THE WINSTON CHURCHILL MEMORIAL TRUST OF AUSTRALIA

Report by RACHAEL BERNSTONE – 2003 CHURCHILL FELLOW

THE AV JENNINGS FELLOWSHIP to study sustainable and affordable housing.

I understand that the Churchill Trust may publish this report, either in hard copy or on the internet or both, and consent to such publication. I indemnify the Churchill Trust against any loss, costs or damages it may suffer arising out of any claim or proceedings made against the Trust in respect of or arising out of the publication of the report submitted to the Trust and which the Trust places on a website for access over the Internet. I also warrant that my Final Report is original and does not infringe the copyright of any person, or contain anything which is, or the incorporation of which into the Final Report is, actionable for defamataion, a breach of any privacy law or obligation, breach of confidence, contempt or court, passing off or contravention of any other private right or of any law. Signed: Dated:

Index

Introduction Executive Summary Fellowship Objectives Fellowship Highlights Key Findings and Recommendations Program Main findings
1. The United Kingdom
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Key players in affordable housing Issues and challenges Policies and strategies Projects and Programmes Key players in affordable housing Issues and challenges Policies and Strategies Projects Policies and Strategies Projects Key players in affordable housing Issues and challenges Policies and strategies Projects

3 4 4 4 4 6 8
8
8 9 10 13

2.

Finland
2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

39
39 39 41 45

3. 4.

Sweden
3.1 3.2

49
49 49

USA
4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

62
62 63 66 69

Conclusions Recommendations Appendices

79 80 82

-2-

Introduction
Undertaking the 2003 AV Jennings Churchill Fellowship enabled me to investigate the latest policies and practices in the fields of affordable and sustainable housing in the United Kingdom, Finland, Sweden and the United States of America. I arranged meetings with representatives of federal, state and local government representatives, architects and planners involved in the design process; and members of the development and construction professions. Topics of discussion included: • policies and strategies; • current approaches to design, and • advances and innovations in construction techniques for the provision of affordable and sustainable housing. In addition, I was able to view and experience many first class examples of affordable, sustainable, and affordablesustainable housing. I hope that my findings and recommendations might prove useful in considering and tackling specific housing problems and challenges in Australia, such as: • • • • • Procuring new sources of funding, both public and private, for the provision of new public housing, Upgrading existing public housing stock, to enhance social, economic and environmental sustainability outcomes; Providing affordable housing for “key” employees, or low to moderate income earners, in areas where market rate housing is often out of reach; and Developing and implementing cost effective and sustainable construction methods for the provision of new public and market rate housing Improving environmental performance of all housing types, from public through to premium market rate.

I am grateful to both the Churchill Trust and AV Jennings for their financial assistance: the trip was extremely satisfying and would not have been possible without their support. I would also like to acknowledge my employer, Simon Grover at The Intermedia Group, who supported my ambition to carry out research overseas for the benefit of the Australian housing industry, as well as my own professional development. I also received considerable support from generous industry colleagues before I departed, who provided references and contacts that were extremely useful in my application and initial research. All of the people I met with during the course of the Fellowship were extremely generous with their time and knowledge, and I would like to thank them for their contribution and for sharing their experiences with me. Lastly, the support of my family and friends has been extremely valuable, and I am grateful for their encouragement throughout the entire process.

-3-

Executive Summary
Rachael Bernstone Editor, Building Australia Magazine PO Box 55 Glebe 2037 NSW T: 02 8586 6118 E: Rachael@Intermedia.com.au

Fellowship Objectives
To study sustainable and affordable housing initiatives that aim to assist welfare dependent or low- and middle-income residents, with emphasis on environmental initiatives, in the United Kingdom, Finland, Sweden and the United States of America.

Fellowship Highlights
Without exception, everyone I met in the course of the trip was extremely generous with their time, knowledge and access to information. I visited more than 20 individual projects, some of which were strong in their approach to environmental design and construction issues, while others placed more emphasis on affordability. Some of the projects were equally strong on both aspects, and they were therefore the highlights of the trip. They included: • London’s Greenwich Peninsula, where English Partnerships, Meridian Delta, the London Borough of Greenwich and architects Erskine and Tovatt, Proctor and Matthews and EPR are all dedicated to delivering some of the most exciting affordable and sustainable housing projects in the UK; • The Peabody Trust’s Murray Grove and Raines Dairy affordable housing projects in London, which have demonstrated that modular housing can combine environmentally friendly construction, affordability, and aesthetic appeal, as well as reducing waste and defects, speeding construction, enhancing the construction working environment, and finally, resulting in places to live that are of higher quality and more affordable than traditional solutions; • The Viikki Ecological Neighbourhood in Helsinki, Finland – an experiment in green building that is resulting in appealing and environmentally friendly places for people to live, work and study; • The Highlands’ Garden Village in Denver, Colorado – where new urbanist principles of design have resulted in a genuine mixed use, mixed tenure community of more than 300 homes. It combines environmental building with historic preservation with urban infill and all within 10 minutes of Downtown Denver – truly the most impressive development I saw on the trip; and lastly, • Colorado Court, in Santa Monica, California – a demonstration green affordable housing project that generates its own energy and is designed to maximise occupier comfort

Key Findings and Recommendations
The most advanced sustainable and affordable housing projects I saw while travelling are fundamentally driven by governments that strongly believe in the importance of environmentally sensitive planning and building, and the provision of housing for all. The countries with the best green building regulations and intentions are committed to the -4-

it is possible to create successful sustainable communities through planning and design. Malmö and Viikki) and a Greenbuild conference wrap-up appearing in the Jan/Feb 2004 issue. developers work hard to educate consumers about the benefits of paying more upfront to reap savings over the course of the tenure there. From my observations. I discovered that this has not been the case in most instances. industry organisations and university students as appropriate throughout 2004. Although I had hoped to find that developers overseas had found a way to include green technologies. by integrating housing with opportunities for employment. in new housing projects with little or no extra cost. transport. with articles on three key European sustainable cities projects (Greenwich.targets set for them in the Kyoto Protocol. and are actively attempting to achieve them through a combination of regulation and incentives. This means that rather than moving towards a scenario where green technologies are seen to be priced competitively with traditional non-green solutions. with a report on modular and prefabricated buildings. Many communities I visited hoped to foster diversity and understanding among their residents. such as water recycling and reuse systems and photo voltaic energy solutions. I have already reported on several key areas from my trip in Building Australia magazine. The March 2004 issue features material from the Fellowship. education. through the provision of similarly high quality housing for various income and tenure types. health and culture. -5- . so that a shift towards real triple bottom line reporting is occurring in some places. there is a growing realisation that it is no longer adequate to consider pure economic outcomes. and that social and environmental factors are gaining more importance. I intend to cover other topics such as Affordable Housing throughout the year. I am also planning to present my findings in person to architecture and engineering firms. Where green technologies have been incorporated into new projects.

USA: 3 to 10 November. 2003 • City Planning Department – Viikki Ecological Neighbourhood • Housing Fund of Finland – Public housing funding and policies • Ministry of the Environment – Public housing funding and policies Stockholm and Malmö.to moderate-income first home buyers • NYSAFAH – New York State Association for Affordable Housing -6- . 2003 • Lower Manhattan Development Corporation – public housing policies following the September 11 terrorist attacks • GF55 Architects – new public housing projects in Manhattan • Stephen Tilley Architecture – sustainable and affordable housing in Irvington. Sutton • Cartwright Pickard Architects – Murray Grove public housing. Finland: 20 to 24 October. Hackney • Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment – Architecture and housing policies • English Partnerships – Greenwich Peninsula redevelopment • EPR Architects – Greenwich Millennium Village design and construction • Greater London Authority – Draft London Plan and housing policies • Housing Corporation – public housing funding and policies • Hyde Housing Association – New affordable and public housing • London Borough of Greenwich – local government perspective on the Greenwich Peninsula redevelopment • London Borough of Islington – Public and affordable housing policy and provision • Meridian Delta Limited – Greenwich Peninsula redevelopment • Office of the Deputy Prime Minister – Government’s public housing finance and policies • Peabody Trust – New public and affordable housing • Proctor and Matthews Architects – Greenwich Millennium Village design and construction • Yorkon – Modular and prefabricated housing construction • Piercy Conner Architects – the Microflat project – affordable housing for first home buyers Helsinki. United Kingdom: 29 September to 17 October 2003 • Allford Hall Monaghan Morris – Raines Dairy public housing. Hackney • Bill Dunster Architects – BedZed environmentally sensitive housing. NY • Housing Development Corporation – public housing funding and policies for NY City • Housing Preservation and Development –public housing funding and regeneration for NY City • Housing Finance Authority – public housing funding and policies for NY State • State of New York Mortgage Agency – low cost mortgages for low.Program London and York. NY. Sweden: 27 to 31 October 2003 • City of Malmö – Bo01 City of Tomorrow housing exhibition • BoKlok – modular affordable housing from Ikea and Skanska • Erskine Tovatt Architecture – Masterplan and housing design at London’s Greenwich Millennium Village New York.

Oregon. USA: 17 to 21 November 2003 • Perry Rose LLC – Highland Gardens market rate and affordable housing. hosted by the US Green Building Council Denver. USA: 1 to 4 December 2003 • Global Green USA – thinktank for greening affordable housing • Community Corporation of Santa Monica – provision of new affordable housing • Pugh+Scarpa Architects – Colorado Court sustainable and affordable housing • Koning Eizenberg Architects – 5th Street sustainable and affordable housing -7- . Basalt and Snowmass. USA: 24 to 27 November 2003 • City of Portland – public housing funding and policies • Portland Development Commission – market rate and public housing development • City of Portland – Office of Sustainable Development – Green Building Division – green building resources for residential and commercial applications • Gerding/Edlen Development Company – Brewery Blocks adaptive reuse project • Shiels Obletz Johnsen – Museum Place market rate and affordable housing project • SERA Architects – Public housing design • ROSE Community Development Corporation – affordable housing development and management Los Angeles. Aspen. Denver • Cottle Graybeal Yaw Architects – Employee housing design and construction for Aspen • Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office – Employee housing funding and policies for Aspen • Rocky Mountain Institute – Sustainable housing research and development • Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHAFA) – public housing funding and policies for Colorado Portland. Colorado. California. USA – 11 to 14 November 2003 • Greenbuild Conference and Expo.Pittsburgh. Pennsylvania.

according to Chris Jarvis. Housing Associations such as the Peabody -8- . comprising 32 London Boroughs and the Corporation of London. developed a Draft London Plan under the direction of Mayor Ken Livingstone. the Housing Corporation planned to grant about ₤1. although its mandate includes a “general duty to promote social. the Housing Corporation. and b) the individual projects and programmes that have resulted from their implementation. I have chosen to first divide them by country. own and operate affordable housing in England (similar bodies exist in Scotland. During the financial year 2003/04. and draw out some salient points that are most relevant for consideration and possible application in Australia. via a non-departmental public body. except for developments at significant sites where more than 200 units are planned. John Prescott. Sustainable Communities: Building for the Future was designed to tackle problems associated with housing shortages in some areas and low demand and abandonment in others. The United Kingdom 1.1 Key players in affordable housing The Deputy Prime Minister. the London Boroughs. although there were several instances where both aspects were given equal weight. a Senior Policy Advisor in the GLA’s Housing and Homelessness Unit. economic and environmental issues of importance to Londoners”. I have attempted to summarise the findings from the entire trip. The Housing Corporation funds and regulates Housing Associations or Registered Social Landlords (RSLs) that build. In an attempt to simplify the presentation of my findings. and each featured different levels of regulation for sustainability outcomes. and non-profit and for-profit developers). In the capital.Main findings This Fellowship focussed on two key sub-sections of the housing market . Each of these outlines provides a summary of the lessons from the individual projects. housing and construction industry organisations. Each of the four countries I visited used different methods for the delivery affordable housing. Wales and Northern Ireland). Public or affordable housing is owned by local authorities. Within each country. I have provided details about: a) the policies and strategies that underpin the delivery of affordable and sustainable housing (as developed by government. 1.sustainability and affordability – and in the main. for the construction of approximately 22. announced a new government housing strategy in February 2002. The GLA (established in 2001 to replace the defunct Greater London Council). In the Conclusion and Recommendations. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) oversees the allocation of government funding for construction of new affordable housing.5 billion in funds under the Approved Development Program. the Greater London Authority (GLA) acts as a strategic planning authority and co-ordinates the activities of local government entities. the people I met with operated in only one of those sectors. The GLA has no direct jurisdiction for housing.000 new affordable homes throughout England.

up from 50% about 30 years ago. which is helping to create more than 40. about 70% of households are owner-occupied. and solve current shortages over a period of ten years. Media and Sport (DCMS). where only about 50% of homes are owneroccupied. Key aims include: regenerating places suffering from economic and social decline by restoring community identity and civic pride and attracting investors and visitors. violence and theft. promoting value for money by reducing the lifetime costs of buildings and improving their performance.2 Issues and challenges Current housing demand According to the ODPM. They also have responsibility for planning and housing approvals for new dwellings.500 new social rental homes to meet new demand as a result of affordability issues. 1. education and welfare services. In London. and can impose affordable housing criteria on private housing developers such as Greenwich Millennium Village Corporation and Meridian Delta Limited through the planning approvals process. more than 6.700 new affordable homes will be required each. the timeframe set by the Mayor to deal with the current affordable housing crisis. The London Boroughs administer applications and allocations of affordable housing. It oversees the Millennium Communities program that aims to improve sustainability in design and construction. it oversees the 10-year £365 million National Coalfields Programme. is closer to 120. according to income and asset criteria and need. funded by the ODPM and the Department for Culture. although this figure is lower in the capital.Trust and Hyde Housing. Nationally.000 additional dwellings will be needed each year in the UK. currently operating in 14 locations throughout the country. assisting in the reduction of crime and anti-social behaviour by creating places that foster community ownership and eliminate physical opportunities for vandalism. and it facilitates the establishment of Urban Regeneration Companies.500 new homes and 2m square metres of commercial and industrial accommodation. This annual total comprises 11. and other entities.200 homes for applicants currently waiting for permanent affordable housing. which bring together local partners to champion and stimulate new investment and plans for regeneration and redevelopment. 2.000.000 new jobs. taking account of demolitions and conversions. The Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) is an Executive non-departmental public body. Surveys suggest that up to 90% of people would prefer to own their own homes if possible. new house building has fallen steadily from a peak of 350. insufficient to meet new demand let alone replace ageing housing stock. to meet anticipated population growth levels. Across the country. 5. The net figure.000 annually in the late 1960s to less than 140.000 new -9- . 2. and 5. English Partnerships is the national government’s agency charged with sustainable urban renewal and regeneration. the Housing Commission estimates that 25. published projections for household growth suggest that 155.000 new social rental homes to absorb population growth. and promoting more environmentally friendly ways of living.000 now. delivering better public services through a direct impact on the quality of healthcare.000 new social rental homes to replace those lost through right to buy schemes.

4%) in ‘other’ hands.Stansted – Cambridge corridor. mainly as a result of Right to Buy Sales.000 units of public housing have been lost. increasing energy efficiency in new buildings.13 million homes in London.700 market rate homes will be required each year to account for population growth. 2.3 Policies and strategies Office of the Deputy Prime Minister The ODPM oversees the government’s Sustainable Communities strategy. the volume of new home construction has dropped significantly in the last decade. leaving 12. 1. Ashford in Kent and the London .700 publicly owned (26%). implementing new construction techniques. Nar Ouse (King's Lynn).324 by the private sector. re-using water and demonstrating re-cycling of waste. while Housing Associations own 291.4% of the total). 17. Milton Keynes and the South Midlands. and tackle issues of abandonment and decay in the areas that are currently in decline (such as much of the north of England). including Greenwich (London). The majority of public housing is owned by local authorities. approximately 175. So far.intermediate homes for low to moderate income households. In addition. 15. Since 1981. 3.024 units (0.077 new homes were completed in London (13. The government hopes to extrapolate the lessons from the Millennium Communities program to all new construction in the UK.2].766 units.4% of total housing stock). Allerton Bywater (near Leeds). and 580 by local authorities).910 units (9. New housing supply According to GLA’s Housing in London 2003 report [Table 1. including at least £1bn for key worker housing. reducing workplace accidents. A further £5b has been earmarked for more affordable homes. seven neighbourhoods have been selected. while £350m will be allocated to speeding up planning systems. or 16. while in 2001/02. More than £600m has been allocated to the development of these growth areas. despite increased demand for housing in the capital. the number of new homes completed had fallen to 14. by reducing construction waste.794 by Housing Associations. 3.170 (10. It aims to provide more new homes in areas of strong economic and population growth (such as London and the South East). In 1991/92. Current housing stock In April 2002. It also aims to support people in their aspirations for home ownership. New Islington (East Manchester). there were 3.10 - . Oakgrove (Milton Keynes) and Hastings. . More than £5 billion has been allocated to the regeneration of deprived areas. and 52 by local authorities). The plan will concentrate future growth in four regions nominated in a review of new housing demand completed in 2000: the Thames Gateway in London. East Ketley (Telford). The Sustainable Communities strategy also incorporates the Millennium Communities program which aims to showcase advances in construction sustainability.31 million of those in the private sector (74%) and 816. (512.357 by the private sector.140 by Housing Associations. which boasts a new regional approach housing policy and a budget of £22billion over three years (2003/04 to 2005/06).

