.

WH: Whatever you like. A wide range of cladding options are available: from locally-grown timber to fibre-cement tiles. We recommend dry-fix products for easy assembly and to help reduce waste.

How many floorplan options:

UB: As the system is modular, it is variable within a standard set of box sizes, generally increments of 150, 300, 450, 600mm.

WH: Our ‘Skylark’ system blocks are based on 600mm modules which can be used to design a variety of floor plan options and openings for windows, doors and skylights. But it is, of course, possible to create custom blocks if required.

Engineering numbers and performance:

UB: 300mm deep 18mm spruce plywood boxes can span 6,000mm with a typical roof, 5,400mm with a lightweight green roof and 3,900mm with a heavy ‘green’ roof.

WH: Skylark beams are flexible: deeper sections can be used to cover longer spans. However, the system is optimised to work with spans between 2.5 m and 7.5 m.

Skylark walls can carry up to ten tons in compression, and they possess adequate stiffness to lateral load to sustain wind loads of buildings up to two-to-three storeys.

Easy-access ducting for pipes and cables?

UB: Most of the panels are exposed and modular, meaning they can be accessed internally with quick removal of the facing. This allows quick access to pipes or cables. ‘First fix’ usually comes before the insulation and membranes are put up. Although some clients prefer to see the workings of the building exposed.

WH: WikiHouse blocks come with integrated internal battens which creates a gap for electrical and plumbing services to be quickly and easily installed before the final internal lining is fitted. For some commercial projects, such as workspaces and studios, we’ve surface-mounted the services for easy maintenance, which has a more industrial look.

Foundations required:

UB: Site-dependent. Generally and compacted hardcore/gravel, on jack pads, on timber frames or for smaller units onto adjustable recycled plastic feet.

WH: Because the system is relatively lightweight compared to traditional construction, WikiHouse can use reusable foundations such as screw piles for larger buildings, or jack-pads for smaller ones. If you’re extending an existing building or supporting vehicles or machinery, you can also build it onto a concrete slab – but of course this has a higher carbon footprint.

Build skills required:

UB: No previous skill required. We provide detailed assembly instructions for every job.

WH: Similarly, any reasonably able-bodied person can build it following the assembly guide.

Price to the client, including delivery (please identify assumptions, such as foundations already in-situ):

UB: For a 150mm deep box structure around £1,400-£1,600 +VAT per m2. For a 300mm deep box structure, between £1,600-£1,800 + VAT per m2. For a basic, watertight structure. Furniture and internal walls are extra.

WH: In general, with manufactured buildings, you’re paying a bit more for the initial manufactured product but you then make savings by building the project yourself, or by building it more quickly, and with fewer errors. Your main insulated shell might typically cost about £640+VAT/m2. The final build cost will depend on the other elements you choose, and how much work you do yourself; but might typically cost between £1,400 and £1,900/m2. We have created a basic cost calculator at https://www.wikihouse.cc/cost.

Other potential costs to be mindful of:

UB: Depending on the type of project, mainly groundworks and other services - electric, plumbing, internal finishes, furnishing, etc.

WH: Groundworks, utilities, services and furniture - along with things like planning fees and insurance. If you don’t want to build it yourself, you can hire a builder, which of course will have an additional cost. We have a growing network of installers who are familiar with the WikiHouse system.

Anything else?

UB: We hope people are interested in what we’re doing and feel like we can solve their problems.

WH: Because WikiHouse isn’t tied to one company, we’re also looking to grow our network of designers, engineers, CNC manufacturers and especially installers ready to help people on their projects.

So, if you’re a business who has always wanted to get into using modular methods, you don’t have to design your own system from scratch. WikiHouse is already yours – and we’d love to send customers your way.

Contact details:

UB: info@u-build.org

WH: enquiries@wikihouse.cc

Image details: A WikiHouse ‘Switch’ house; copyright: Open Systems Lab

• Please note, this article was first published on another website run by Mike Wilson (editor of BuildEdinburgh.com) in June 2024. So, for BuildEdinburgh (even though not launched until May 2025), this July 2024 publication date recognises both sites.