“Developers tend to buy up land and then sit on it. universities. Deputy PM John Prescott has already incorporated some of the recommendations into a new Housing Bill.According to Sue Beaumont. “Initially the developers that were willing to become involved were small.11 - . where 19 out of the top 20 national builders submitted bids.” Also within the Sustainable Communities strategy. These included increasing the supply of affordable housing. the government intends to overcome some of the difficulties of the current planning system. It was convened in February 2003 with a mandate to investigate the range of programmes available to help people into home ownership. because the planning systems are too slow. a Key Worker Policy Advisor in the Affordable Housing Division at the ODPM. The report’s executive summary. but the experience there “changed ideas about what can be done”. and aimed to determine reasons for a lack of housing supply and weak responsiveness to the housing . a senior policy advisor at the ODPM. Also in 2003. which was submitted to Parliament in December 2003. and aims to forge new relationships with volume house builders and institutional investors. The group’s final report.” Ms Beaumont said. and the others were wary. A joint venture between government agencies English Partnerships and the Housing Corporation is developing a register of disused or underutilised public land in the hope of maximising funding and speeding the delivery of new affordable homes. developers were cautious about the first implementation at Greenwich. while others will be considered in 2004. equity loans and shared ownership. There’s an acceptance now that developers and builders have to be in this game. A Home of My Own. through its inclusion in the government’s new Housing Bill. The Barker Review was commissioned by the Treasury in the 2003 Budget. making use of space above shops and regeneration of brownfield sites. Gillian Verrall. and local authorities have too much control. The Home Ownership Task Force included 20 representatives from national and local government.” she explained. and providing better information and advice to potential applicants. That proposal has since been incorporated into policy. monitor and manage". made 45 recommendations in six main areas. “That had changed by the time we started implementation at Telford. It will consider converting surplus office space into housing. A review of the planning system aims to shift from a “predict and provide” approach to a system of "plan. can be downloaded from the Housing Corporation website. implementing a new and simplified framework for low-cost home ownership programs including discounts. private lending institutions and home builders. said that the organisation was considering expanding the pool of eligible affordable housing developers to enable private developers to compete with Housing Associations and Registered Social Landlords. released in November. A new Planning Bill will introduce a simplified and streamlined planning system and bring greater focus to regional planning through the introduction of Regional Spatial Strategies. submitted to Parliament in December 2003. the UK government initiated two major inquiries into housing.

housing associations and private developers. so the Mayor plans to put a case to the national Government to increase funding for affordable housing under this proposal. while 30% would be intermediate housing for low to moderate income earners. for sale or rent. In her interim report. reported that the supply of new homes in the UK was not keeping pace with demand: only 175. At the same time. The Review will publish its final report with recommendations for government in the second quarter of 2004. they are developed to ensure a high proportion of affordable housing instead of simply ensuring the highest financial return through their sale into private hands. with supplementary planning guidelines due for release to assist in its implementation by the spring of 2004.000 new homes would be needed each year to keep up with population growth.000 dwellings between 200416). the Housing Corporation’s budget for construction of new affordable housing in London was £338 million. About 70% of the new properties would be provided as social rental housing. the Mayor is working with the Housing Corporation. capacity and financing in the house building industry. to find ways to make more effective use of private and public investment. Greater London Authority and the Mayor of London In the Draft London Plan. influenced the way land was made available for development. The interim report also found that the planning issues. The Review identified land supply as the main constraint. and to maximise the number of affordable homes delivered through the planning process.12 - . The Mayor anticipates that about three quarters of the proposed new affordable homes would be provided on mixed tenure sites. which leads to a reluctance to build out large sites quickly. and the interaction of those factors with the planning system and sustainable development objectives. while in the remaining 13 boroughs it has been set at 35%. and suggested that the housebuilding industry contributed to the problem through its response to risk. If and when .000 new dwellings per year (for a total of 130. a member of the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee. London Boroughs. In 2002/03. Barker said.000 houses were built in 2001 – the lowest level since the Second World War – and Barker suggested that another 39. The Mayor also hopes to work with local authorities to ensure that where potential development sites are already publicly owned. the Mayor has proposed minimum delivery levels for affordable housing as a proportion of all new home building across the capital: in 19 London boroughs. The DLP was due to be finalised in December 2003. A London house that cost around four times the annual income of a low income household in 1993 would cost nearly eight times the same income level by 2002. such as the regulatory relationship and control over the use of land. with the remainder on stand alone sites. Adoption of the targets would require a public subsidy of between £500 and £600 million for about 10. housing affordability had suffered. the target has been set at 50%. Kate Barker.shortage in the UK. As a result of the shortage. It examined the roles of competition.

commissioned by supermarket chain Tesco's. It found that more than a third of nurses and teachers working in the capital would be look for a new job in 2004. they don’t know what is required. without grants if possible. which concluded that an extra 25. thereby eliminating some of the uncertainty inherent in the current planning system. “At the moment. frequently constrained in wage bargaining.000 key workers in London.13 - . KLW defines key workers according to their industries.000 per year. They cited housing costs and other housing issues as their main cause for wanting to leave. The second study. housing providers. “The GLA’s priority is to make use of every opportunity to provide as much housing as possible and to ensure that it is as affordable as possible.000 dwellings could be provided. Although the research conceded that the current housing crises among key workers was partly cyclical (resulting from strong economic conditions and booming housing costs). transport and law enforcement sectors. and that 50% of those job-seekers were planning to leave London. He added that the GLA was also trying to convince planning authorities to release land that is currently zoned for employment uses to make it available for housing uses.000 of them earned less than £30. which are geographically specific. generally labour and skills intensive. KLW concluded that there were more than 670. KLW has also developed and leased 175 flats and houses in the intermediate housing market to test new solutions. and its main purpose is to clarify the contribution that affordable housing can make to the recruitment and retention of key workers in London and identify ways of procuring it. there is a degree of uncertainty for planners in terms of affordability: until they go to the London Borough. while other reasons included low pay.000 units could be provided over 15 years6. and estimated that an at least 10. investigated housing and regeneration potential in mixed-use developments on existing retail sites. and that more than 500. The Department of Transport. adoption of the plan would drive the push towards greater housing affordability from the supply side of the equation. education.” he explained. Local Government and the Regions commissioned a study into airspace development potential above single storey uses. local authorities and lobby groups. The Keep London Working (KLW) research board comprises employers. nurses and bus-workers as being representative of most key workers in London. and negotiate a Section 106 Agreement. 1. through its Single Regeneration Budget. it . although the research has concentrated on teachers. inadequate pay differentials and difficult working conditions. developers. To this end. such as food stores and petrol stations. and essential to the maintenance and growth of the capital.” he said. According to Chris Jarvis of the GLA’s Housing and Homelessness Unit. two recent studies have demonstrated the potential for building over existing single-storey developments. This includes workers in health.4 Projects and Programmes Keep London Working research The London Development Agency.it is adopted by the London Boroughs in 2004. has funded research into the need for housing for London workers. each will need to ensure that its development guidelines conform with the London Plan to enable its implementation.

Assistance was in the form of equity loans. . care workers. which was administered according to workplace location. the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister launched the Starter Home Initiative. such as homeless people. reliable and safe public transport. and assisted in the purchase of 238 units by October 2004. for workers in the London Boroughs of Hackney and Haringey. Rather it argues that support for key workers should be in addition to social housing. KLW does not advocate the diversion of housing related resources away from people in acute need.000 applicants. The program was administered by the Housing Commission.6 million in equity loans: £5.7 m granted by the Housing Corporation and £1. equity interest in the property. teachers and police).8m from its own funds. at levels that are at least 25% cheaper than equivalent private sector furnished accommodation. interest free loans and shared ownership arrangements. rent subsidies. before being moved back to general revenue if they are not reused. interest free loans or nomination agreements. and positioned to reflect the key worker’s circumstances within the housing cycle. According to the scheme’s manager. and the type and value of assistance varied according to which housing association administered the scheme. (primarily nurses.000 key workers. The Starter Home Initiative In 2001. • located no more than three-quarters of an hour door to door from a workplace. By October. KLW also argued that employers should contribute towards making housing more affordable for workers. into home ownership in London and the south east of England where high housing prices were seen to be undermining recruitment and retention of staff. and that the problem was unlikely to disappear of its own accord. • self-contained: predominantly studios. Lucy Chitty.14 - . occupational therapists. The Peabody Trust’s SHI scheme was an equity loan program called First Step. prison and probation staff were added to the list of eligible occupations. When the loans are repaid. a £250 million program that aimed to assist 10. The report recommended a number of strategies. and in July 2003. In 2002. transport workers. with five months of the left to run. • available: key workers should wait less than a year for accommodation. the Trust had allocated £7. which allocated funds to housing associations for distribution to eligible key workers. including providing access to discounted land or property. ideally along the route of affordable. the Trust has received enquiries from 2. or as the effects of a lower turnover of staff create savings. and those living in temporary accommodation or overcrowded conditions. not act as a replacement for it. and • well-managed for people at work during working hours. one and two bedroom flats. the funds will be returned to Peabody’s recycled capital grant fund for three years. The research suggested that intermediate housing solutions for key workers should be” • affordable: rent should be related to key workers’ incomes rather than discounted market rates.argued that underlying structural factors were also partly to blame. Kensington and Chelsea and Newham. the scheme was extended to assist social workers. loans to workers. either immediately in the form of land or rental guarantees. fire fighters.

even with First Steps. That quota was quickly fulfilled. their situation. and the Trust applied for more funding for NHS admin staff and junior doctors.000 was imposed for each application. the scheme will not be continued in its present form after the cut-off date in March 2004.000-5. and said that in some cases. He believes that the SHI “gives money to a lucky few [key workers] to go out and bid and push [housing] prices higher” Chitty countered this view. but as property prices increased over the course of the programme. or places that need work to be comfortable. “They are tending to buy flats in the cheaper boroughs. Applicants had to demonstrate that they were unable to buy a home without SHI assistance. including running opening days at hospitals. Chitty said that one downside of the scheme was that it was only open to British or European Union residents. Some people have criticised the Starter Home Initiative as a scheme that addresses the supply side of the housing shortage. from the ODPM.Initially the Peabody targeted 100 health workers. it became clear that the Trust would not meet its target number of applicants if that level continued.” As part of its First Steps programme. not fuel demand”. and some had loans from parents or other relatives of a few thousand pounds. and that they were capable of sustaining home ownership.” she said. inserting notes in payslip notes. She said that lessons included the fact that there were too many parties administering the scheme. so a cap of £50.” she said. and advertising in local and trade publications. According to Gillian Verrall. Initially. and then for teachers. with capital gains. to ensure that people were making commitments they could afford and were comfortable with. “Also. Peabody set its loan limits as a percentage of the purchase price (with a maximum of 35%). the Trust offered to put its applicants in touch with respected and economical solicitors and financial advisors. Some applicants had £2. The equity loan is issued as a proportion of the property price. rather than the demand side. or for kids to get to school.000 in savings. and is repaid to Peabody Trust when the property is sold. “We needed to ensure that we gave them sufficient funding to live near their mother in law. Chitty said. The GLA’s Chris Jarvis said that housing solutions in London “needed to increase supply. and couples or single parents into two bedroom flats. and therefore equity loan amount. Once an applicant came forward. making it difficult for Key Workers to access information and navigate the rules. Chitty said that initially the Trust ran marketing campaigns to alert the target groups to the opportunity of the First Step scheme. she said that in determining the mortgage. However. savings and aspirations were reviewed. in collaboration with the National Health Service’s housing office. In most cases. where those things applied. the Trust was able to assist single people into one bedroom flats.15 - . fire fighters and police. others had no savings at all. the market is so high at the moment. as the ODPM’s criteria expanded. . that most people are just about scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of the properties they can afford. the fact that applicants were recipients of a government grant did not work in their favour. the both the applicant and the Trust needed to be flexible in terms of the preferred unit size and location. but that the NHS employed a significant number of African staff and foreign nurses who could not be assisted.

to floor coverings. were developed for hotel clients such as Jarvis. with columns on each corner and two or three intermediate columns on the longer sides. Ms Verrall said that a further problem of the first SHI scheme was the fact that it addressed issues of recruitment but didn’t tackle staff retention issues as well. .She also spoke of the risk that the Starter Home Initiative would inflate property prices by enabling people to buy homes in the open market.16 - . Forte and Hilton. are built to a tolerance of 3. with a focus on London. which consisted of two rooms on either side of a 1. where it also prefabricates buildings for supermarkets. Ms Verrall added that the ODPM was consulting with public sector employers via other government departments. we might assist overseas nurses on a four year contract with rental housing. although it was likely that the list would include any health worker. “Any future scheme should therefore enable people to trade up and purchase family homes. such as the department of health. with projects in London. and then lifted onto the site by a crane. thereby negating the need to re-enter the rooms themselves. said that the company aimed to complete as much construction as possible in the factory. Key Worker definitions had also been contentious. For example. Modular construction for affordable housing projects The UK’s largest builder of portable and prefabricated buildings has made a successful transition into the affordable housing market in recent years.” he said. Under the floor. and can be stacked up to six floors high.” The steel framed modules. “That way we can control the cost. “leaving only the site connection and cladding to onsite contractors. we need to look at provisions for social rental at an Intermediate level. so that final facades can be fitted onsite according to the client or designer’s specification. hotels and temporary office accommodation. restaurants. The completed units are stacked in the factory yard prior to being transported to their intended location on a trailer. because it was aimed at first home buyers. the modules are clad with aluminium. every flat is fully finished at the factory.2m wide corridor. with the ODPM adding new categories to the initial three professions in response to criticism from excluded groups.” she said. the South East and the London to Cambridge corridor. Internally. from the plumbing and fixtures and fittings. not potential family home buyers. because not all Key Workers want to buy homes. and the department of education and skills. The company’s first room modules. police and police administrators. quality and the program in York. Prior to transport. Ms Verrall said that the ODPM had not yet determined the professions that would be included in any future scheme.5mm. state school teachers. Yorkon’s Commercial Team Manager. in an attempt to obtain their financial contribution to future schemes. Peter Browne. painting and decorating. they feature elastomeric bearing blocks to transfer the load and reduce vibrations between units. Services to each room are connected by Yorkon tradespeople via a service riser panel situated in the central hallway. the Home Office for law enforcement employees. “Also. Yorkon now boasts a dedicated production line for residential projects at its 60 acre factory facility in York. York and Manchester.

” he explained. and it can be decorated on the site. “We are working with partners. The main contractor prepares the site and builds the access decks. who work across the Portakabin and Yorkon business. and we know what schemes they have on the drawing board at the moment. weatherproofs the buildings.3 x 4m and comprises a separate flat. A team of Yorkon employees then joins the modules together. repeat”. connects the services. Mr Browne said that the major benefit of building in the factory was the ability to “repeat.” At its headquarters in York. not just in the factory line but also in the office: when we advertise a vacancy it’s a job to sort through them. are carried out by local subcontractors. “We have direct contacts with both housing associations and architects. the whole process can take less than six months. “It’s very easy to attract people to work here. particularly following the success of Murray Grove in London’s Hackney.” he said. at Raines Dairy. such as tiling and floorcoverings.” The company is currently working on a 102 unit proposal for a Manchester-based housing association. they are stored in the yard prior to delivery. Office based employees work in design. the company has no problems attracting and retaining staff. all with different permutations according to party walls and external walls. “That’s not to say that we can’t do a few different modules in one schedule. mainly in joinery and Mechanical and Engineering positions. According to Mr Browne. including one. “For example. but the difficulty is in translating the right types of enquiries. marketing and administration roles. “There is no movement at all in the fixed frame. particularly tradespeople who appreciate the relative comfort of working in a factory as opposed to working on outdoor building sites. “Occasionally we get a hairline crack between the wall and the ceiling in some modules. “We also train apprentices here: we’ve taken on six in the last year. LANTAC (Local Authority National Type Approval Confederation). we produced 61 flats.” . and certification from the national code coordinator. and non skilled labourers. the company employs nearly 900 people. engineering. including qualified tradespeople such as electricians. and there were 24 flat types. M&E specialists and decorators. Only a few finishing trades.” he said.17 - . Mr Browne is confident that the commissions will continue to roll in. before up to nine completed modules are landed at the site each day. Depending on the size of the job.” he said. two and three bedroom units. repeat. sales.Mr Browne said that it was rare for the units to be damaged in transit.” The buildings comply with local building codes throughout the country via the company’s partnership with the York Building Commission. and don’t tend to do any direct marketing. We actually have more enquiries than we could cope with building. and they know which ones they plan to go modular with. but that only happens in 2% of cases. where each module measures 9. Once the individual components are completed and internally fitted out at the factory. and clads the modules before occupation.

. and construction commenced in 1995. Figure 1 . ecologically friendly whole. public rental tenants tba What makes this project interesting? Greenwich Peninsula is Europe’s largest urban renewal project: it aims to provide a sustainable community for 20.000 residents and 24.18 - . 70% of the Peninsula was occupied by a gasworks.000 workers by 2020. shared ownership for key workers. earning the site the unfortunate title of “the most contaminated site in Europe”. services and landscaping. shops. transport and leisure facilities into a coherent. roads.5 billion total investment 1997 – Infrastructure 2004 or 2005 – Residential and commercial development 2020 Private investment and Housing Association n/a 6 – 20 floor apartment towers and townhouses Owner occupiers. services.The Richard Rogers' Masterplan for the Greenwich Peninsula blends homes. East London English Partnerships Meridian Delta Limited (jv partners Lend Lease and Quintain Estates) Masterplan by Richard Rogers Partnership Individual parcels to be undertaken by subject to public tender £4.Case Studies Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: Greenwich Peninsula Greenwich. providing a 20 minute connection to the city and west end. the government agency responsible for regeneration. before spending £180 million on remediation and the provision of infrastructure. paid British Gas £20 million for 300 acres (121 hectares). For more than 150 years until the early 1990s. As a result. The government announced plans to extend the Jubilee Underground Line from Waterloo to Stratford prior to development plans being finalised. designed by Will Alsop with additions by Foster and Partners. the Peninsula boasts a state-of-the-art Tube and Bus interchange. private rental tenants. In 1997. English Partnerships.

” she said. said that most of that would be offered as social rental housing to housing benefit recipients. a multiplex cinema and several home and lifestyle stores. and other community housing. MDL obtained approval from both Greenwich council and the Mayor of London for its development proposals in 2003. The largest. such as for students. the first land parcels were offered to private developers. In 1998. On the south western part of the site.19 - . and construction is continuing on stage two. roads. Catherine Snow. The delivery of affordable housing within the MDL scheme will exceed GMV’s. services. . it does intend to “match the publicly announced standards of Greenwich Millennium Village” and has committed to achieving BREEAM’s Excellent rating.” she explained. we have defined the overall envelope for each building and resolved worse case scenarios in terms of shadowing. Susie Wilson. to identify the causes of urban decline in England. In 1999. which championed the redevelopment of brownfield sites with an emphasis on design excellences. Rogers produced a report. orientation and cross ventilation. Anna Ladyman. where residents have moved into stage one. and outline planning proposal documents were submitted to the London Borough of Greenwich for approval in 1997.English Partnerships commissioned architect Sir Richard Rogers to prepare the master plan for the Greenwich Peninsula. Rogers’ Greenwich Peninsula master plan aimed to integrate homes. and most contentious. while stages three and four are in the final planning phase. the government convened an Urban Taskforce. a new hotel sits alongside the country’s most environmentally advanced supermarket. and offer practical recommendations to draw people back into cities. social well being and environmental responsibility. according to MDL’s Community Development Manager. social and environmental concerns. From this process. Towards and Urban Renaissance. “There will also be a smaller proportion offered as intermediate housing [as defined by salary and job type in the Draft London Plan] for residents who are economically active. What lessons can be learned from this project? Although MDL has not yet finalised its housing designs. transport and leisure facilities into a coherent. portion of the site was sold in December 2001. a joint venture partnership between Lend Lease Europe and Quintain Estates & Development) acquired 190 acres at the northern end. but are struggling to get onto the housing ladder. towns and urban neighbourhoods. English Partnerships enforced stringent development briefs for the private sector addressing economic. following the decision by the Mayor to impose a minimum of 38% on the project. ecologically friendly whole. Partners Countrywide Properties and Taylor Woodrow acquired the site of the Greenwich Millennium Village (see case study below).” Prior to MDL acquiring its development parcel. chaired by Sir Richard Rogers. when Meridian Delta Limited (MDL. buildings along the river front will reach a maximum of 24 storeys. “So we are currently developing environmental building codes for our third party developers. “Further options will include discounted for sale homes. “So far. set at roughly 70% of market value. according to EP’s Greenwich Peninsula Marketing Manager. shops. MDL’s real estate solutions expert. with six to eight floors the average height for interior structures.” Within the MDL development. while producing a showcase for British urban regeneration. or sheltered or nursing home accommodation.

MDL’s Community Development Manager. thereby improving the skills base for sustainable careers”. such as Greenwich University. . The focus on sustainability is a key aspect of MDL's approach too. most of whom employ less than 10 people. to provide training to help local people get jobs on the Peninsula. two Beacon [adult education] colleges and the London Leisure College. providing local employment. ensuring good quality. we are working with local business owners in Greenwich.” she said. in addition to the initial rehabilitation. “We are working with local colleges. to facilitate their expansion to the Peninsula as development occurs. “So we are working on improvements to accessibility across the borough through new and modified bus routes.” Mr Robertson explained. Millennium celebrations at the Dome set the tone for minimal car access: most visitors arrived by Tube or coach. While the new public transport interchange provides good links to central London and some neighbouring areas.” Ms Wilson said. connections to other parts of the borough are still problematic. we’re addressing signalling and frequency issues on the Jubilee Line extension in conjunction with Transport for London.” The focus on transport is expected to meet both environmental and social objectives. “In addition. chief architect with the project.“These include minimising private car use in favour of public transport. strong design and encouraging innovation in construction. Other environmental concerns have resulted in significant conservation and remediation. with onsite parking reserved for disabled users. EP also worked with the Environment Agency to conserve 2km of riverside parkland. for improved flood defences. that will probably reduce over time from the current level of . throughout the project. it takes 1 ½ hours by bus. and we’re collaborating on the provision of a new bridge across the river by 2016. as well as controlled parking zones and low car parking ratios. where entry will be controlled according to the age of each vehicle and the type of fuel it uses.7 spaces per residence.” Mr Robertson added.20 - . According to Susie Wilson.” said Lawrence Robertson.” Ms Wilson added. In 1997. Combined with a new foot and cycle path. and a further project restored fendering and salt marsh terraces alongside the Thames. these measures have resulted in improved wildlife habitats and increased public accessibility to the river. communications services and utilities were installed in separate troughs at the edges of the new roads to prevent future disturbance and disruption for maintenance and repair. “MDL is challenging the role of the car. and is attempting to manage car use to the point where you won’t need one anymore. “Even though it only takes 20 minutes to get here from Eltham by car. “Also. the company is addressing social and economic factors by working with local businesses and Greenwich council to “ensure employment for local people. we have incorporated low emission zones.

passive ventilation which is operational 90% of the time.21 - . and restore fendering and salt marsh terraces alongside the Thames.Figure 2 – English Partnerships worked with the Environment Agency to conserve 2km of riverside parkland. . Factors that contribute to energy savings include natural lighting via roof windows. and boasts both photovoltaic cells and a wind turbine. which generate power for all of its exterior signage. for improved flood defences. and has already demonstrated energy savings of 50% over a traditional supermarket design. and Sainsburys is applying the lessons learned at new store developments across the country. The store also collects rainwater and recycles grey water for irrigation. and the installation of energy efficient appliances and low level lighting. which opened in 2001.Sainsburys' Greenwich Peninsula store has already demonstrated energy savings of 50% over traditional supermarket design. It shares one car park with the neighbouring 12-screen cinema complex and non-food retailer. the use of earthbanks for insulation. Figure 3 . Sustainability extends to the Peninsula’s new Sainburys supermarket.

with green corridors connecting the river and the rest of the Peninsula.600 One to four bedroom units in multistorey apartments and townhouses. which are grouped around a central village green and man-made lake. and market rate and public housing rental tenants. Each section is set around an updated version of the traditional London square. Stage 2 in association with Proctor and Matthews. and then grouped around a central village green and man-made lake. Countryside Properties and Taylor Woodrow n/a 1999 2007 Private investors and Housing Association 1. .22 - . Stage 1 in association with EPR Architects.Ralph Erksine's Masterplan for the Greenwich Millennium Village situated apartments and townhouses around a series of traditional London squares. Greenwich Millennium Village is the country’s largest green housing development. Owner occupiers. Some onsite prefabrication combined with some traditional construction What makes this project interesting? Figure 4 .Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: Greenwich Millennium Village Greenwich. and has set new benchmarks for environmental building across the country. East London Greenwich Millennium Village Limited Greenwich Millennium Village Limited Masterplan and Design by Erskine & Tovatt. Architect Ralph Erskine conceived the master plan and designed the first stage of housing for the 13 hectare site.

600 dwellings in the form of units and townhouses. and prefabricated cladding and window solutions which are assembled in . using a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system. Figure 6 –Greenwich Millennium Village minimises car use and creates opportunities for community interaction in compact and character-filled streets. with green corridors connecting the river and the rest of the Peninsula. As well as maximising the advantages of solar orientation and cross ventilation. hot water and electricity for all residents. Erskine’s housing designs emphasise energy efficiency and mixed tenure communities: the entire development will provides nearly 1. about 20% will be offered as social housing and a further 12% as market rate rental accommodation. and will generate power onsite for central heating.23 - . The project uses innovative construction techniques. the development aims to reduce energy consumption through the use of low-embodied energy materials and low energy appliances. and then grouped around a central village green and man-made lake.Each of GMV’s four sections is set around an updated version of the traditional London square.Figure 5 . Of these. such as modular bathroom and kitchen pods.

onsite factories prior to installation, resulting in lower costs, better quality finishes, and less construction waste.

Figure 7 - GMV uses innovative construction techniques, such as modular bathroom and kitchen pods, and prefabricated cladding and window solutions, which are assembled in onsite factories prior to installation.

Although the project is not yet half finished: the first residential stage is complete and occupied, while the second stage was nearing completion around the time of my visit, several community facilities, including a primary school and health centre, have already opened. Public transport, including buses and underground trains are also operational, with further services to be added as the population on the peninsula increases. Local jobs are available at retail outlets, a Royal Mail sorting office and the remaining industries on the western side of the peninsula.

Figure 8 - The new Millennium Primary School is already open. After hours, the school is used as a community meeting place for local events.

What lessons can be learned from this project? According to EPR Architect Brendan Phelan, Greenwich Millennium Village “tries to strike a balance” between ecological objectives, such as water and energy saving devices, and commercial realities. At the same time, the project has been built using new construction techniques that reduce both time and cost, result in fewer defects, and virtually eliminate construction waste (which accounts for 40% of the country’s landfill). Mr Phelan said that GMV’s achievements to date, including achieving an Excellent rating using the BREEAM system for eco-homes, had performed an educational role. “Rather than just meeting existing targets, GMV raises the bar in terms of what other developers could do, and it helps to educate the market in that respect,” he said. Since completing the first stage, development partner Taylor Woodrow has committed to meeting the same ecological standards for all its new homes nationwide, thereby exceeding existing code requirements. - 24 -

Mr Phelan also said that in most cases, “socially deprived sectors were living in the poorest quality housing [in England], so they are being doubly deprived”. He suggested that providing ecologically sensitive homes would save those residents money by reducing their utility bills, and therefore contribute to their ability to eventually move out of the social housing sector. Mr Phelan said that while modularised and prefabricated construction was currently more expensive than traditional forms of building (by between 20 and 30%), and needed at least 100 units to be viable, it offered significant advantages in terms of defects and waste minimisation. “For bathrooms and kitchens, for example, there’s a lot of trades concentrated in one area, and it becomes technically difficult to co-ordinate,” he said. “Tiles get chipped, things get stolen, and they are the areas with the most defects, so prefab is great for those rooms.” Mr Phelan also said that the density of the GMV would be an important factor in its success. “In the UK, suburban sprawl means about 26 or 27 houses per hectare, and the knock on effect of that is that you don’t have enough houses for a local shop or to support frequent and reliable public transport,” he said. “Therefore 50 units per hectare is seen as ideal, and GMV should equate to about 170 units per hectare, compared to a maximum density in London of about 800 units per hectare. We think the density at this project will provide an optimum level for the residents without the disadvantages of overcrowding.” Proctor and Matthews architect Stephen Proctor said GMV provided a good example of planning for sustainable communities. “We are interested in creating sustainable neighbourhoods, not through photo voltaics and wind turbines, but by making people responsible for their environment in different ways,” he said. “We want to avoid first home buyer ghettos, or socially deprived ghettos, and build proper communities by design instead. So at GMV, like other mixed income housing projects, we don’t seek to differentiate between private and affordable homes: there shouldn’t be a distinction.” Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: BedZED, the Beddington Zero Energy Development Sutton, Surrey Peabody Trust Peabody Trust and BioRegional (an environmental organisation that aims to bring local sustainability into mainstream business and industry) Bill Dunster Architects not known not known 1999 2000 not known 82 1, 2, 3 & 4 bedroom flats and houses for private and public sale and rent Singles, families and couples eligible for housing association accommodation. not known

- 25 -

What makes this project interesting? BedZED is an environmentally-friendly, energy-efficient mix of housing and work spaces, and was the first in the UK to incorporate up-to-the minute thinking on sustainable development into every aspect of the scheme. The development only uses energy from renewable sources generated onsite, making it the country’s first large-scale ‘carbon neutral’ community. It aims to show that it is possible to meet demand for new housing without destroying the countryside, and to demonstrate that an eco-friendly lifestyle can be easy, affordable and attractive.

Figure 9 – BedZED only uses energy from renewable sources generated onsite, making it the UK’s first large-scale ‘carbon neutral’ community.

Where possible, building materials were selected from natural, renewable or recycled sources, and purchased within a 35-mile radius of the site. The houses were designed to be energy-efficient, and are all south facing so as to most of the heat from the sun, with excellent insulation and triple-glazed windows. Rubbish bins in each home are divided into `four compartments, for paper and card, and glass and tin recycling, as well as green and general waste, while each kitchen features electricity and water meters, so that residents can monitor their own consumption regularly.

Figure 10 - Recycle bins and water and electricity meters in every kitchen make it easy for BedZED's residents to reduce waste to landfill and monitor resource consumption.

A site wide water strategy, including installing water saving appliances and making the most of rain and recycled water, reduces mains consumption by one third, while a green transport plan reduces reliance on cars by cutting the need for travel (through internet shopping links and on-site facilities) and providing alternatives to driving such as a car pool. Residents can hire electric cars for local journeys, and the nearest major shopping area in Sutton provides car recharging points.

- 26 -

Residents can reduce their total energy demand by up to 60%, with a 90% reduction in heat demand, compared to a typical suburban home. What lessons can be learned from this project? According to interviews and research carried out by the project’s designers and managers, BedZED’s residents are very happy with the philosophy behind their homes and the practicalities of the scheme. Architect Bill Dunster claims that the project provides answer to many of the problems facing planners and politicians as they try to meet the demand for housing in the 21st century: • The site is an good example of creative use of brownfield land (the site was formerly a sewage treatment plant); • The mix of living and work space cuts down on commuting and helps boost the local economy; and • The mix of homes: for sale and rent on affordable and market terms, attracts people with high and low incomes, creating a diverse and inclusive community. The development generates and uses heat and energy produced onsite by a combined heat and power unit (CHP), which eliminates the use of fossil fuels and avoids carbon emissions. The CHP is fuelled by waste timber from local tree surgery, which would normally go to landfill. The CHP unit generates electricity and distributes hot water around the site via insulated pipes. These deliver heat to domestic hot water cylinders positioned centrally in every home and office, doubling up as heat emitters in cold spells. Excess electricity is exported to the National Grid, to be retrieved at times of site peak electrical demand to supplement the CHP generation. The buildings have been designed to conserve energy: heat loss is drastically reduced by an ‘overcoat’ of super-insulation to the roofs, walls and floors, so that heat from sunshine, lights, appliances, hot water, and everyday activities such as cooking, keep the houses cosy and warm. (The thick walls of the building prevent overheating in summer and store warmth in the winter to be released slowly during cooler periods such as night and on overcast days.)

Figure 11 - Every home has a private garden, even on the upper floors, as well as a cosy sunroom that is well sealed to prevent heat loss.

The windows are triple-glazed, while their timber frames further reduce heat loss. Wellsealed windows and doors, and the concrete construction stop the heat leaking out. A heat exchanger in the wind-driven ventilation system recovers between 50% and 70% of the warmth from the outgoing stale air. Also, the houses face south and are fitted with photovoltaic solar panels, which generate power for recharging points for electric vehicles. At the time of completion, kitchens were installed with the latest energy-saving appliances, - 27 -

as well as energy efficient kitchen and laundry appliances. low flow taps and low volume baths. and treats the water so that it can be recycled back to the underground water tanks to supplement rainwater for flushing the toilet.while low-energy lighting means that even if a family has a light on in every room. Figure 12 – BedZED features water efficient appliances. connected and clad onsite . such as washing machines.315 million Competition held 1998. BedZED’s wastewater is treated on site by a small-scale sewage treatment system known as the Living Machine. Outside. using lower-volume baths and fitting taps with water-saving flow restrictors. It extracts nutrients for plant food. 50% are rented at full market rates. the development’s car parking spaces were laid with porous block paving over gravel to minimise surface run off. roads and pavements is drained to the front of the development where a dry ditch has been enhanced into a water feature specially designed to attract wild-life. the total use will still only be 120 watts. installing dual flush toilets. Water saving measures include the installation of water-efficient appliances.and two-bedroom apartments 50% of units are rented at subsidised rates to key workers who meet eligibility criteria. construction commenced February 1999 September 1999 Public funding through Housing Association 30 One. Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: Murray Grove Stoke Newington. Factory built modules installed. North London Peabody Trust Peabody Trust Cartwright Pickard Architects Yorkon £2.28 - . and collecting rainwater and recycled water which is stored in large tanks in the foundations for reuse. and runoff from sky gardens.

multi-storey. the fact that he had worked in Sweden for two years. which consists of 30 one. Figure 14 . “The architecture profession has lost sight of who they are designing for. What makes this project interesting? Yorkon’s first residential project was Murray Grove.and twobedroom apartments. According to James Cartwright. Half of the units are rented at subsidised rates to key workers. Peabody held a design competition for the project. for a corner site in Stoke Newington. with a leafy south facing internal courtyard. and will last a long time and age well.Murray Grove is situated on a corner site. such as teachers and nurses. The firm’s unique approach to design and construction was also a contributing factor.” The firm’s design for Murray Grove took advantage of the corner site by placing two wings along Murray Grove and Shepherdess Walk. or arriving at buildings that will be great places to live and work for 100 years. helped his six month old architecture firm to win the competition in 1998. while the other half are rented at full market rates. where he became familiar with flat packed timber construction methods. North London. affordable housing project.Figure 13 . and specified offsite forms of construction. “They are too focussed on design for design’s sake. off a central tower that contains a secure entry lobby at ground level. and lift and stair access to the upper floors. and are not solving problems. .29 - . who have stable incomes but are often unable to meet the rising costs of private rents in London.” he asserted. an affordable housing development commissioned by the Peabody Trust. “We don’t see construction technology as an end in itself: the end result of our work is a beautiful and functional building that works. architect and partner at Cartwright Pickard Architects.Murray Grove was the UK's first modular. Mr Cartwright said.

overlook a central south-facing courtyard. while private balconies overlook the internal courtyard. while bedrooms and living spaces overlook the quieter courtyard. with final completion and handover taking place in September 1999. and the final 39 modules were erected in mid-April. Apartments are accessed via 1. The roof elements and circular entrance tower that contains the lift and stairwell were also delivered as modular elements. and there are no internal corridors.15m x 3m.5 metre wide external corridors positioned on the street elevation. Pile foundations were installed in February 1999. large enough to accommodate a table and four chairs. while the street elevations feature clip-on terracotta panels. with the modular margins clearly expressed.The front door opens onto the kitchen and bathroom. . while the two-bedroom units comprise three modules. the front door gives immediate access to the bathroom and kitchen. Figure 16 . Inside each unit. All bedrooms and living rooms have interior dimensions of 5. followed by the access deck and roof. the first 35 apartment modules were landed in three days at the end of March. Figure 15 – The street frontage features access balconies.315 million and took just 32 weeks to complete. eliminating the need for corridors.2m modules. The balconies and access ways were assembled onsite from precast concrete and steel-rod cross bracing.30 - . The entire project cost £2. The courtyard elevation was dry clad with red cedar. The lift and stair tower erection was next. which are positioned on the street side to provide a buffer from external noise.The one-bedroom apartments consist of two 8m x 3. while individual balconies.

” Cartwright said. In 2001.and three-bedroom apartments. All photos of Murray Grove courtesy of Cartwright Pickard Architects and Yorkon. starting this year “We believe that our primary market for the timber frame product will be low rise family type dwellings and apartments up to five or six stories. two. The project has since won ten design awards. who commissioned the Sixth Avenue affordable housing scheme. and was completed in April 2002.31 - . including a 2000 Housing Design Award. with a developer based in Chicago. from clients York Housing and the City of York. Since working with Yorkon on modular schemes. The £2m project featured 24 one-. The firm used a similar plan to Murray Grove. landscaped courtyard.The entire project took just 32 weeks from commencement to completion. with six floors of apartments placed around a private. Figure 18 . featuring more than 200 units. Cartwright Pickard Architects won a second modular Yorkon project. The firm is now working on a third modular affordable housing project.The Sixth Avenue project in York features terracotta cladding on the ground floor and western red cedar above (left). with modules landed onsite in just than ten days. Cartwright Pickard Architects developed a modular system for housing construction in the USA. The stair and lift tower gives way to access balconies that overlook the courtyard (right). constructed from 48 modules. alongside projects such as the London Eye and Canary Wharf Station. also for Peabody Trust.Figure 17 . and was short listed for the Royal Institute of British Architecture (RIBA) Stirling Prize for architecture. in the same year. Murray Grove. What lessons can be learned from this project? Architect James Cartwright said that lessons learnt and improved efficiencies meant that the Sixth Avenue project cost 20% less in real terms than its predecessor. and has also designed a flat packed timber housing system for distribution in the UK. “We’ll be using the .

and then change it out in a day. “The supply is still limited. “Then it can be clad according to the client’s choice. “The government has encouraged them to employ good architects. such as hospitals and hotels. “The vast majority of big name architecture firms didn’t want to touch affordable housing before.” he said.32 - . That’s part of the reason we’ve established our new product: we don’t want to compete with steel frame companies. predictability in terms of program and cost. but Mr Cartwright said that the company aimed to the housing equivalent of “Volkswagen Golfs.” The main advantages. “Essentially. “Once you own one of these homes and you want to renovate the bathroom or kitchen. and we expect that figure will double in two the three years.000 homes a year.” Mr Cartwright asserted that Murray Grove had made affordable housing “sexy”.” he added. so volume house builders could buy our kits and clad them in Georgian brick if they want to. so other firms have tended to produce lots of big office buildings. and it’s not glamorous work. and the product will be watertight just two days after starting construction. “We know that our timber framing partner is currently building 2. and we’ll be able to undercut traditional forms of construction on cost. with no certain completion date. “Also. though. than housing.” . and there’s an acknowledgement now that the quality of affordable housing is very important. were quality control at the site. instead of living through renovations for weeks on end. and the fact that buildings should be almost defect free. but they are turning to affordable architecture now that the office market is declining. and then again in three years after that.” he continued. because the fees are not high. you have to really deal with clients and their needs. you can select your new design from the catalogue. order it from the factory. improving quality and speed of installation.” he said.latest Swedish technologies. like that done by Yorkon. was not as suited to housing as other building types. “That means that [those builders] are more likely to go for building types with higher return. Mr Cartwright said.” Mr Cartwright said that complete offsite manufacture. and their manufacturing capacity is not what it could be. not Ladas”. Kits will be erected onsite by semi-skilled labourers. the whole house is a kit of parts: customers will be able to design a customised house designed by an architect.” “It helps that the Housing Association is becoming more enlightened.” Mr Cartwright said another benefit of the new system was that bathrooms and kitchens would be manufactured in pods offsite.” he claimed.

North East London Peabody Trust Peabody Trust Allford. Architect Simon Allford said that the process of designing modular units helped to maximise internal space efficiencies. and constructed with modules manufactured by Yorkon. connected and clad onsite Figure 19 . Monaghan and Morris Yorkon £4.” . and to start thinking in terms of squared feet of useable space.33 - .Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: Raines Dairy Hackney. partly because circulation space is virtually eliminated. in terms of the shape. Hall. but they can’t add a balcony later.and three-bedroom apartments (x 53) for subsidised rent and shared ownership and Live/Work units (x 8) for market sale Subsidised units for residents with incomes of up to £25. layout and access. “I think the key to good design is to stop measuring homes in terms of squared feet. Factory built modules installed.9 million 2001 2002 Public funding through Housing Association 61 Two. What makes this project interesting? The success of Murray Grove prompted another affordable housing development in London in 2001. “We included balconies at Raines Dairy.000 and market rate purchasers. “You can improve the efficiency of units. and used lower quality finishes.” he said. Raines Dairy was also commissioned by the Peabody Trust.Raines Dairy is the first Yorkon modular project to offer homes for sale. because residents can upgrade the finishes down the track.

” AAHM is now working on a project called MoMo. according to Mr Allford. While the lead times can be longer for prefabrication.Figure 20 . a busy arterial road and existing housing. Figure 21 .34 - .8m. The main façade was clad with shiplap profiled zinc panels. short for Mobile Modular. The triangular site was bordered by a railway line cutting.The modules at Raines Dairy incorporate balconies for each apartment (left) and it features an impressive. but you do improve worksite conditions. a clearway arterial road and existing housing. a saving of 40% compared to traditional onsite building. with five floors of two-bedroom apartments above. “You still need the same trades in the factory as you would need for construction from scratch onsite. which uses office technologies and is designed to be moved to different sites every five years or so as land uses change. with an increased width to 3.6 to 11. while modular construction offers one solution to London’s housing affordability problems and tight sights. with zinc cover strips to mask the modular joints. which helped to reduce installation and transport costs. bordered by a railway cutting. secure lobby.The triangular site's location. so its easier to encourage people to work in a trade.6 metres. made it a prime candidate for offsite construction. the process is better for the surrounding areas than traditional construction. “Prefab produces boxes. it should not be seen as the only option. and painted cladding in the balcony recesses to define each unit. not flats.” he said. making it an ideal candidate for prefabricated construction. The project used 127 modules ranging in length from 9. The live/work units are located on the ground floor of the T-shaped plan. and the three-bedroom units in a separate wing at the rear. The entire project was completed in just 50 weeks. However. The other elevations were finished in larch timber cladding. What lessons can be learned from this project? .

” he said. The firm now has about 16 staff. and on top of that. There’s “too many glib comments about on time.” he said. with a view to developing sites across the capital. and according to architect Leonard Milford. Housing for key workers would be one of the biggest challenges in the future in London. and on budget. such as internal space planning efficiencies and suitability for difficult infill sites. the pair decided to streamline the construction process to produce a modular product.000 per unit prototype designed in 2002 n/a Seeking public financing solutions to ensure eligibility criteria are in place and affordability is maintained over time Multiples of 18 One bedroom units Key workers who meet eligibility criteria Modularised steel framed construction What makes this project interesting? Architects Stuart Piercy and Richard Conner came up with the Microflat prototype as a solution to their own affordable housing problem in London – they were unable to find suitable housing in inner London that they and their friends could afford to buy.Architect Simon Allford said that the use of prefabricated modules called into question fundamental architectural issues about land and place. “You really need subsidised land to make it viable. If there was a clear and straightforward system for calculating land tax. which they established in 1999. before securing a construction and development partner. The Microflat is a compact but space-efficient flat that they hoped to develop on a small but central site. Mr Allford said. that would make development easier: at the moment planning requirements differ from site to site. is primarily interested in exploring housing solutions to address sustainability and affordability issues. and work to renew existing land in the inner city.35 - .” he said. and the greatest uncertainty is not the build cost but the development cost.” Project: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: Microflat prototype not yet secured not yet secured Piercy Conner Architects The Microflat Company for sale at less than £100. the planners want the developer to deliver £1 m in landscape improvements. Mr Allford also argued that the Mayor of London’s 50% affordable housing target for new construction was “killing off schemes”. ”We are currently looking at a [mixed tenure] scheme with 60 private and 25 affordable units. arguing that modular housing offered other benefits that were not so easily quantified. He also added that there was too much emphasis on construction time and cost when assessing the practicality of modular construction. The architects are partners at Piercy Conner. “We need to rethink land use. and that architects and clients needed to be attentive to avoid producing housing solutions that were not site specific. When they realised the potential of the design to address London’s shortage of housing for key workers and young professionals. wondering which agency or level of government would accept responsibility for providing it. while .

The Microflat measures just 32. kitchen and bathroom pod.8 metres high to provide an enhanced feeling of space and maximise natural light from floor to ceiling windows. to foster interaction and provide outdoor leisure space. The one bedroom Microflat measures just 32. Prospective developments might include up to 40 units. and developed several new housing types. sited for solar orientation and passive ventilation. Taking inspiration from yacht design.36 - . a pod containing a shower and toilet. barbecues and tennis courts. the architects made use of every available inch of space. and a living area with a small balcony. based on Victorian townhouses and the Microflat. Ceilings are 2. The proposed developments would also include facilities for residents such as gardens. incorporating a small double bedroom.taking into account changing demographics and market forces. and the interiors are attractively fitted out with laminated floors. and a kitchen / living area that provides access to a small balcony. about two-thirds of the size of an average onebedroom flat in London. . including the Flexible Living Opportunities (FLO) project. While the latter began life as a private project.5m2. the walls are heavily insulated to keep noise at bay. but includes a small double bedroom. The firm has entered many housing competitions. the firm has worked tirelessly to promote its ability to deal with a shortage of affordable housing for key workers in London. Figure 22 . storage space. architectural ironmongery and kitchen fittings from market leaders such as Neff.5m2.

To demonstrate the feasibility of the Microflat. Europe. Participant Helene Cacace said that she aspired to own her own home. well short of London’s average price of £150. to ensure that the units would be sold to owner occupiers who were otherwise unable to purchase a home on the open market in London. for privacy and optimum solar orientation. The units are expected to sell for less than £100.000. Two single 24 year old professionals. but would require changes to planning consents to increase densities before proceeding.Microflats could be stacked on top of each other. with newspaper. However. spent a week each living in the unit. USA and Asia. “but on my present salary there's no way I'd be able to buy anything in central London. magazine and television coverage.000 for a one-bedroom . The success of the installation gave the architects the impetus to establish The Microflat Company with a builder. on small central sites. I could get a mortgage for something like this. appearing through the UK.37 - . a department store on London’s Oxford Street. They hope to develop sites above council-owned car parks and new supermarkets. and to start looking for suitable sites.Figure 23 . a prototype was installed in a store window at Selfridges.500-strong waiting list of key workers eager to own a Microflat in central London. including a documentary.A Microflat was installed in the window at Selfridges department store to demonstrate its viability to prospective developers and residents The demonstration generated mountains of publicity. It also generated plenty of enquiries from potential residents. Piercy Conner also hopes to secure government support for the Microflat project. in full view of passers by. with community facilities on the roof. in January 2002. and there is now a 2. a male bank worker and a female market researcher. I think it would be very popular: there's definitely a market for it.” Figure 24 .

With assistance from the government and housing associations. Governments at all levels can assist in delivering these types of solutions: local governments can facilitate the development of projects of this density within their jurisdiction. the units could be reused or recycled. young people in the city centre is so severe. . “That may be difficult because they have a ready market for expensive apartments in central London. The fact that the prototype has not yet been implemented in London. with appreciation tied to inflation and new buyers also required to meet eligibility criteria. thereby reducing the cost of the embodied energy. Piercy is cautiously optimistic. economically viable (by partnering with government to establish eligibility criteria and long-term affordability objectives) and space efficient (both inside through careful architectural planning. and aims to use ecologically friendly materials in its construction. and both state and local governments can provide access to public sites where developments of this type can take place. the project is stuck on the drawing board. The modular system saves on design and construction costs by saving money through repetition. the affordability of Microflats could be preserved for future buyers. state governments can establish and enforce eligibility criteria so that ownership is restricted to residents who are otherwise priced out of the home ownership market. Building these would mean reduced profit margins. but acknowledges the problems. who are often hardest hit when housing affordability is compromised in large cities.” he said. “The challenge is to find appropriate sites close to the city and convince developers to go with the idea. where the demand for housing for working. although the firm continues to enter housing competitions in the hope of winning a commission for the product. and outside via installation in ‘air-right’ spaces above ground floor commercial developments or above public carparks. speaks to the requirement for government co-operation and backing for solutions such as the Microflat.apartment. Also. Despite much negotiating with both councils and developers.” What lessons can be learned from this project? It is possible to combine good design and efficient construction to arrive at affordable housing solutions for first home buyers.38 - . energy and water conservation and landscaping and biodiversity considerations). Piercy Conner’s Microflat solution is environmentally sensitive (taking in solar orientation.

with net growth of about 10.2 million): this is expected to grow by another people by 150. half of that resulting from international migration. monitors quality and cost control attached to subsidy systems. municipalities also determine both the housing type and the form of tenure. Another factor contributing to housing demand is a steady decrease in average household size: from 3. the Housing Fund of Finland (ARA). which play a significant role in housing policy and development: they oversee land use planning for both social and market housing. particularly the capital.2. Its revenue is derived from cash from interest payments and amortisation of existing state housing loans. they own about 60% of all social housing.2 Issues and challenges Current housing demand Finland has a population of about 5. In the case of social housing. and housing. and collectively.2 million people. Finland 2.000 homeless people. Current housing stock Finnish society is characterised by equal opportunity for all.3 million households. In 1998. housing subsidy systems and budget planning. as well as external sources such as securitisation or borrowing. with more than half located in greater Helsinki. A range of housing loans. interest subsidies and grants are financed from an off-budget fund. This shift has contributed to a housing shortage in some metropolitan areas. that originated in the early 1990s.000 people each year. while some provinces will lose up to one quarter of their existing population in the same timeframe. 2. International migration is also contributing to demand for housing in the capital: even though foreign born residents account for only 2% of the national population. Currently the population of Helsinki is 550. and housing demand is strongest in major cities.34 in 1960 to 2. and provide new infrastructure where necessary. offset by a housing surplus in some rural parts. grants state housing loans. and is responsible for housing legislature. such as the City of Helsinki. education and health policies have all been formulated to reflect this.39 - . approves interest subsidised commercial loans. they are largely concentrated in Helsinki. There are more than 400 independent and autonomous muncipalities. and allocates grants for regeneration and renewal of existing housing.000 by 2030.1 Key players in affordable housing The Finnish Government’s Ministry for the Environment sets the country’s housing policies and strategies. ARA also designates and monitors the nonprofit organisations that construct and manage social housing throughout the country (15% of total housing stock nationally). While the majority of Finns are . The Ministry’s operative arm. The country has approximately 2. largely as a result of migration from the country areas. the State Housing Fund.000 (greater area population is 1. Finland had approximately 10. where they account for about 5% of the total.25 in 1998.

and Teuvo Ijas. “Between 1990 and 2000. 1.400 units). private money is cheaper than ARA Funding. The majority of new units were in apartment developments (46%).” Mr Ijas said that this situation was the main cause of the government failing to reach its target of 10. 28. with a shortfall of 1. During the late 1980s and early 1990s. the role of social housing has been crucial in improving housing standards generally.000 new dwellings were built in Finland: 69% were market financed (19. accounting for 17% of all dwellings. that have also been met in the public sector.” Mr Ijas said. social rental housing plays a significant role. government funded housing has again dominated construction. the number of new single family homes has dropped to less than 50% of total production.” Mr Tähtinen said. the housing sector was dominated by a boom in the private sector. “We actually have funds in State treasury that are not being used at the moment. with the remainder falling into free market rental (15%) and ‘other’ categories (4%). so borrowers are less inclined to use ARA funding and those that have are paying back our loans quickly.400 were social rented for elderly people or students. and from the outside you can’t tell whether housing is social or private. 1. “At the moment.” Mr Ijas said. “It is easier to service a loan now than it was in [the housing boom of] the early 1990s.000) with a small number of market rate rental units (1. According to Timo Tähtinen. up from an average of 8 years in the 1980s) have both contributed to a shift towards home ownership in Finland. while the cost of mortgages has decreased as a proportion of income. As most of the government subsidised dwellings are flats. low interest rates (generally set at less than 3%) and extended mortgage terms (now 20 years. The state subsidised construction of 8.400 dwellings.owner occupiers (64% in 2001). Senior Advisor.” Developers are also taking advantage of low interest rates. through the establishment of quality and space standards for social housing. According to Mr Tuevo Ijas.000 new social units per year in 2002. when single family houses dominated new construction (66% of all new homes).500 were right of occupancy units and 1.200 were owner occupied. despite the ever increasing need for more social housing. with more than 70% of new dwellings funded by government loans or interest subsidies. the cost of renting has actually increased as a proportion of income.400).600 dwellings in 2002: 4. the Director-General of ARA. . Director-General of the Housing Fund of Finland. “We have no slums in Finland.600 were social rental units. and the majority of those were owner occupied dwellings (18. Following a downturn in the private sector that began in the early 1990s.40 - . Housing Finance at the Ministry for the Environment. New housing supply In 2002. and about 50% of these homes were built with government subsidies. More than half of Finland’s total housing stock was built between 1970 and 1990. while detached houses made up 39% of the total and terraced houses 15%. our social housing is of the same standard as private housing.

In the past 50 years. leading to a fall in the supply of social housing. as developers and owners of new social housing. A government imposed cap on price increases of 10% per year is designed to ensure costeffectiveness in the delivery of new social housing. are ongoing. During the construction stage. Planning and delivering integrated residential areas. are taken out by Finnish municipal governments. ARA maintains responsibility for monitoring and approving the cost and quality of all projects built with its financing schemes.41 - .3 Policies and Strategies Social housing The state provides housing subsidies of €1. The majority of ARAVA loans. for example by increasing the profit levels from 8% or shortening the term of affordability. and 17% linked to production in the form of government loans (ARAVA loans). and the construction contractor is selected following a public bidding process. In the development phase. resulting in the production of: • 400. The remaining 40% of loans are allocated to designated borrowers.6 billion (1. such as nonprofit social housing developers (whose profit margins are currently set by the state at a maximum level of 8%) and special purpose associations (which provide housing for targeted groups. approximately 60%.2% of GNP): 83% linked to housing demand. • Ensuring cost effectiveness in the construction of new housing. as it is at the moment. Municipalities hold responsibility for monitoring compliance with state government construction codes.A negative impact of the shift towards home ownership has been the increase in housing costs in both owner occupier and rental markets. Therefore. and • 225. the home ownership development market is more profitable than social development. state subsidised loans have been used to finance 42% of all new dwelling construction.000 owner occupied dwellings • 23. Housing costs in Helsinki are now double the national average on a per square metre basis. 2. political debate revolving around encouraging more developers into the sector.All developers are required to maintain affordability of ARAVA funded housing for 45 years.000 right of occupancy dwellings. such as the elderly and students). Many non-profit developers are part of larger organisations that also operate in the public sector. Key objectives of the country’s social housing policy include: • Maintaining the role of housing as a core element in ensuring the welfare of all. or companies owned by them. with social stability and no slums. in the form of housing allowances and tax-relief for interest on housing loans. and when the housing market is buoyant.000 dwelling renovations. but it may also be responsible for reluctance among developers and builders to incorporate new environmental measures in . • Maintaining housing affordability. interest-subsidy loans and renovation grants. Design selection is based on an architectural competition.000 new rental dwellings • 430. and • Ensuring comparable architectural quality for social and market rate housing. and for authorisation of any variation to the approved design or plan.

the Ministry of the Environment sets a maximum figure for rent payable according to location and household size. established in the early 1990s and still operational. The General Housing Allowance is available to all types of households (families with children. Housing Allowance Finland’s most important housing support system is the Housing Allowance. Above certain income thresholds. although they are not able to ‘staircase’ out of the program into full home ownership. The household then pays rent to the developer. although the income limits are higher than those that apply to social rental dwellings. 165. fall outside the threshold. and meets 80% of that total. couples and communities) and for all types of tenure (rental. Shared ownership schemes The Ministry of the Environment has introduced two main shared ownership schemes to assist traditional social rental clients into partial home ownership. Households can pay a share of the accepted building cost (generally 20%) while the developer takes out an interest subsidised commercial loan for the remaining 80% of the cost. which is redeemable at any time adjusted by the construction cost index. Of the total number of recipients. Households are selected on the basis of social appropriateness and financial need. applicants are placed in a queue before being allocated a place in the program. the scheme has been used for about 1% of all new housing construction. recipients can also pay top up amount should the rent exceed the limits set by the program. and was perceived to have competitive problems in the market. at a total cost of €890 million. owner-occupied and right of occupancy).000 recipients in 2001. and after five years but before 12 years.000 new dwellings. single persons. they must demonstrate that they are not capable of purchasing a dwelling to meet their households’ needs. They then pay a monthly charge. while 36% of recipients were low income employees. based on the cost of housing. A second scheme of state subsidised shared ownership was introduced in 2001. the householder can opt to purchase the dwelling from the developer. About 95% of recipients were accommodated in rental housing. Upon satisfying the criteria for Right to Occupancy housing. with the remaining 5% in shared ownership schemes. Residents buy into the scheme by paying a specified percentage of the home value (currently set at 15%).000 received housing supplement for students. with recipients liable for 20%. Under the Housing Allowance program. Mr Tahtinen said that the scheme was seen as a step towards homeownership.social housing. the cost of new technologies required for energy production and water management. However. similar to rent. 158.000 received pensioners’ housing allowance and 151. 55% of the total in ARAVA social housing. 64% of recipients of General Housing Allowance were unemployed. resulting in the provision of about 30.42 - . he admitted that while the scheme had been well received in Helsinki. The first was the Right of Occupancy scheme. In 2001. Since its introduction. Mr . such as photo voltaics and grey-water recycling systems. but the tenure was more secure than traditional rental accommodation. In many cases.500 received general housing allowance. it had not been widely used in other parts of the country. which was paid to about 475. for the life of their tenure. While applicants do not have to satisfy income criteria. and offered benefits to householders because the investment was not as great as for a full mortgage.

Borrowers must put forward 15% of the purchase price as a deposit. thereby creating a disastrous situation not only for young owner occupiers but also for their family members who had provided personal guarantees. with less than 100 projects completed so far. a recession resulted in spiralling housing costs.250).. through the Ministry of the Environment. 134. and to speed up the introduction of technical innovations across the construction sector. Building authorities and the property and construction sectors are collaborating towards goals of sustainable development. and is available to households or individuals for the purchase of a primary residence. He suggested that its popularity as a stepping stone to home ownership may increase when interest rates start to rise and outright home ownership options are not as attractive as they are currently. with capital gains based on the purchase and sale price of the property. prospective owner occupiers were required to procure deposits of up to 4. developed a strategy to tackle these two issues: it aimed to assist young buyers back into home ownership and to stimulate the construction of new dwellings in a soft market. In the eight years since its inception. and the SMG is available for 20% of the loan amount (to a maximum of €25.43 - . At the end of October 2003. In the early 1990s.5 of the loan. State Mortgage Guarantee In the 1970s and 1980s.000 new guarantees taken up each month (about 20% of all new housing loans). Some social housing projects have received funding for maintenance or repairs to improve energy efficiency . and new commencements had largely stalled. Maintenance and repairs Since the early 1990s. The State Mortgage Guarantee was established in 1996. it had not been well received. and is therefore modern in comparison with many other countries. the cost of the SMG was 1. the there have only been about 20 defaults.5% in light of the upturn in the housing market.or 50% in order to secure a loan to buy a home. the Housing Fund of Finland has expanded its remit to grant loans and funds for the renovation of existing public and private dwellings. As well as forcing many owner occupiers to sell their homes. When it was first introduced. which has since been increased to 2. The state has €84 billion invested in the scheme. Experimental building is taking place to research and develop appropriate solutions for the Finnish environment. When the property is sold. and many younger buyers relied on personal guarantee arrangements with family members to enable them to become owner occupiers. the SMG reverts to the state. the same amount is now spent on renovation and modernisation of existing residential buildings as is spent on construction of new dwellings across the public and private sectors. in line with new environmental. but added that in the current housing market.Tahtinen said that the scheme aimed to balance the requirements of both homeowners and developers. the recession impacted on the housing construction market. where the state has been called upon to pay the guarantee to the lending institution. The government. Although 85% of Finland’s housing stock has been constructed since 1950. In the social housing sector. funding for repairs and maintenance has been allocated to assist in the country’s compliance with its Kyoto Protocol obligations.472 State Mortgage Guarantees had been issued. with about 3. health and changing population objectives.

“We face new challenges in terms of managing our existing housing stock. and was responsible for 70% of all new multi-storey housing.” Mr Ijas explained. and providing more advice and action on energy issues. and to provide recommendations for the future. while being flexible and easy to cooperate with. care visits. construction industry representatives and state administrators. He suggested that ARA could become an expert on meeting the housing needs of the elderly. providing better solutions for homelessness. the results of the review were positive.and indoor air quality. Changing household requirements The Housing Fund is also working to provide adequate housing for changing household demographics. and it was suggested that the government should use that tool more effectively.” Mr Ijas said. The Housing Fund is also working to assist single tenants or couples who are living in large flats to find suitable smaller accommodation. developers. but we could work with the municipalities. thereby freeing up larger properties for families in housing need. eliminating mould and damp problems. an independent evaluation of the Housing Fund of Finland was carried out. . to help them in the construction of schools and day-care centres for example. with respondents suggesting that ARA was a professional organisation that maintained good relationships with outside parties. “At the moment ARA is just financing and constructing housing. The Housing Fund has also allocated funds for improvements to housing for elderly people. healthcare and technical equipment. including through the provision of new equipment and co-ordinating the provision of food services. with the goal of enabling them to age in their homes for as long as possible. and maintaining people and communities to prevent the emergence of slums. Mr Ijas said. shopping. to ascertain the views of key stakeholders such as municipalities. and installing low emission finishing materials. Projects include installing elevators into walk-up apartment blocks in both public and private buildings (ARA provides grants for 50% and 40% of the cost respectively with tenants paying the rest). through greater collaboration with Finland’s autonomous municipalities. which have significant landholdings. Review of ARA In 2002. Mr Ijas said that the Housing Fund was conscious of the need for smaller rental dwellings. “The Housing Fund of Finland was found to be a good tool in housing policy. It’s important therefore to admit that new production of housing does not play the key role that it used to” As a result of the review. Overall. Works include upgrading central heating systems to reduce energy consumption. and installing technical equipment such as handrails and mobility aids.44 - . Constructive feedback suggested that ARA needed more authority to affect change in housing policy and activity more readily. replacing leaking windows to improve building envelopes. Mr Ijas hopes to develop the agency’s expertise in other areas outside its remit of developing and financing loans. He also suggested that ARA could play a more proactive role in land planning and use.

The area had been used as farmland since the city was founded in 1550. one third of which will be built on. with support from the Finnish Ministry of the Environment and the Finnish Association of Architects.000 students. and a nature conservation area in the form of low lying wetlands. it is expected that the Viikki Ecological Neighbourhood and Science Park will accommodate 6. Figure 25 . It is bordered by the Vantaanjoki River. private tenants.132 hectares. and the Ring Road 1 motorway. with the remaining two thirds set aside for conservation and parkland.45 - . Since 1931. two thirds of which will be set aside as fields and a nature conservation area.000 workers and 6. the land has been managed by the University as a teaching and research facility. concrete and steel build on site techniques with some part prefabrication. multistorey timber framed houses What makes this project interesting? By 2010. subsidised partownership (right of occupancy) and public rental Construction method/s: Traditional masonry. The neighbourhood project was initiated in 1994 by the City of Helsinki.000 people: One to four bedrooms in single family houses. Finland City of Helsinki Planning Department various City of Helsinki Planning Department and others various n/a 1994 2010 (estimated) Private investors and ARAVA loans n/a / 11.2.Viikki is located on a former greenfield site. . with a smaller rocky forest area. firstly as part of the royal estate before being let to private tenants. the northern reaches of Helsinki Harbour. Prior to the development.4 Projects Case Study Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units / residents: Housing type/s: Viikki Ecological Neighbourhood Helsinki. Viikki is located just 8km from the centre of Helsinki on a former greenfield site incorporating 1.000 residents. attached houses. apartments Potential occupants: Private owner-occupiers. the landscape consisted mostly of fields. and provide homes for 11.

as well as the University’s experimental farm. and will eventually incorporate a hotel.The main objective of the neighbourhood was to combine ecological. specialty shops and other services. and the Latokartano and Viikinmaki residential neighbourhoods. The town square is already home to the Viikki public library. passive cooling (above right) and solar collectors. private office accommodation and business incubators.Viikki University Science Park . The neighbourhood is well served by public transport: frequent bus services connect it to the city centre and cross city bus routes connect it to other suburbs. which is already occupied. In future. Figure 26 – Viikki’s housing types include apartments. and the City’s master plan aimed to deliver an environmentally conscious town plan and housing structure. By road. including the University Science Park. a tram service will be extended to the main residential area. social and economic principles in the practice of actual building. Figure 27 . all of which incorporate ecological factors such as wintergardens (above left and below). The Science Park focuses on biological sciences and biotechnology. the site is connected via two major arterial roads to the city. and incorporates the University of Helsinki’s campus areas. attached houses and single family dwellings.46 - . and is just 20 minutes from Helsinki’s Vantaa International Airport. where construction is continuing. The site is divided into several key areas. It also features a town square shopping centre that will include a department store and supermarket.

What lessons can be learned from this project? All residential buildings in the Neighbourhood are designed for optimum environmental performance. . Construction at Viikki’s largest residential area. reducing the building’s heating load. lecture and conference facilities. use one third less water and produce one third less waste than conventional residential areas in Helsinki. with 700 new residents moving in each year.000 people. natural resources. They must demonstrate ecological viability against five main criteria: pollution. heat recovery from ventilation. facilities for senior citizens and further shops. Assessments based on analysis of design schemes indicate that the neighbourhood will consume nearly 50% less heating energy.Viikki's new school caters for grades 1 – 12. and it already offers community facilities such as a newly opened school for grades 1 to 12. including a full line supermarket. a childcare centre. in addition to meeting the basic requirements for obtaining a building permit under the Finnish building codes.Timber multistorey houses at Viikki Within the Science Park. The area will eventually house 10. to be added in future. and private offices and admin areas. Figure 30 .Viikki's new childcare centre is already open. biodiversity. commenced in 1998 and will be completed by about 2010. In the winter. The building features double skin facades. The units were among the first timber framed multistorey dwellings constructed in Finland.Some of the Neighbourhood’s first homes were built in this area in 1997: the 64 units are owned by the University and provide tied accommodation for its staff.47 - . the air supply is preheated via solar energy. health. a health centre and youth club. Latokartano. the Korona InfoCentre houses two libraries. Figure 28 . Figure 29 . and solar hot water. and food production. with a church.

. from Helsinki’s Planning Department. repositioned and rebuilt to resemble a natural waterway. It now collects rainwater and acts as a detention facility in local floods. wall structures. and about 13% of the annual heating load. The experiment is co-ordinated by Finnish company Solpros.Solar collectors are integrated within roof structures. balconies and as stand alone units in carparks and on local streets. taking in residential and commercial areas. Solar collectors are integrated within roof structures.According to Markku Siskonen. open fields and the bay waterfront.Solar collectors provide nearly half the energy required to heat domestic hot water. while the cost of meeting the basic ecological requirements set by the City has been estimated at an additional 5% of total construction costs. Figure 32 . Approximately 400 dwellings are part of the experiment. as part of the European Union’s THERMIE programme. Conservation efforts at the site have seen the Viikinoja stream. a former drainage ditch. who will recoup them in the form of savings on utility bills over the life of the dwelling. with nine separate heating systems installed to date. cycling or skiing during winter. to slow down the movement of water across the site and thereby improve the quality of water before it reaches the bay.48 - . in conjunction with two Austrian energy companies and the Helsinki Energy Board. Figure 31 . which uses 1. and about 13% of the annual heating load. those costs have been met by owners and residents. wall structures. balconies (left) and as stand alone units in carparks (right) and on local streets.246 m2 of collectors to provide nearly half the energy required to heat domestic hot water. Viikki also features the country’s largest solar heating experiment. The site also features extensive paths for walking.

I met with architects and planners from the City of Malmö. native trees. fruit trees and wetlands have been carried out.3. couples and families Buildings dating from 1950s with new upgrades What makes this project interesting? The project has placed a heavy emphasis on landscape and environmental issues. One of the key aims of the project is to enable residents to take a leading role in the ideas. funded by the government’s Local Investments Programme. so this section is not a comprehensive overview of the entire country. . More details are provided below. a public housing project constructed in the 1950s. More details are provided below. will create a more socially. As a result. local schools and industrial and business areas. such as Augustenborg. The city is also working to improve existing affordable housing neighbourhoods. The city intends that landscaping. to improve habitats and increase amenity. the Västra Hamnen (Western Harbour). which features new affordable and market rate housing. building and social works in the neighbourhood. economically and ecologically sustainable neighbourhood. The Ekostaden Augustenborg project is one of Sweden’s largest urban sustainability projects. school students and employees have been consulted and involved in the design and implementation of new outdoor environments. Sweden City of Malmö and MKB City of Malmö and MKB City of Malmö Planning Department n/a n/a 2000 Ongoing Local Investments Program and other public and private funding 300+ One.1 Policies and Strategies In Sweden. with the addition of bat and bird boxes throughout the housing estate.2 Projects Case Studies Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: Augustenborg Malmö. 3. Sweden 3. and local residents. local partners within Malmö City and the MKB housing company (a statutory body for the construction and maintenance of public housing). two and three bedroom units in medium density blocks Existing occupants – low to moderate income single people. to discuss local initiatives for sustainable development. design and implementation of the project. new plantings of flowering perennials. in an ecologically sensitive design and setting. The city has a new development area.49 - .

which now boasts Sweden’s largest electric vehicle fleet. The remaining buildings will be tackled in a rolling program over a longer period. Figure 33 . a series of new canals and detention basins have been cut throughout the estate. It is part of a research and development project with funding from the European Union’s LIFE program. increased biodiversity and aesthetic improvements. 13 new Resource Houses were built throughout the estate so that residents have a dedicated place to separate general waste from compost . The project also features the largest Green Roof scheme in Scandinavia.A series of new canals and detention basins have been cut throughout the Augustenborg estate. Some of the estate’s buildings have also undergone significant aesthetic and functional improvement as part of the recent works. underground car parks and on roads and paths throughout the Augustenborg estate. 90% of household waste from Augustenborg is now collected and recycled or reused. a local resident and amateur water enthusiast started his own business to work with Malmö´s Water Works to design and develop a unique system designed to be partially self-cleaning. and the replacement of conventional petrol vehicles with electric vehicles in the Kommunteknik’s (Public Works Dept) fleet. These works aim to decrease resource use by 20% and consumption of water. In the 1970s. electricity and hot water in the residential area by 10%. extended roof life.500m2 of roof surface at Augustenborg’s industrial estate. and it aims to study different growing angles and conditions.50 - . to collect run-off from most hard surfaces and take it to a number of holding ponds and flooding ponds before some of the water leaves the area. These have included the installation of a new ventilation system with a heat exchanger. Other aspects of the Augustenborg project have tackled resource use and waste management. During this process. In the latest renovations. Figure 34 – The five worst affected buildings at Augustenborg have received a new layer of insulation and a covering of skimmed painted concrete. including run-off minimisation. the use of sedum and mosses to create light weight roof covering has had several benefits.In the past. To minimise these problems. Meanwhile. To date. to collect run-off from most hard surfaces and take it to a number of holding ponds and flooding ponds before some of the water leaves the area. many buildings received new facades of external insulation and steel sheeting which had a negative impact on some homes over time. which has been laid on 9. insulation. To facilitate this process. improved microclimate. causing problems with damp. The project was developed in partnership with Nordisk Gröntak AB. in both the industrial and residential areas. ventilation and temperature control. the five worst affected buildings had those outer coverings removed and replaced with a new layer of insulation and a covering of skimmed painted concrete. local flooding during heavy rainfall resulting from the combined sewage system has caused major problems in cellars.

with enhanced environmental attributes. parts of the estate were converted to Garden Street status. and increased awareness and improved responses to energy. thereby generating new employment opportunities.51 - . water and waste issues. What lessons can be learned from this project? By carrying out remediation and upgrading work to older affordable housing estates. with improved social and economic opportunities. Rather than being seen as an eyesore and a place of despair and isolation. a central collection point for the separation of large items of rubbish. a local speed limit of 30 km/h was introduced throughout the entire area. governments and housing managers can achieve more wide ranging and effective solutions. resulting in a greater feeling among residents of investment and involvement in the neighbourhood. The recycling and waste collecting system is operated by a new resident’s co-operative company. . to the design of solutions and finally. and through traffic and heavy vehicles serving the industrial estate. waste and hazardous waste from the industrial area also features an exchange room. It also offers new abilities for community interaction. and generate an increased feeling of ownership and investment by those involved. According to the residents of Augustenborg. where pedestrians are prioritised.organic waste. from the identification of problems. chemists and banks. partially as a result of a dysfunctional one way system. Figure 35 . where residents can leave unwanted furniture.New electric street trains. built in Malmo. the City of Malmö has provided a more functional and aesthetically appealing neighbourhood. and take someone else’s discarded TV. Consequently. In addition. traffic was a significant problem before the latest project. By involving local residents in the process. conserve water and minimise waste. residents and owner/managers can reduce energy consumption. and new employment opportunities. Augustenborg is now perceived as a progressive environmental area. now provde eco-friendly transport in Malmo. implementation of works. thereby deterring commercial and through traffic. which offer improved public transport opportunities for local residents and new connections to local services such as health centres. In addition. such as an old sofa. The trains were designed and manufactured locally. The area is also served by the world's first electric street trains. The trains are powered by eco-labelled energy in a battery unit. Using a triple bottom line approach. and are quiet. emission free and narrow enough to run on adapted cycle tracks along short stretches of their routes to reduce travel times. and a new entrance to the industrial area was opened for use during evenings and weekends.

The master plan for the Housing Expo site and the remainder of Västra Hamnen was completed by the City Planning Department.000 residents by 2010 One to four bedrooms in single family houses.Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Potential occupants: Construction method: Bo01 – City of Tomorrow and Västra Hamnen (Western Harbour) Malmö. The Bo01 project occupies 25 hectares within the western harbour region. attached houses. plus other builders and architects for the remaining Västra Hamnen area not known 2000 2010 expected City of Malmö funding (290 million Swedish Krona .52 - . which aimed to become an internationally leading example of environmental adaptation of a densely built urban environment. where ecologically sustainability was seen as an added bonus.about $A60 million) for environmentally related investments at Västra Hamnen. known as Västra Hamnen. families various What makes this project interesting? In 2001. They took into account research findings that demonstrated that close contact with green areas. The 160 hectare former industrial and port facility is located beside a popular beach. . for some of the energy measures. The architects aimed to deliver an attractive new neighbourhood that could compete with other types of new developments in the city. Further support from the European Union. 22 architectural firms. less than two kilometres north west of the city centre. subsidised partownership and public rental Singles. Public funding for university campus. The city hoped that the project would also become a driving force in the region’s shift towards environmental sustainability. medium and high density apartment blocks Private owner-occupiers. The rehabilitation of Västra Hamnen required a significant soil remediation program to eliminate contaminants from previous industrial uses. Sweden City of Malmö City of Malmö City of Malmö Planning Department Bo01 Expo area – 18 developer/builders. private tenants. couples. sun and water could contribute to people’s physical and mental health and wellbeing. 10. the City of Malmö hosted a European Housing Expo. 600 completed to date. through the Local Investment Programme. Private investment for housing and commercial developments.

small scale streets. Across the whole site. The housing itself was designed by 22 different architecture firms. for use at times of the year when more energy is needed. A major initiative was the City’s commitment to renewable energy and associated measures that aimed to reduce energy consumption within the buildings. wind power and a heat pump that extracts heat from seawater and a bedrock aquifer. which was devised in partnership by the City.Västra Hamnen Masterplan . A total of 18 development and construction teams won tenders to develop individual parcels for the Bo01 exhibition. pedestrian walkways. Energy consultant Sydkraft devised a 100% local renewable energy concept that provides all the power for the Expo homes. choice of materials. so that it can ‘bank’ energy when excess is produced.53 - . a complex configuration of streets. At the southern end of the Bo01 exhibition site.Figure 36 . The system is linked to the city electricity grid. alleyways and open squares maximises access to water views and sunlight. pedestrian walkways. with a focus on contrast and diversity. It measured 150 factors including architectural standards.the Bo01 Expo site is located at the bottom left. and provides character and variety for residents and visitors. water collection and recycling and biodiversity and landscape. Each project had to comply with a design and environmental quality program. the Bo01 Expo and property developers. The energy concept also set a maximum energy consumption . energy production and consumption. using solar energy. Figure 37 – Within the Expo area. and provides character and variety for residents and visitors. alongside one of the main entry points to the area. a new marina brings the water into the urban environment. alleyways and open squares maximises access to water views and sunlight.

000 workers and students: already 80 large and small businesses have set up premises in the area. The open stormwater run-off system is also an important contributor to the ecological profile of the Bo01 area. The visible waterways combined with trees and lush undergrowth serve as dynamic and attractive features in what might otherwise have become a sterile urban environment. It will provide 150 apartments and office space over 54 floors. Rain is delayed on green roofs and in ponds in private courtyards and public spaces. making it the tallest structure in the city. to provide new dwellings for an anticipated total of 10. Waste separation units within each home or development make it easy for residents to sort paper and packaging materials. is 120 m high to the tip of the wings. before being transported via open channels to the sea. The maximum effect is 2 MW and the calculated annual electricity production is 6300 MWh. tall buildings painted in pale colours provide a buffer against sea breezes. 1400 m2 of vacuum solar collectors have been installed on ten buildings.54 - . To date. The wind power plant. Currently under construction adjacent to the Bo01 site. .level of 105 kWh/m2/year for residential use. nearly 600 dwellings have been completed with further residential and commercial construction continuing beyond the original Expo site.000 residents. The city’s recently established university is currently building a campus at Västra Hamnen. Eventually the area will accommodate 20. where more vibrant colours were used for the buildings. and is due for completion by late 2005.Along the waterfront. The Bo01 Expo site already boasts four restaurants and cafes and six new shops. as well as facilitate recycling and enable the use of waste and sewage as energy sources. with an annual heat production of 500 MWh. while each home features one of two food waste reuse systems: in-sink disposal units or a centralised vacuum waste chute system. Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava’s Turning Torso is already seen as a new architectural landmark in Malmö. employing 6. The ‘twisting’ building will reach a height of 190 metres. while the small-scale interior buildings are painted in more vibrant colours. while a new private school that opened in 2002 will be joined by a public school in 2006. which will also be occupied in 2005. and is located in the northern harbour at Malmö. In the Expo area. Taller buildings painted in pale colours have been positioned along the outer edges of the area to serve as protection against strong winds for the small-scale interior. Figure 38 .000 people. The area’s waste management system aimed firstly to minimise waste generation. called Boel.

for some of the energy measures. A further aspect of the planning saw the co-location of public and private homes with commercial and industrial precincts. The system also promoted the provision of suitable habitats for local flora and fauna. roofs and in ponds. which will enable residents to book a car for a nominated period via the Internet or phone. looking at new technologies and how they are used by residents. the city intends to establish a local car sharing facility.7 parking spaces per household. butterfly flower beds. and as a steady flow of pedestrians who contribute to a sense of public life and the ‘eyes on the street’ approach to security. the city trialled a ‘green space’ factor system. which is car free and boasts just 0. As a result of its success at Bo01. The funds have largely been used to offset extra costs that have resulted from the City’s high standards for the development. with the intention of capitalising on the experience in the Västra Hamnen area for use in other projects locally and globally. country gardens and enough soil depth to grow vegetables. and perceptions of the housing and surroundings. which connects the area with several central parts of the city in a service that runs every seven minutes. provided as much vegetation as possible on the ground. green structures and storm water. More than 10 universities and colleges are currently involved in evaluating the site. Further support has been given to the project the European Union. Every dwelling is located within 300m of a bus stop. landscaping and biodiversity and public transport and traffic calming. users of an extensive and frequent public transport system. students and visitors. traffic. The LIP funding was granted on the proviso that scientific reviews and evaluations of Bo01’s urban sustainability initiatives would be carried out. which ensured that every private outdoor space. with bat nesting boxes. Other studies are focussing on soil decontamination. through its Local Investment Program (LIP). and sustainable development. energy. including courtyards and gardens. To date. and will deliver significant cost savings for residents in future. As part of the Bo01 development. wild Swedish flower meadows. building and living. the ‘green space’ factor system has been adopted for use at all new residential developments in Malmö.The entire area was planned to encourage inhabitants and visitors to use environmentallyfriendly transport modes: pedestrians and bicycles have been given priority in the Bo01 housing area. While some of these measures required extra funding at the outset. walls. employees. as well as for informative and educational projects. using environmentally adapted vehicles. . These mixed uses ensure the area is constantly populated by residents. water collection and runoff. and nearby Lund and Helsingborg. environmental information and education. who act as consumers for local businesses. What lessons can be learned from this project? The City of Malmö worked hard to incorporate environmental factors into its newest and largest development area. with excellent outcomes in relation to energy generation and consumption.55 - . In future. and educational institutions including two primary schools and a university campus. the City of Malmö has granted 290 million Swedish Krona (about $A60 million) for environmentally related investments at Västra Hamnen. recycling. they have resulted in a more attractive and appealing neighbourhood.

timber framed homes across Sweden.500 affordable. Inside. We worked backwards. According to Ulrika Nordeberg. the collaborators turned the practice of home building on its head in the process. Furniture giant Ikea and construction company Skanska first teamed up in 1995 for a one-off housing exhibition. Head of R&D at BoKlok. childcare. as well as Finland. timber floors and quality materials. when the country’s housing sector was depressed and building costs were high. most participants said that they preferred a maximum height of two floors for flats. and that cars should be parked nearby but not necessarily in front of houses. modular. such as tiles in the bathrooms and ‘nice’ kitchen cabinets. what amount is left for living?’” According to responses from 1. and found that the average household consisted of between one and three people. and that’s what we decided to do here. which offered contact with the garden and a fence around their own yard. starts with market research. Norway and Denmark Commissioned by private and public clients BoKlok is a joint venture between construction company Skanska and furniture company Ikea BoKlok BoKlok 20% less than traditionally constructed homes in Sweden. with child safety an important consideration. most people wanted to live in a small development of just a few houses. “We approached a bank to conduct some customer research. “Ikea. Concept commenced in 1995 ongoing Private investment and housing co-operative developers 6 units per ‘house’ 2 x 1. they wanted light filled spaces with big windows. with Skanska responsible for construction and Ikea in charge of furnishing the demonstration model.” she said. not live in an anonymous environment. as well as an apple tree and room to grow vegetables.Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: BoKlok Malmö and other parts of Sweden. by asking ‘After spending on clothes. They aimed to demonstrate that it was possible to build houses at a lower cost than current market offerings.56 - . In addition. 2 and 3 bedroom units per ‘house’ Private owner occupiers and rental tenants Modularised and prefabricated timber framed construction for erection onsite What makes this project interesting? Two of Sweden’s most successful companies. on the other hand. “Skanska generally acts as a speculator: they build a product and hope the market will buy it. . with one income. Survey respondents also suggested that they wanted to know their neighbours. food and bills. which both operate globally.000 participants. have joined forces to develop and build more than 1. Demand is so high for their popular product that BoKlok homes are now allocated by a lottery system.

like there’s a market for cars from Audi and Skoda. . the flats appear more spacious through clever design. and three-bedroom apartment on the ground and first floors. even for flats. but would rather spend their money on other things. The partners came up with a ‘house’ that contains three different units types arranged in an L-shape. houses tended to be built with brick or stone. the average three bedroom unit is 78m2 in Sweden).” Figure 39 . such as expensive motorbikes or a flat in the Canary Islands. “So we looked to Ikea. and people who wish to spend less on housing costs. “But that proved not to be the case.Nordeberg said that in the south of Sweden. and the partners wondered how they could achieve this with a low cost product. and we recognised that there was room in the market for products at both ends of the cost spectrum. a 59m2 two bedroom flat and a 48m2 one bedroom flat.” she said. the most densely populated part of the country. because normally the building industry designs a new product every time. repeated over two floors: a 74m2 three bedroom flat. and could therefore contribute to the creation of deprived neighbourhoods.57 - . seniors. we needed volume.” Nordeberg said that there was a concern in the early stages of development that the low cost homes would attract only low income residents.Each BoKlok 'house' contains a one-. “because some people who buy our homes have average to high incomes. “We asked ‘Who builds for the many people and households with regular income?’” she continued.. “We knew that to maintain low cost.” she said. first time buyers. two-. While they are slightly smaller than traditional homes (by comparison. and the car industry. “We decided therefore to target singles with or without children (given that the divorce rate in Sweden is higher than 50%). for example. couples with or without children.

4m average. because of the planning expertise that Ikea brought to the project. Nordeberg claimed.Figure 40 .6m.” . through the use of natural light and high ceilings. and they all boast windows on three sides. Each ground floor unit has a door onto the garden while first floor homes all have balconies. at 2. because we have time to build up systems you wouldn’t have with one-off homes. giving the illusion of extra space.” Figure 41= Every room in the apartments benefits from natural light and high ceilings.58 - .9% of cases. and every unit boasts access to the garden or a balcony. the partners discovered an advantage” we had “time to design the details that you might not have in one off projects. “So we have a product that is of very high quality. Also. Ceiling heights are taller than the 2. By deciding to develop and produce a volume product in a factory.Each house contains a one-. people said ‘I thought it would be much smaller!’. the homes could be furnished very well and still feel spacious. a fact that Nordeberg said contributed to an extremely positive reaction from potential customers. “We are able to fool the eye into thinking the homes are larger than they are.” Nordeberg said. “In 99. two and three-bedroom flat on each floor.

Originally. but not so common for multistorey dwellings. completing the first three developments in three locations in 1997. Following the introduction of the second. We’ve managed to cut the cost of house building. where they walls were constructed in a Skanska factory and then assembled onsite. “One advantage of building homes in the factory means that we can circumvent the retailers when buying building materials. BoKlok then has a team of tradespeople who connect the modules onsite. because the onsite stage was not properly industrialised: we still had to rely on the local plumber. the first method was due to be phased out. “But in time we realised that that wasn’t the best system. “In fact the positive response and resulting publicity was so strong that the partners thought ‘What have we done?’” she laughed. and to cope with that demand.” . and consumer liked how they looked. although timber framed houses of up to five storeys are built from scratch onsite. as they are easier to transport. “We can also achieve economies of scale by sourcing materials from outside Sweden. to the point where the kitchen cabinets are installed and the painting is done in the factory. but by repetition. the homes were built as flat pack products. and that gives us much more control over price and quality. In 1998. which saves money. not through skimping on design or construction quality. which increased the risk. with a proven business case. but demand for BoKlok homes is high. and we couldn’t guarantee the quality or price. “The first stage that we opened to the public was a very big success: it proved that we could calculate and build for lower costs. Skanska and Ikea formalised their joint venture by establishing the BoKlok brand (which translates as Live Smart) and started building more homes. with Ikea responsible for post occupancy evaluations and ongoing research. Those first sites were developed as rental units. but streamlining of the construction process means that houses are now built in modules and transported to site for installation. Nordeberg said that both production lines had sufficient forward orders to run at maximum capacity for at least a year.” Figure 42 – Originally BoKlok homes were flat-packed and assembled onsite (above). factory built houses are common for single family homes. owned and managed by Skanska. Ikea and Skanska commenced phase one of their project in 1996.In Sweden. because they only have to be delivered to one place.” Nordeberg said.59 - . in mid 2002.” Nordeberg said.” Nordeberg explained. modular system. painter and electrician. “So now we build in volume units with another Skanska company. the flat packed models are still being produced for delivery to Northern Sweden. Based on their research and subsequent development.

“There are still a few factors that we can’t control.60 - .” By the end of 2003. and the roof is on within first day. BoKlok is now considering launching the product in the United Kingdom. public transport and shopping areas. and land costs. so we are working with local governments to identify potential sites close to cities. it takes about six months to complete each development.” Nordeberg said. and the residents are responsible for managing the communal garden areas. with the intention of obtaining land at a lower cost so we can pass those savings on to consumers. BoKlok developed half of the completed projects and then sold the homes as company title properties. “The house construction is actually very quick. it’s just two weeks from delivery of the houses to handover to customers. Each development features between three and seven ‘houses’. and we are working to resolve them with external partners. following customer research. which saves on body corporate fees and assists in community building. and a recycling and garbage unit. and they mean that the cost of a BoKlok home varies according to the site. and had expanded the concept to neighbouring Norway and Finland. “We are also in partnership with a bank brand to manage loans for BoKlok homes. so that there is consistency across Sweden: streamlining the cost of finance also lowers the end cost for our consumers. “They include ground preparation at the site.500 BoKlok homes across Sweden. it’s hard therefore to give an average cost. customer research in each new market had concluded that the concept was suitable for the other Scandinavian countries. whereby new purchasers or tenants are randomly selected from a list of interested parties. which consist of a one. Car parking for all the units is at a central point away from the houses.” Currently. schools. “Most land in Sweden is owned by the municipality. because of the impact of variable costs on each development. Nordeberg said. regardless of the location.What lessons can be learned from this project? Nordeberg said that while it was hard to provide an indicative price for a BoKlok home. with most of that time spent on ground preparation. . once building permissions have been granted. while half were overseen by third party developers and are rental properties. According to Nordeberg. transport. Community facilities include gardens for growing edible plants. the company had built more than 1. She added that BoKlok aimed to reduce the price for consumers even further in future.” Nordeberg said. with Denmark to be added this year. and each unit has its own apple tree and outdoor bench in the garden. In Sweden. although Nordeberg said that it might need to be adapted for that market. The popularity of the BoKlok product means that both types of development are now in such demand that a lottery system is necessary. although slightly different building regulations in Norway necessitated a change to the layout of the houses. as well as storage space on the ground floor. resulting in between 18 and 42 units per site. two and three bedroom flat on the ground and first floors. the homes initially sold at prices 20% lower than traditionally built homes.

At the moment. we meet the Swedish regulations for building. . “and they will last a lot longer than that”.” which is extraordinarily good feedback.000 SEK (about $AU650) for new furniture. and twice we have achieved results of 100%.” Ultimately. As for working towards ecological sustainable building. we will.” Nordeberg explained.All new purchasers are entitled to a free consultation with an Ikea interior decorator. “If we can incorporate new green building methods without it costing more. and we are continually assessing new technologies through Skanska’s ISO4000 Quality Assurance programme. “We conduct a telephone interview with all customers three months after they move in.61 - . “We ask them ‘What is the most important quality for your in your home?’. “We acknowledge that our buildings are not the best [in terms of ecological sustainability] because that costs money. she suggested that there was room for improvement. Each flat purchaser also receives an Ikea voucher for 3. who can assist with minor changes to the plan and selection of colours and fittings. the success of the homes is measured in terms of customer satisfaction. though.” she said. Nordeberg said that BoKlok homes were guaranteed for 50 years.” Nordeberg conceded. and then ‘How does your BoKlok flat fulfil your expectations?’ Mostly our results are in within the 90-100% range.

and provides funding for affordable housing to each state based on its population (at the rate of $1. USA 4. The GBC hosts the annual Greenbuild Conference and Expo. and corporate entities that develop affordable housing for tax credits. this type of agency and its approach may soon be replicated in Boston and Chicago. Within the City of New York. against HUD’s published media income data. State and city governments also have housing and finance agencies that raise funds and administer HUD funding. a further agency. It also conducts research about housing need and supply. People who require housing assistance generally apply to the city or county government agency responsible for managing affordable housing. which are used to determine eligibility for affordable housing nationally. multi-family housing that works directly with housing developers and other mortgage lenders to structure low-cost mortgage loans for many different types of affordable housing. state and city funds to facilitate the remediation of existing dwellings and the production of new housing. City of Portland or the Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Office. These agencies assess eligibility according to income. as well as work with non-profit and for-profit developers to deliver affordable housing. the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority (CHAFA) and the Portland Development Commission (PDC). the NY State . and need. to encourage residents of the lower Manhattan area to remain in the vicinity during the recovery and rebuilding period. Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) uses federal. In New York. Another agency that is unique to New York City is the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation. for profit or non-profit developers. which is based in Washington DC and has chapters in more than twenty states. which was held in Pittsburgh in November 2003. such as the City of New York. such as Portland’s Rose Community Development Corporation and the Community Corporation of Santa Monica.4. ranking housing alongside bridges and roads in terms of infrastructure priority. HDC raises funds for its mortgage program through the sale of both tax-exempt and taxable bonds in the municipal bond market. either in stand-alone developments.25 per person per year). which was established after the terrorism attacks of September 11. 2001. Owners of rental affordable housing stock include state or city governments. Industry organisations involved in the delivery of affordable and sustainable housing include the US Green Building Council. and publishes national income tables by area. These government agencies include New York State’s Housing Finance Authority (HFA). While New York City is one of just a few cities that allocate their own capital to housing (most cities use only federal and state funding). or as a proportion of market rate developments of a certain size. New York City’s Housing Development Corporation (HDC).1 Key players in affordable housing The federal government’s Housing and Urban Development (HUD) department sets nationwide housing policy. HDC is a mortgage lender for affordable. and to entice new residents into the area during that time.62 - .

NYC faces a housing shortage as a result of significant net migration. and provides consultancy services for affordable housing developers. there is an acknowledgement that housing is as important as other types of infrastructure. In NYC.000 households pay more than 50% of their income in rent. and nearly 500. and Global Green USA. while on the south west coast in cities like Los Angeles and San Diego.Association for Affordable Housing (NYSAFAH) is a trade organisation for the for-profit development community. which promotes sustainable building through its Green Building Group.5 persons per room) conditions. In addition. and the boundaries of the four other boroughs are also fixed. including the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) in Colorado. For example. the figure is much lower in New York City. and many of the agencies and policies of the last 30 years were established to deal with those problems. bridges and schools. and in NYC. at about 30%. There are many housing and sustainability research and development institutes across the USA.2 Issues and challenges Current housing demand New York City currently has one of the USA’s most acute housing shortages. The same . Every city in the USA faces its own set of challenges in meeting housing demand. Because NYC faces many challenges that are similar to those faced in Australia. economics and demographics play a different role in each place. While the USA has an owner-occupier rate of about 68%. The fact that federal spending on public housing has dropped by 66% in real terms of 25 years means that city and state governments have been forced to find alternative funding sources for public housing. and it has been prioritised accordingly. resulting in a huge demand for both public and private housing. Today. according to a 1999 Housing and Vacancy Survey by the US Census Bureau. and its unique approach to tackling housing problems means that many of its methods are now being replicated in other American cities.63 - . All of these issues combine to create a high problem in the area of housing overcrowding and affordability. and factors such as climates. so there is significant demand for housing and support programs for people who have been used to sleeping rough. The city has a population of about 8 million people. which is based in Santa Monica with offices in other cities. I have chosen to provide statistics and data about its current housing conditions as a snapshot of the situation in the USA. both from within America and overseas. so that further expansion and infrastructure development is limited. the city faced issues associated with housing abandonment (like many other major cities in the USA). and this problem is increasing. One of its four areas of expertise is green building. In the past. 4. At the same time. the warmer climate attracts homeless people from across the country. hundreds of thousands of people live in crowded (more than one person per room) and overcrowded (more than 1. like roads. and it acts as a clearing house for the affordable housing community nationally. particularly in Sydney. and approximately 40% of residents are foreign born. meaning that a lot of people rely on rented accommodation. nearly half of all New Yorkers pay more than 30% of their income in rent. there is a high level of foreign migration so a significant proportion of housing demand is generated by people who are economically active but earn low to moderate incomes. the city is constrained by the fact that its most populous borough is an island.

000 in 1996 to 221. The entire approach was unique to NYC. This process has resulted in the preservation or creation of more than 200. The City of New York established the Department of Housing Preservation and Development in 1978 to deal with this crisis. with tax abatement for 10 years.000 of the original units still awaiting redevelopment. The City amended its abandonment laws to enable it to seize possession of buildings whose owners had failed to pay city taxes for 12 months (previously 3 years).1%. which had by then grown to 179. Thomas M. Menino. In 1986. and Popkin said that there were now less than 10. and became the owner of 100. where the Area Median Income is .000 units overnight. no other city in the USA boasts the same extensive experience or resources in this area.000 in 1999. In addition. She added that parts of Brooklyn. who has been with the agency since that time. According to Ilene Popkin. it is generally priced to exclude the majority of low to moderate income earners. and consequently. “Landlords stopped providing services. New housing supply Most housing in New York City is built by the private sector. not for profit housing and community development organizations. generally white. before moving on to occupied unit blocks. and then the buildings were torched by landlords for the insurance. Ed Koch. New York suffered from ‘white flight’ in the 1970s and 1980s. an increase of 9. starting with vacant properties. About 27. the number of doubled-up households increased from 203. east Harlem and the south Bronx “looked like Dresden after World War II” as a result of the damage inflicted by landlords. appears in Appendix B.000 units of affordable housing and spurred a community of academic and financial institutions. An article written in 2002 by Boston Mayor and President of the U.8% of New York City residents now reside in areas where significant occurred at that time. where welloff.000.64 - . Conference of Mayors. tenant cooperatives and entrepreneurs. forcing 800. Developers included non-profit organisations.” Ms Popkin said.000 dwellings. Mayor Koch’s plan has been carried forward by every mayor since.715 from 1996 to 1999. Popkin said the agency created a pipeline of programs to use public funds and make direct loans to developers for the rehabilitation of buildings.000 people from their homes. such as heat and hot water. outlined a 10 year plan to restore and renovate the city’s stock of units. and the number of severely crowded to more than 215. and they purchased city-owned buildings for $1. Like many American cities.000 apartments were lost. the Mayor of New York City. The plan was administered by HPD. about the need for affordable housing across the USA. so tenants fled the buildings. Current housing stock Housing stock in NYC is in the best physical condition that it has been in since it was first measured in 1965.survey found that the number of crowded families increased to 75. regardless of political persuasion. middle class residents fled inner the perceived ‘danger’ of inner city areas for the ‘safety’ of the suburbs. and local and citywide real estate development and management professionals. 329.S. half of which were still occupied and half of which were vacant or derelict. with only 1% of the housing stock in dilapidated condition.

Mayor of Boston and president of the US Conference of Mayors. Menino argued that “no one can deny the important role that local governments. Michael Bloomberg. Menino wrote: “The poor. Drastic housing budget cuts in the 1980s were followed by small budget increases in the 1990s. the homeless and low-income working families continue to struggle to find decent affordable housing. which appeared in the Los Angeles Times on 31 July 2002. promoting expanded housing assistance by employers in the form of downpayment help.and middle-income New Yorkers.” Menino said that America's mayors were united in recognising an affordable-housing crisis and also in demanding action. More than 14 million Americans are now forced to spend more than half of their income on housing. In no state today does a full-time minimum-wage job enable most families to pay fair market rent for a moderate two-bedroom apartment. As our mothers taught us. spurred in part by the rising cost of government-funded housing vouchers.800. they reflect the mayors' belief that affordable housing is a national priority. ignoring a problem will not make it go away. Both the state and city governments are actively involved in the provision of public housing. What is new is the effect of the housing crisis on the nation's middle-income families. the federal government has walked away from its obligation to preserve the housing we have and build the housing we need. while retail salespeople were only able to afford rent in just three of those markets. we have proposed a number of steps. to produce 65. These proposals alone may not solve our affordable-housing crisis.65 - . low-interest loans and home-buyer education. Also. Menino. The number of middle-income families spending more than half of their income on housing increased by 74 percent between 1997 and 1999. Yet it is equally essential for the federal government to address this problem. Few resources were devoted to producing new housing. as Los Angeles and more than 200 other cities do.” . the Mayor of New York.$62. teachers and police officers could not afford to buy a medianpriced home in most major housing markets. The New Marketplace: Creating Housing for the Next Generation plan aims to use public funds to stimulate private investment to the tune of $3 billion over five years. the lack of affordable housing was becoming a national crises at that time. National demand and supply According to an article written by Thomas M. He referred to the capacity of some professional groups to afford housing. “Working together. For two decades now. unveiled a new housing policy to address housing issues in the city. and in December 2002. And.000 new and rehabilitated units. equally important. businesses and nonprofits must play in meeting the housing crisis. for low. and found that janitors were only able to afford to rent a one-bedroom apartment in six of the 60 largest housing markets in the US. establishing a national affordable-housing trust fund to provide a steady stream of revenue to deal with critical housing needs. but they will help. including: creating a national homeownership tax credit to make buying a home more affordable.

state and local governments undertook large scale financing of affordable housing projects. the Corporation issues taxable bonds to provide long-term fixed-rate permanent financing to developers.3 Policies and strategies The City of New York’s New Housing Marketplace The five year plan includes new strategies and existing programs.000 dwellings. The Program assists housing developers for new construction. Staten Island and northern parts of Manhattan.000 per unit.to middle-income families. but under the Mayor’s new plan.000 units.000 units. $350 million. for a total of 65.4. and includes new initiatives to encourage private sector investment in housing. $60 million worth of New HOP funding was set aside for low. • Preservation of existing affordable housing In the 1960s and 1970s. Under the LAMP scheme.000 new units and the preservation of 38. after which time ownership and the ability to set market rate rents reverted to the owner of the project. HDC provides subordinate loans of up to $50. such as teachers. . In the past. the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) is responsible for the allocation of approximately $500 million in public funds.000 per unit. from city and federal sources. who earned between 60% and 100% of median income. Firstly. rental accommodation for people who earn less than 60% of median income.800 in 2002). It represents an increase in production of 25% over the previous five years. as follows: • The New Housing Opportunities Program (New HOP) The majority of HDCs funding. to encourage developers to provide 100% affordable.66 - . the Program was used to develop rental projects for middle income families who earned between 100% and 250% of the area median income (about $62. HDC has therefore set aside $50 million to provide funds for the repair and preservation of Mitchell-Lama and other affordable housing resources. windows and roofs in the 30-year old projects. The plan aims to bring about the construction of 27. elevators. or $7. The plan is administered by two key housing agencies. is being channelled through its existing New Housing Opportunity Program (HOP). to affordable housing in New York. police officers. the Bronx. It is limited to projects located in Brooklyn. which is being used to leverage more than $2. Queens.5 billion of private financing. and will devote more than $3 billion of public funding. fire fighters and health care workers. substantial rehabilitation and conversions of non-residential buildings. substantial rehabilitation and conversions of non-residential buildings. • Low-Income Affordable Marketplace Program (LAMP) HDC has also committed $100 million to its LAMP scheme. to construct and preserve 17. which combines the use of tax-exempt bond financing with Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credits and other subsidies. where projects contain at least 20 units. Under the New HOP. which can be utilised with subsidies from other agencies. The Program assists housing developers for new construction.5 million per project. These were developed on 30 year mortgages. such as the Mitchell-Lama developments in New York City. in addition to providing subsidies of up to $45. It is being used to upgrade heating systems.

“It’s alarming to see how many affordable developments look the same.and the Corporation is working with the owners of the properties by offering low interest loans.000 units. The Department is also responsible for carrying out the Mayor’s plan to work with private housing owners to return about 20. and its existing budget of $2 billion from the City's housing capital and expense budgets will ensure the creation and preservation of some 40. These include facilitating the remediation of brownfield sites.67 - . is how you build modern housing in an . Many of the projects that will be funded with the redirected budgets will be made feasible with creative use of Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Secondly. to attract private investment in affordable housing across the city by reducing building and land acquisition costs through legislative and administrative changes.000 units.000 vacant units. HPD administers the program and helps families to improve their credit and save for the down payments. The Mayor’s plan also aims to provide access to new development sites. According to competition organiser and AIA president-elect. Funding totalling $25 million over five years is assisting 2. in an attempt to showcase innovative design ideas and promote sustainability and architectural quality in affordable housing. to the marketplace. “The first site is in East Harlem. The main dilemma there then. to enable them to renew the properties as affordable housing resources for future generations. the competition should prompt the development of “different housing types that are economically viable within existing zoning frameworks”. New Housing. Eligible developers will receive up to $20. and reforming land disposition policies and regulations. which will provide $200 million in low-interest loans for acquisition.000 per unit for a total of approximately 10. and it’s a small plot of 75’ x 100’. increasing density limits. Mark Ginsberg. • Home Ownership The Mayor’s plan also includes incentives to assist New Yorkers into home ownership.” he said. which will generate more than $200 million in direct equity investments. site development and environmental work necessary to accelerate development for new construction. all of which offered different design and construction challenges.500 working families in New York City to purchase their first home in targeted neighbourhoods. surrounded by brownstones that have largely been renovated.000 units. The competition was framed around three existing development sites in the city. HPD will administer the New Venture Incentive Program. New York The American Institute of Architects (AIA) and the City of New York teamed up to run an architectural competition for affordable housing in 2003-04. and is collaborating with the New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) to develop affordable housing on NYCHA property that is currently vacant or underutilised for housing purposes. many of them located above ground floor retail uses and requiring renovation or remediation. such as the HomeFirst Down Payment Assistance Program. the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) has redirected $555 million from housing maintenance to new investment in 8. implementing rezoning from commercial to residential.

requiring new streets and new thoughts about affordable housing. as are 26 other states. the building and planning codes mean that projects tend to have double loaded corridors for efficiency.” Mr Ginsberg hoped that a secondary outcome of the competition would be to contribute of the debate about the city’s existing zoning and building codes. with commercial opportunities on the ground floor.” American and overseas architects were asked to register their interest by mid December. with final designs for one or more sites due at the end of January. “The second site is in Brooklyn. “As an example. where the zoning permits a mid-rise apartment block of seven to 12 floors. “We may be overly ambitious. “The city implemented its zoning policy in 1961. because “people build what they know”.” he added.” He also hoped to challenge the builders and developers. and has seen updates every three years. so cost becomes the most important factor.” he said.” . but we hope to have a similar impact with this competition. The third option is in Queens. ““We hope that the competition might flag some good ideas that might then be used to alter or vary the codes by proposing innovative solutions.” he said. “That makes it hard to incorporate sustainable design in affordable housing: there are some things that you can do without incurring extra costs. and that’s a 10 acre waterfront site: a former industrial site with remediation issues that becomes a site planning exercise. The building code was introduced in 1968.existing urban fabric?” Ginsberg said. Mr Ginsberg hoped to see developments that tackled ecological sustainability. claiming that it was hard for architects to convince their colleagues to implement new ideas.” he said. but there is much more scope for improvement by spending more upfront.68 - . “The agencies that fund affordable housing in New York place great emphasis on the cost per unit and the number of units they can deliver. but acknowledged that it was hard to implement ESD in affordable housing in the city. which are currently under review. and since then there have been piecemeal updates. but that’s an 18 to 24 month process. “An architectural competition for housing in New York in 1900 spurred on new the law on tenements which were passed in 1903. “New York is in the process of is adopting a national model code. so you can’t design for cross ventilation or duplexes. and we are required to have a corridor on every floor for accessibility.

townhouses. cohousing (x 33) as well as retail.69 - . apartments for seniors (63) . such as environmentally friendly construction. it still contained the carousel and heritage theatre building. with apartments and townhouses located within the site. Colorado Perry Rose Perry Rose Masterplan by Peter Calthorpe. than any other development in the USA. a retail offering including a major supermarket and speciality shops will be completed. which moved to a new site in the Platte Valley area in the early 1990s. state and federal loans for affordable housing 326 Single family homes (x 52). Executive Director of the Congress for the New Urbanism. market rate and public housing rental tenants. and in 2004. The development has been knitted into its surrounding neighbourhood by extending existing streets through the site and positioning single family homes on the boundaries. preservation of historic sites and easy access to mass transit in an urban setting. townhouses (x 54). Built on the former site of Denver’s 100 year old amusement park and Botanic Gardens. When the developers purchased the site in 1998. live work spaces and community areas Market rate owner occupiers. significant open parkland. and rollercoasters. with various firms responsible for individual housing projects Wonderland Construction. and is situated adjacent to two city bus routes. and tax free city. The master plan by new urbanist authority Peter Calthorpe combines several housing types.4. the project is located just ten minutes drive from the centre of the city. Mendel Allison Construction Company (Cottage Hill Senior Apartments) Palace Construction Company (Trocadero Apartments) and others $US93. apartments and loft apartments (x 124). Highlands’ Garden Village combines more elements of smart growth. It also features community buildings. Elitch Gardens. which were both preserved for community use. Historic Preservation Tax Credits.5 million 1998 expected – 2005 Private investment combined with public funding in the form of Local tax credits for affordable housing. apartments. including single family homes. . affordable housing. Historic Preservation grants and Environmental sustainability grants. live/work spaces and one of America’s few cohousing communities. cohousing owner occupiers Various No of units: Unit type/s: Potential occupants: Construction method: What makes this project interesting? According to Shelly Poticha. a variety of housing styles. parks and walkways. including some with self-contained carriage houses (x 20).4 Projects Case Studies Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: Highlands’ Garden Village Denver. and other seasonal buildings which were demolished.

The narrower streets. and garages are alley loaded so as to minimise the impact of driveways and garage doors on the streets. the homes themselves are also designed to be 25% more energy efficient than their counterparts in Denver.70 - . at Stapleton and Lowry. nearing the end of construction in November 2003.Highland's Garden Village has been knitted into its surroundings by positioning single family homes on the edge of the development.Inside. and parklands. Following on from the environmentally sensitive master plan. The calmer streets offer enhanced opportunities for walking throughout the site. which wind across the site. it was eventually granted.Live Work Apartments opposite the Plaza.36th Street . While the developer struggled to obtain consent from the approval authority for this measure. . residents can expect to save up to $US525 a year on their utility bills. cohousing. carousel. and in fact has set a precedent for two new major urban developments in Denver. Figure 44 . and most roads were designed to terminate with views. and extending neighbourhood streets through the site. A significant contributor to the success of the plan was the decision to reduce the width of streets from the Denver minimum of 36’ to 32’. the Live Work Apartments feature energy efficiency measures which could save their owners up to $525 a year on utility bills. of the theatre. As a result. Figure 45 .Figure 43 . help to calm traffic. even exceeding Colorado’s Build Green standards and Energy Smart program.

recycled carpet and padding. One third of the 52 single family homes also include self-contained carriage units above the garages.Garages are accessed from rear alleys. water heaters and household appliances • Built-in kitchen recycling centres • Double glazed energy efficient windows • Wind generated electricity for use in community buildings and parks • Advanced sealing of units to minimise heat loss during winter and gain during summer • Recycled materials used for outdoor structures.71 - . which can be used as home offices. . reconstituted siding for exterior walls. decking and landscaping • Low VOC paints and glues • Low water use plumbing fixtures • Compact fluorescent lighting • Use of farm produced engineered wood and engineered wood I joists in floor and roof trusses • Use of flyash concrete • Recycled materials such as OSB for sub flooring and exterior walls. or rented to third party tenants for extra income. built around a central community house that includes a gourmet kitchen and dining facilities so that all residents can eat meals together. 40% of the units are subsidised rates for people whose income is 60% or less than the area median.Green building design and construction attributes include: • Energy efficient mechanical systems. recycled content insulation Green landscape attributes include: • Community parks and gardens feature edible plants.075 for a market rate two bedroom unit. The Hearthstone Cohousing Community provides 33 homes in townhouses and single story units. They range in price from $US523 per month for a one bedroom low income unit to $1. At the Cottage Hill Senior Apartments . increase permeable surfaces and encourage walking and jogging • 30 tonnes of concrete recycled for reuse as road base • Conservation of many existing gardens and trees • Xeriscaped tree lawns and water conserving vegetation throughout the development Accommodation at Highlands’ Garden Village was designed to cater for a range of household types and income levels. It also features a playroom and laundry facilities and is located on the edge of a private park. Figure 46 . Hearthstone is the only cohousing community within a new urbanist development in America. and one third feature carriage houses above them: self contained units for accommodation or home offices. or to provide intergenerational living options for grandparents or teenager or young adults.

and a conference and business centre. as well as jazz and chamber music concerts. and feature some undercover car parking (above left). At the Trocadero. which were designed to resemble individual townhouses.72 - . The project also provides a range of community facilities including the Elitch Gardens Theatre. The floor of the Carousel is painted with a medieval labyrinth for meditation. .Trocadero Apartments were designed to resemble individual town homes. The Trocadero Apartments comprise 74 units in four three-storey buildings. which is currently awaiting renovation (a non-profit heritage group has already raised $2m of the $7m needed for the job). 25% of apartments are affordable for people whose income is 50% of the area median income.Figure 47 – Heathstone Cohousing offers 33 dwellings set around a private park and community house (above right). which is used by some residents on a regularly basis. A children’s playground is located near the middle of the site. adjacent to the cohousing development. which is used for weekly Growers’ Markets in the summer. and the Plaza. where a kitchen. Residents of the one and two bedroom apartments also have access to a clubhouse with health facilities. laundry facilities and playroom can be enjoyed by all residents. which is used for open air movies in the summer and other community events throughout the year. Figure 48 . dining room. the Carousel. built in the late 1800s.

Highlands' Garden Village provides open spaces. including places to grow edible plants (above left) and for informal community interaction (above right).The rear car park at the Trocadero apartments features a landscaped detention pond for stormwater collection. buffalo grass was used in preference over bluegrass. which was the main entrance to the amusement park. sits within the car park that serves the Trocadero Apartments. who helped to design a water conservation landscape. and is more drought resistant. which features many small open spaces.Figure 49 . and places to grow edible plants. Another collection point. In the Plaza in front of the theatre. Figure 50 . to collect stormwater runoff from the entire site for slow release into the city’s draining system. and still acts as the main pedestrian entry point. It was renovated and replanted with assistance from the Denver Botanic Gardens. a car pool service . as it requires only 1/6 of the water needed to keep it green. As the lowest part of the site. Carousel (top right) and children's playground (bottom). with two major bus routes connecting it to the city. The same principles have been used across the site.Community facilities include the historic Elitch Theatre (top left). The site is well served by public transport. Initially. The park at the north east corner of the site. was fully retained. a detention basin sits below the Plaza. in the form of an attractive wetlands pond. the developers sponsored the use of the Zipcar system. Figure 51 .73 - .

Fee-based developments for third party clients 3. By adopting energy efficient design principles and through the extensive use of ecologically sensitive and recycled materials. where current projects include tribal housing for native Americans.000. Starting with the Denver Dry Good Store redevelopment using Affordable Housing and Historic Preservation Tax Credits in the early 1980s. When the private market suffers higher vacancy rates. According to Charles Perry. the project provides affordable homes for a range of people from young couples and families to seniors. Best of all.” Mr Perry said. apartments at HGV boast a 99% occupancy rate. By using all of the available public funding and resources. the company’s operations in four main areas are key to its success. . Property and Asset Management. it became unviable to continue. “and this time we got lucky. Perry Rose is mainly engaged in: 1. who put together what seemed to be a high-risk program on an infill site with heritage considerations. the firm had become expert at affordable housing developments. “We took it to market in late 1990s.” Mr Perry said. sale prices increased 25% per year between 1999 and 2002.” Mr Perry said. However. Albequerque. with 750 units under its control at present. “For a private developer. expect to make a 10% return per year on their investment. “Homes at Highlands’ Garden Village were priced between $210.” As a testament to the success of the project’s unique design and environmental attributes. and 4. social and financial objectives. Mr Perry said that the firm was currently looking for a new site to carry out another project like Highlands’ Garden Village in Denver. and they all sold. and is also active in New York City and Sante Fe. so you can use affordable housing to provide a cushion from market rate slumps in the downtimes. the developers. “For example. The company is also looking to buy existing housing projects that were developed 30 years ago as Section 8 housing with a 30 year affordability mortgage. Mr Perry said that while every kind of development had its own set of risks. the Denver private rental market is at its worst ever point at the moment. Developments on its own behalf. compared to a Denver average of 88%.using electric vehicles that members can rent for $US4.000 and $400. to rehabilitate and preserve them for future affordable use. one of the development partners. you have more predictable rents and the occupancy rates are higher. it has since completed 20 projects in Denver alone using those combined sources of public funding.000 to $80. “Sometimes in these urban infill sites. but with only 14 members after two years. they have to accept lower rental returns.74 - . affordable housing actually has less market risk than market rate rental properties. the homes save their owners money and reduce their impact on the environment. On the rental front. the project was seen as risky when it was first announced. Planning and design projects for third party clients.000. and local homes were selling for $75. 2. with only 88% of private rental homes currently leased. when the housing market in Denver was very strong. According to development partner Charles Perry. in affordable housing.” What lessons can be learned from this project? The Highlands’ Garden Village is an extremely successful example of how new developments can meet environmental. against a neighbourhood average of just 10% growth. you take a risk at the front end.00 per hour plus 40 cents per mile.

Construction method: Ground floor concrete. What makes this project interesting? On an awkward site with three street frontages. the intricacies of putting together a deal were more subtle than straightforward subsidies though.75 - . and the market rate product. Santa Monica.” Mr Perry said that ultimately.000 from an affordable housing lot. compared to $1. but is a lot more stable and predictable.” Mr Perry said that it was important to combine affordable housing projects with market rate housing to ensure the success of the development over the long term.Effectively you create a rate of return that is a little bit lower than the private market rate.” he said. and using them to fill the gaps between the rate of return on an affordable housing product. ”Also. The architects first applied passive solar and ventilation principles to achieve internal comfort. and the sense of diversity that people who want urban lifestyles desire. because projects that are just for one market don’t age well.” he asserted. while operable windows . we might take a profit of $40. which provide a marginal subsidy for the affordable component.000) No of units: 44 Unit type/s: Studio units over 5 floors Potential occupants: CCSM clients who meet eligibility criteria who earn less than 35% and 40% of median area income. “It’s more a question of understanding the [various government] financing programs. and they become stereotyped by the community.” Project: Location: Client: Developer: Architect: Builder: Cost: Commencement date: Completion date: Financing type: Colorado Court. “Despite the complexity of the affordable housing development framework. including one on the Santa Monica Freeway.” he explained.100 for a market rent studio flat. Large access balconies on the south front provide shading. “We don’t like 100% affordable housing developments. California Community Corporation of Santa Monica Community Corporation of Santa Monica Pugh+Scarpa Ruiz Brothers Construction Company $US4. Pugh+Scarpa Architects have created an energy efficient affordable housing complex that makes the most of Californian sunshine and Santa Monica breezes. “So we have come up with a set of techniques where we combine affordable housing with market rate homes. “For example.3m not known April 2002 City of Santa Monica – affordable housing finance and land provision. they don’t create sense of community.000 from a market rate townhouse lot. City of Santa Monica and Regional Energy Efficiency Program funding for energy efficiency elements (approximately $US500. wood stud framing first floor and above with prefab concrete panels. so there’s some degree of internal subsidy that you’re able to accomplish through mixed use and mixed income developments. and only $10. the end product can help you weather downmarket cycles in the private sector. Rents are between $337 and $386 per month.

according to architect Angie Brooks. and super high energy efficient models from GE were purchased. Careful design meant that all of the existing trees on the block were preserved. and producing all of the domestic hot water needed for sinks. stucco with integral pigment that never needs painting and shade screening made from galvanised metal. . Outside. while the payback for the micro turbine is short. What lessons can be learned from this project? The combined passive and active energy efficiency measures at Colorado Court mean that the “payback for the whole project is les than ten years”. “Photo voltaic systems have a long payback period.” she said. at a comparable cost to regular fridges. Landscaping uses drought tolerant plantings. This combination makes the system more efficient than a single mode system. Figure 52 . according to architect Angie Brooks. These measures mean that air-conditioning is only required in one small area of office space. The apartments feature 10’ ceilings to enhance the sense of space. and the garden is watered via a drip irrigation system with seasonal adjustment. cabinets that use plastic laminate and formaldehyde free MDF for low off-gassing. to make it 92% energy self sufficient. with panels on three of the site’s four buildings and the rooftop. showers and radiators from waste heat. In addition. and there are few windows located on the western façade. It uses a 30KW photovoltaic system. which all combine to improve indoor air quality over traditional materials. precoloured concrete blocks. the building employs active energy efficiency measures that result in the project generating 50% of its electricity requirements. 25% recycled carpet. external materials that would require little long-term maintenance were specified.Colorado Court features PV panels on three western walls and the roof. According to project architect Angie Brooks. and a 28kW gas-fired micro turbine with cogeneration (heat recovery) system. Parking spaces are located underneath the building to reduce the heat island effect. materials included low VOC paints. “’It therefore makes financial sense to increase the efficiency of the PV through the addition of a micro turbine”. The development features a permeable gravel alley and underground stormwater retention system to collect 95% of rainfall. such as exposed concrete.76 - . with motion sensors in public spaces to further save energy. Refrigerators are provided in each unit. enabling slow percolation into the ground water.positioned above the front door provide access for cross ventilating breezes. rather than running off via stormwater drains. long-lasting compact fluorescent lights were installed. while large openings on the north side provide light without heat. with just one palm relocated during the course of construction. as well as a gasfired micro turbine. Inside the units.

and disabled people requiring modified homes Construction method: not known What makes this project interesting? The 5th Street family housing project provides affordable accommodation in the heart of Santa Monica. The City’s Public Works Department paid for the stormwater retention system as part of its program to capture stormwater on key sites to prevent urban pollution runoff into the bay. and Colorado Court uses two (PV and the gas-fired micro turbine) so is ineligible. Ms Brooks said that the architects would have preferred to provide polished concrete floors in the project.52m Commencement date: not known Completion date: April 1998 Financing type: Tax credit funding for affordable housing No of units: 32 Unit type/s: 22 x three bedroom townhouses at ground level. Even if it had been able to export energy to Southern California Edison. 10 x two and four bedroom disabled access units located above the townhouses Potential occupants: Moderate income families. over carpeting. and committed $250. to avoid the health problems associated with carpets. the energy utility has a policy in place that only allows credits to accrue from one renewable energy source. California Client: Community Corporation of Santa Monica Developer: Community Corporation of Santa Monica Architect: Koning Eizenberg Architects Builder: not known Cost: $US3. there is a disparity in the cost. with ten units specifically designed and offered to disabled residents.By partnering with local utility companies. Eventually the developer was able to negotiate a lower cost for the lino. Project: 5th Street Housing Location: Santa Monica.000 to this project. The site demonstrated that it was possible to save 75% of construction waste. However. and the City of Santa Monica has since introduced legislation to force all new construction projects to achieve recycling targets or pay financial penalties for non-compliance.77 - . by purchasing it from the same supplier as the partially recycled carpet. while it charges customers 15 cents / KWH for electricity. and for extra soundproofing. The architects also suggested natural linoleum flooring in place of synthetic vinyl in kitchen and bathroom areas. while the City of Santa Monica contributed a similar amount to the cost of the energy generation systems. and to save money. with the utility paying less than 2 cents per KWH. While the developer had hoped to export net energy to the grid for monetary credit. . but initially the first cost of linoleum was seen as prohibitive. she explained. The Regional Energy Efficiency Initiative (a joint program of Southern Californian Edison and the Cities of Irvine and Santa Monica) uses a public goods surcharge from utility bills to fund energy efficiency demonstration projects. the developers were able to offset the additional cost of some of the environmental measures. it is common for affordable housing projects to offer carpet for perceptions of comfort. ie the PV and micro turbine elements.

Underground car parking keeps the ground level free for community interaction and play areas. it also provides family friendly accommodation with semi private and private spaces for each unit. and an internal walk street. Drawing on environmental design principles. The project won an AIA California Design Merit Award in 2000. . The buildings are organised around a common courtyard which features play equipment for children. This area is overlooked by front doors and kitchen windows. the location of the disabled access residents on the top floor may seem counterintuitive. What lessons can be learned from this project? 5th Street uses passive solar and cross ventilation to create comfortable apartments with an abundance of natural light. while providing ample space for planting of large trees for shade and amenity. The ground floor townhouses are thereby able to take advantage of large side yards to provide generous outdoor spaces for the majority of the units. while the footprint of the townhouses is generous enough to provide large decks for the third floor units. offering potential social benefits from increased interaction among a diverse population. and the complex only requires one above-grade access walkway. The project cleverly combines large family homes over two levels with single level apartments for disabled residents.According to architect Julie Eizenberg.78 - . thereby providing “eyes on the street” and increased community interaction. but residents on the third floor can access the ground and lower parking levels via an elevator.

which benefited from considerable government support. schools and childcare. mixed use projects. those residents can reduce the proportion of their income spent on housing related costs. to a position of acknowledging the higher upfront cost of the green attributes and selling the benefits of lower operating costs over the life of the building. quality can be controlled in the factory ensuring fewer defects upon completion. and formal and informal meeting places. had moved away from purely financial reporting. such as flat-packed homes and modular construction. or infill construction where nearby residents would be disturbed by noise and dust over a long period should traditional construction be employed. safe. they are often more suitable for tight or difficult sites.Conclusions The most successful affordable and sustainable housing projects I saw during the course of my Fellowship were mixed tenure. it is imperative that amenities such as transport. to date I have included some of the largest projects Iv visited (Greenwich Peninsula. Of course. from developers to buyers. Many of the people I met during the course of the trip emphasised that residents of public or social housing projects have the most to gain from living in environmentally sensitive homes: by paying less for utilities. or incentives through tax credit programs or tax abatement. design and construction sense. they argued. The projects that were the most green. and convenient places for people to live. and materials can be sourced more efficiently because they only have to be delivered to one site. or driving to work instead of taking public transport. they are often faster. in a planning. It became apparent that new construction methods. governments to residents. As for disseminating my findings. new residents form detrimental habits. Otherwise. some projects were not the greenest in terms of construction. schools and health facilities to provide comfortable. health facilities. Malmo’s Bo01 Expo and Vastra Hamnen and Helsinki’s Viikki Ecological Neighbourhood) in Building Australia’s Jan/Feb 2004 issue. and thereby potentially accelerate their transition into private accommodation. but combined access to transport. and reminded me that new policies have to consider all the players. They encourage people to work in construction trades by providing better quality working environments. and it is possible that unforeseen problems during the installation process can negate the earlier gains. or a combination of all these factors.79 - . are offering real benefits that go beyond simply being cheaper (which in some cases. jobs. are provided when the first residents move in. such as driving to buy groceries when they could work. and offer significant savings through repetition. The sustainability of such projects was often measured in a triple bottom line sense – taking into account environmental. which are hard to break once the facilities are provided. they are not). Architect Julie Eizenberg warned against adopting change too easily. banks to insurance companies. The people I met with agreed that in order to create the foundations for sustainable communities. That support took the form of assistance with planning and development or financial assistance via grants. some of the savings are offset by transport costs (which would be more significant in a country as large and sparsely populated as Australia than in Sweden or the United Kingdom). The same . social and economic factors. To this end.

such as affordable housing. energy. While developers argue that the regulation is in effect just a tax on their profits. more renewable energy R&D and implementation. In a big picture sense. • • • • . I would be pleased to make myself available to any reader of this report who wishes to know more about any project or policy that I learned about during the course of my trip. It is imperative that national leaders believe in the cause. Lastly. mixed tenure development. public transport options.issue also included an eight-page section on the Greenbuild Conference and Expo. Recommendations • First and foremost. petrol stations. waste and resources. Dense sites and neighbourhoods have more chance of achieving sustainability: large populations are need to support local shops. From discussions with government representatives and developers in London. I also intend to present my findings in person to university students and professional colleagues this year. have mandated the inclusion of an affordable housing component in EVERY new development of a certain size (in this case. Australia needs underlying support from the federal government for the concept of sustainable development. health facilities and other community amenities. In areas where land supply for further housing development is limited. Some governments. such as the Greater London Authority. and act appropriately. state governments have an obligation to work with private developers who wish to purchase publicly owned land. the key to its success is to level the regulation consistently across the entire area. national and local governments could conduct surveys of existing uses and vacant sites to maximise density and provide new opportunities for affordable housing. Governments need to ensure that future development sites are planned to achieve densities that will support the infrastructure that is needed to make local communities sustainable.80 - . Sites that offer opportunities for development of air space are worthy of particular investigation. The March 2004 issue will include a special report on modular and prefabricated construction. will feature throughout this year. rather than dealing with councils on a case-by-case basis on each application. for the benefit of the construction industry readers who will profit from it most. schools. strategies and policies that aim to reduce consumption of water. Australia needs a commitment to the Kyoto Protocol. which creates uncertainty and increases risk for the development community. such as supermarkets. to ensure that affordable housing is provided as part of a mixed use. and other topics of interest. rather than simply focussing on maximising financial return through private sale. so that the costs are known upfront and can be incorporated in the project. and can result in stifling development. if is worthy of consideration. and changes to financial structures that will incentivise industry and the community to pursue sustainable goals. As for the provision of adequate affordable housing. 15 units). low rise retail strips etc.

At a community level. Simple measures can have significant impacts on the lives of residents. and renovations of existing homes. The fact that state governments are still the major procurers of public housing in Australia means that they have an incredible opportunity to push the adoption and implementation of green building techniques and technologies. • • • • . and contributing towards the reduction of greenhouse gases. as the owner of large tracts of rental accommodation. Advances in modular and prefabricated construction offer the Australian construction industry plenty of scope for improvement. Personal responsibility can go a long way towards reducing waste. the development of public housing has devolved from government responsibility and is now carried out by specialist for profit and not-forprofit agencies. and consider the introduction of other mechanisms to assist moderate income residents into home ownership. the government is investing money in new environmentally friendly technologies such as heating and hot water systems. they could contribute to the creation of critical mass for those technologies. and any subsequent action. in this regard. and could conduct ongoing user research for the benefit of industry and the community generally over time. thereby making them more accessible for everyone. providing enhanced working conditions. the industry could benefit from efficiencies arising from modularisation and prefabrication of many elements of the traditional building process. In Finland. The rehabilitation of public and affordable housing neighbourhoods in Finland. Some examples include low-cost mortgages. the owners of public housing are working to eliminate problems associated with indoor air quality through eradicating damp and mould. companies and organisations of all types and size can adopt a Fully Sustainable Workplace policy. shared ownership schemes. while in Finland and Sweden.• In most countries I visited. saving water and electricity. I am eagerly awaiting the report from the Productivity Commission inquiry into Affordable Housing. The federal government should consider the efficacy of the First Home Owners Grant. state mortgage guarantees. like the Portland based architecture firm SERA is currently implementing. for example. Government also has a significant opportunity to test and trial new technologies.81 - . If state government housing providers were to mandate the inclusion of renewable energy systems and water recycling solutions on all new public housing. and through cost and efficiency measures. Sweden and the USA is providing an opportunity to revitalise down-at-heel areas and give residents a new reason to be proud of their surroundings. While Australia probably doesn’t have the population or geographical suitability for a Yorkon or a BoKlok-type product. assistance with closing costs. tied-employee housing etc. improvements to quality and defect control.

3.000 and £35. London has the highest concentration of families in priority need in England: At the end of March 2003.Appendices Appendix A – London housing statistics 1. the average house price in London increased by 115%. The need for additional affordable housing is borne out by the number of people on council waiting lists for social rented housing – more than 226 households in London in April 2002 – representing a 25% increase in five years. even in London’s cheapest borough. and bus or coach drivers earn £19. a single annual gross salary of more than £55.000 households living in temporary accommodation in London.777.180. this situation is creating profound recruitment and retention difficulties for London’s key public services and some private firms. Population growth According to the GLA’s Draft London Plan. According to the Housing Commission.000 would be needed to buy an average home: the average London salary is £34.000.900 a year. This equates to 20.430. The households most adversely affected by these changes to the housing market are those with low to moderate incomes between £15. amounting to 60% of the national total. London’s population is expected to grow by 700.000. primary school teachers earn an average salary of £26. Homelessness According to the London Housing Board’s Homes and Communities in London report of 2003. Housing Affordability House prices and rents in London have increased at faster rates than incomes. leading to serious housing affordability issues in the capital.000 units) would require social rented housing.850. The Housing Commission concluded that the lack of affordable housing in London has become a fundamental market failure. About two-thirds of homeless households need a permanent home with two or more bedrooms.360. . which is undermining the region’s sustainable economic development. staff nurses earn about £21.700 new homes per year to handle population growth alone. or 311. from £96. postal workers earn about £21. Between 1995 and 2002.82 - . For example. and is unlikely to improve in the future without urgent and significant strategic input from all levels of government.000 to £205. These households are generally unable to afford market rate housing but do not qualify for social rented housing either. 2.000 households (based on current average household sizes) between 2001 and 2016. Research conducted by the Housing Commission suggested that 24% of those new households (approximately 5. None of these workers could afford to buy an average priced home. there were nearly 59. In 2002.

uk Bill Dunster Architects www.com Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) www.yorkon.org/hfa/hfa.piercyconner.com/ Finland City of Helsinki Planning Department www.renewNYC.com/rainescourt Yorkon www.Malmö.83 - . Hyde Housing Association www.nyc.rose-network.uk Housing Corporation www.org.com State of New York Mortgage Agency www.com Colorado Housing and Finance Authority www.org.islington.html (SONYMA) Pittsburgh.gov/hpd and Development GF55 Architects www.uk Piercy Conner Architects www.nychdc.hel. NY City of New York .uk.fi/ksv/english Housing Fund of Finland (ARA) www.fi Sweden BoKlok www.com Housing Finance Authority www.co. Colorado Aspen / Pitkin County Housing Office www.yorkon.ekostaden.com New York.gov.uk Greater London Authority www.nychomes.Housing Preservation www.environment.uk EPR Architects www.se.co.cgyarchitects.com Office of the Deputy Prime Minister www.stillyarchitect.epr.uk Meridian Delta Limited www.com Perry Rose www.org .meridiandeltaltd.odpm.se (Swedish text only) City of Malmö www.nychomes.hyde-housing. www.Appendix B Web addresses for organisations and projects featured in this report: United Kingdom Allford Hall Monaghan Morris www.peabody.gov.fi Ministry of the Environment www.org.co.colohfa.org Stephen Tilly Architecture www.uk London Borough of Greenwich www.ara.com Denver.englishpartnerships.org (CHAFA) Cottle Graybeal Yaw Architects www.zedfactory.co.htm Lower Manhattan Development Corporation www.uk Environment English Partnerships www.gf55.proctorandmatthews.uk London Borough of Islington www.com Raines Dairy www.rmi. Pennsylvania Green Build Conference and Expo www.housingcorp.gov.aspenhousingoffice.com Cartwright Pickard Architects Not known Commission for Architecture and the Built www.greenbuildexpo.greenwich.nysafah.uk Peabody Trust www.ahmm.gov.cabe.com NYSAFAH www.org/sony/sonyma.london.com Housing Development Corporation www.co.uk Proctor and Matthews Architects www.boklok.

com www.org www.breweryblocks.globalgreen.ge-dev. Oregon Brewery Blocks.portland.com www.communitycorp.or.com www.us/mayor www.org www.rosecdc.kearch.com www.84 - . California Community Corporation of Santa Monica Global Green USA Koning Eizenberg Architects Pugh+Scarpa Architects www. Portland City of Portland Gerding/Edlen Development Company Portland Development Commission Environmental Building Supplies Office of Sustainable Development ROSE Community Development Corporation SERA Architects Shiels Obletz Johnsen Los Angeles.sojpdx.Portland.us www.com .ecohaus.org www.ci.green-rated.com www.org www.serapdx.com www.pugh-scarpa.pdc.

taxes etc. but I would be happy to provide readers with extra information about the following programs: NY’s Housing Development Corporation is assisting in the creation of affordable housing in some of the most desirable locations in the city. that are only repayable if the property is sold within the first nine years.6bn has been earmarked for residential development within the zone. Therefore. of $20. providing 20% of the units in their project to low-income tenants earning no more than 50% of area median income in exchange. following the terrorist attacks of September 11. or substantial renovation of an existing residential facility. Rehabilitation expenditures must equal at least 50% of the amount of New York Liberty Bonds. and encourage environmentally responsible design and construction. SONYMA completes about 5. to ensure low-income residents can live near where they work. which has been defined as south of Canal Street. . Eligibility criteria include credit standards and maximum purchase prices. with a total value of about $450 – 520 million. the program has been successful in creating affordable units in otherwise high-cost areas. through the Tax-exempt 80/20 Program. This enables the building owner to keep 20% of the units reserved for low-income tenants earning no more than 80% of area median income. conversion of a commercial facility.000 per low-income unit.000 to cover attorneys fees. Successful borrowers who put down a deposit of 5% or less are compelled to attend a homebuyer education course. Alternatively.Appendix C Other policies and strategies Some policies and strategies I came across didn’t make into the Fellowship report. To date. Up to $US1. 2001. Developers can access low cost finance. Eligible projects may consist of new construction. The State of New York Mortgage Agency (SONYMA) administers a Low Interest Rate Mortgage Program for low. thus making those units affordable to low and moderate-income tenants. whereby it offers a subsidy.000 loans every year. 25% of the units may be reserved for low-income tenants earning no more than 60% of area median income. The $US8 billion Liberty Bond Program initiative provides low cost. tax-exempt bond financing for major projects to revitalise the affected area. attract new residents to New York City. HDC created a Taxable 80/20 Program. but it is limited by the availability of tax-exempt bond allocations each year. Mortgages can be taken out for up to 97% of the purchase value and have an interest rate 1-2% points lower than market rates. and they are funded through the sale of tax-exempt bonds. and the Achieving the Dream Program for low-income first home buyers. in the form of a second mortgage at 1% for 20 years. In August 2002. with the New York State Housing Finance Agency (HFA) and New York City Housing Development Corporation (HDC) each responsible for issuing $800m. East Broadway (east of its intersection with Canal Street).85 - .to moderate-income first home buyers. Some programs also offer closing cost assistance loans for amounts up to 5% or $5. The housing sector of the program seeks to create multifamily residential rental and complementary retail development. the New York state and city governments announced a new federal funding package for Lower Manhattan. and Grand Street (east of its intersection with East Broadway). while HFA will require that at least 5% of the units be affordable to moderate income families. Both HDC and HFA are requiring an additional public benefit as part of the Liberty Bond Program: HDC will impose additional fees to be used to preserve and create affordable housing throughout the City.

chemicals. tracking of daily . CHAFA runs the state’s affordable housing program using federal Low Income Tax Credits. development and education programs to encourage home owners and builders to adopt green building practices. and acts as a disseminator of information about improve environmental performance in all types of buildings. and acts as a consultant to private clients in green building. the PDC has published guidelines for affordable housing. furniture. providing information about how to access to programs and funding streams. demolition and use of resource efficient materials. an architect with RMI’s Green Development Services. which measures indicators such as construction. paper. and maintains the G-rated website for that purpose. to assist with environmental remediation of contaminated commercial sites for new uses including housing. The Authority also publishes guidelines and resources for employers in rural resort regions about housing employees. drinking vessels and lunch wrappings. and has adopted an internal office policy to ensure a sustainable workplace.86 - . Working with the city’s Office of Sustainable Development. The Portland based architecture firm SERA is involved in the design of green buildings. using a Revolving Loan Fund. to encourage the construction. is the secretary of the World Green Building Council. and all city-funded projects. into home ownership. and builds new affordable housing as well as buying existing housing for affordable use. The program uses funds from a real estate transfer tax and city taxes. It also administers the Colorado Brownfields Program.In Denver. The county’s green building guidelines mean that all new affordable housing developments must comply with an Efficient Building Program Checklist. using programs such as MRB First Step. who earn up to 60% of the area median income. and addresses aspects such as energy. travel. plastics. fixtures and equipment. Taxable Income Opener. framing and materials. The SERA Fully Sustainable Workplace was developed with employee input. as well as facilitating the global sharing of information and research about green building. CHAFA also runs programs to assist low and moderate income residents. which must comply with standards set out in LEED. ranging from cleaners and babysitters to doctors and lawyers. plastic cutlery. The firm has also implemented a worm bin. called Greening Portland’s Affordable Housing. land use and water conservation. Colorado. and disabled citizens. in Snowmass Colorado. In Portland. metals and glass. Eligible applicants must initially attend an education program to learn about home ownership and how to maintain a home. Huston Eubank. such as affordable housing developments. rehabilitation and preservation of rental housing for low and moderate income households. The city’s Office of Sustainable Development conducts research. including affordable housing. HVAC. Oregon. solar. Colorado. To date the office has eliminated harmful products such as foam core. is a research organisation that develops blueprints for a sustainable future. The PDC also carries out research into green buildings. In Aspen. the Portland Development Commission (PDC) oversees the implementation of the Green Building Policy for all new and major retrofitted buildings. including housing. energy measures. food. where median house prices are between $5 – 7 million. indoor air quality and rewards projects that demonstrate innovation. the Aspen/Pitkin County Employee Housing Program provides housing for workers at all income levels. Home Access and Home Access Plus. and intends to add disposable writing implements to its banned list. insulation. The Rocky Mountain Institute. materials library and human resources. and is working to establish new GBCs in countries around the world..

based in Santa Monica.87 - . is the US affiliate of Green Cross International. The organisation developed the Greening Affordable Housing Initiative and conducts workshops around the country. to promote green building among the affordable housing development community. and organisation established by Mikhail Gorbachev to create a sustainable future. Global Green USA. energy star appliances and minimising plotting and printing. such as 8 Steps to Funding Green. by cultivating harmonious relationships between humans and the environment. It also publishes leaflets. and is currently working toward energy efficient lighting. developers and operators of affordable housing across the country to encourage the adoption of green building strategies and materials. .transportation for CO2 offsets. acts as a consultant to affordable housing developers. and lobby’s governments on policy initiatives such as tax credits. GG USA works with the designers. California. a sustainable library. collaborates with other organisations such as Habitat for Humanity. shares information on financing streams and funding resources among housing developers. and case studies on green projects such as Colorado Court.

88 - . New York 3. Irvington. but I would be happy to provide readers with extra information about the following developments: 1. Benedict Commons. Aspen . New York 2.Affordable Housing and Public Library.Appendix D Other projects Some projects I visited didn’t make it into the Fellowship in the report. Burnham Factory . East Harlem. Madison Court.

Museum Place. Brewery Blocks. Colorado 5. Oregon 7. Portland. Oregon 6.4. Portland.89 - . Aspen. Burlingame. Rose Community Development Corporation projects in Portland No pictures available .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful