DELIVERING SUCCESSFULHIGHER-DENSITY HOUSINGA TOOLKIT – SECOND EDITION

£14.95

© East Thames Group 2008

ISBN 978-0-9543932-2-9

15 CONCERNS TO WATCH OUT FOR

The top 15 concerns or perceptions expressed by residents,home seekers and those commissioning higher-density

schemes include:

I don’t want to live in a tower block

There’s nowhere for the kids to play

You don’t know your neighbours

Too noisy

Crowded together like rats

Nowhere to park your car

No one cares for the bits outside the building

Postman/delivery person/pizza person can’t find you

Lifts are always broken down

Not enough light and air

Nowhere to hang out the washing

Not enough room

No gardens

Nowhere to keep things outside

No privacy

�

If a higher-density scheme is to succeed in the longer term an integrated

approach to planning and evaluation should be taken from the outset.

This should include addressing the issues relating to economic, social

and environmental sustainability.

Take the 15 concerns opposite and the eight key factors in the diagram

above to meetings throughout the development process and whenever

management and maintenance are under consideration. Ensure that

these eight factors are considered fully.

Use the checklists at the back of this toolkit to further evaluate

scheme proposals.

EVALUATING HIGHER-DENSITYSCHEMES AT A GLANCE

CONTENTSAbout this toolkit 2

Part one: The guidanceMyths and reality – getting higher density right 5

1 Neighbourhood, amenity and location 8

2 Mixed communities 12

3 Design standards 16

4 Private and communal external space 24

5 Travel, parking provision and management 28

6 Allocations and lettings 32

7 Management, maintenance and 34community engagement

8 Service charges 38

Part two: The checklists 40

Acknowledgements 53

An integrated approach to higher-density housing –the density wheel

1

But by asking the right questions these issues can be overcome byaddressing each concern as follows:

Higher density need not mean high-rise – is the built form

suitable for the client group and area?

What provision is made for play and other amenities?

How does the scheme layout and use of communal areas

(internal and external) allow for neighbourly interaction?

How does the design address external noise sources and

sound insulation between the properties and how are

rooms arranged in relation to each other?

Is the density suitable for the proposed client group?

What provision is made for parking or alternatives to

car usage?

How are the public realm and communal areas

to be maintained?

Does the layout of the scheme allow for easy access

and circulation and is signage provided?

Are lifts and other communal fixtures and finishes

robust enough?

What is the orientation of the homes in relation to

some sunlight during each day?

What are the facilities for clothes drying?

Is there sufficient storage and are the homes big enough?

What provision is made for somewhere to sit outside?

How are bulky/dirty items to be stored?

How have the issues of being overlooked and privacy

been dealt with in the design?

�

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

� �

1 The Brundtland Report, Our Common Future (1987)2 Sustainable Development Commission, Building Houses or Creating Communities? (2007)3 CLG, Building a Greener Future: policy statement (2007)

ABOUT THIS TOOLKIT ABOUT THIS TOOLKIT

2

4 CABE, Better neighbourhoods: Making higher densities work (2005)

3

Whether you are a councillor, a housing association

board member, a resident, an officer, developer,

architect or consultant, this toolkit will help you to

evaluate proposals for higher-density, mixed-tenure

housing schemes. It is not a technical document or a

design tool. It is an evaluation document that offers a

means of considering scheme proposals by taking into

account all aspects of developing homes at higher

densities.

This second edition of the toolkit builds upon the first edition,

which was adopted as best practice by the Housing

Corporation. It takes the opportunity to include advice and

guidance on higher density assembled from experience of

developing higher-density homes since 2006 and also

includes environmental sustainability issues as part of the

process of evaluation.

Furthermore, since the publication of the first edition, this

toolkit has been adopted as part of the evaluation of

schemes to be undertaken in order to achieve compliance

with the Housing Corporation’s Design and QualityStandards (2007). The standard is set out in Box 1, page 4.

The approach outlined is, to some extent, an aspiration, one

that all developers including East Thames Group, which has

supported its development, are working towards. It should

be linked to the developer’s own design standards, those

set out by the Housing Corporation (and its successor

agency the Homes and Communities Agency), the London

Housing Federation and others in relation to higher density.

Sustainable development

Sustainable development is ‘development which meets the

needs of the present without compromising the ability of

future generations to meet their own needs’, according to

the Brundtland Report.1 Although this report was primarily

concerned with securing a global equity, redistributing

resources towards poorer nations while encouraging their

economic growth, it remains relevant to housing. Almost half

the recognised indicators of sustainable development are

related to housing. The principles of sustainable

development set out by Brundtland – environmental

protection, economic growth and social equity – are all part

of the housing agenda.

Sustainable neighbourhoods are about more than

high-quality homes. Social and economic regeneration and

environmental sustainability are also vital to successful

neighbourhoods. This toolkit, whilst concentrating on the

development of homes, acknowledges the importance of

this comprehensive approach to delivering sustainable

neighbourhoods and the need to address issues such as

employment, health, transport and education and skills.

It recognises the findings of the Sustainable Development

Commission that, despite good intentions, ‘newcommunities aren’t always coming up to scratch’.2 As many

of the new communities that are being built are built at

higher densities it is critical that these schemes address

this agenda.

Higher-density housing can:

• Make better use of scarce land resources

• Make more efficient use of existing infrastructure

• Reduce the need for travel by providing

local amenities

• Reduce the reliance on car transport by providing

a focus for walking, cycling and public

transport networks.

Tackling climate change

The UK government is committed to tackling climate

change. Its long-term goal is to reduce carbon emissions

from all sources by 60% by 2050.3 It is vital that we ensure

that our homes are built in a way that minimises the use of

energy and reduces their harmful carbon dioxide emissions

as domestic housing contributes towards 27% of the UK’s

carbon emissions. The government has set a target for all

new homes to be zero carbon by 2016 with a progressive

tightening of Part L (conservation of heat and power) of the

building regulations – by 25% improvement over TER in

2010 and by 44% improvement in 2013 – up to the zero

carbon target in 2016. Furthermore, the Housing

Corporation will require that, to be eligible for funding, all

affordable homes will be required to meet level 4 (44%

improvement over TER) of the Code for Sustainable Homes

by 2011. Zero carbon development will be their minimum

standard by 2015 as long as the technology becomes

available and is cost-effective.

Building sustainable homes is about more than just

greenhouse gases. We also need to build and use our

homes in a way that minimises their other environmental

impacts, such as the water they use, the waste they

generate and the materials they are built from.

Well designed and maintained high-density housing can

help to reduce our impact upon the environment and help to

mitigate climate change. This toolkit attempts to show how

the pitfalls of developing at higher densities can be

addressed to avoid repetition of past mistakes and to help

create truly sustainable neighbourhoods.

What are the barriers to increasing density?

Research shows that some of the biggest barriers to

increasing density are:

• Concerns about the impact on traffic and parking

• Local residents not in favour, out of character with the

local area

• Concerns about the impact on local services

• Concerns about the lack of high-quality public space

and play areas

• It is associated with problem families

• It is perceived to be ugly

• It is perceived to reduce house prices for

current residents4

• Reluctance of lenders to offer mortgages on high

rise properties, a barrier set to grow if current market

trends persist.

Other concerns include:

• Long-term sustainability and popularity of the scheme;

• Whether the design is sensitive to the area;

• Intensity of use and the robustness and quality of materials

and finishes, especially in communal areas

(i.e. whether it will stand the test of time)

• High levels of occupancy;

• Child densities and the need for forethought in housing

large numbers of children (for example, the impact on

health and schools services);

• Approaches to lettings;

• The costs of managing higher density; and

• Whether a scheme will be effectively managed

and maintained.

Given the government’s Respect Agenda, it is vital to

ensure that higher-density homes are designed and

managed with safe, secure and cohesive communities in

mind. It is hoped that the approach outlined in this toolkit will

influence, among other things, local authority Local

Development Frameworks, and that authorities will be more

responsive to the issues that it raises.

This toolkit dispels some of the myths about higher density

and considers the issues that need to be addressed if

higher-density homes are to become homes of choice.

It comprises:

Part one - The guidance

Part two - The checklists

A web-based resource that supplements the toolkit is

available at www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

Families with children prefer a suburban style of living. It is

possible both to achieve higher density and also to deliver

family housing in a more suburban form by adopting a

range of site layouts and built forms.

Higher densities of up to 120 dwellings per hectare can be

achieved in developments of two to four storeys. Table 1.1

shows how this can be done by offering a mix of different

housing types.5

5 MJP Architects: Redefining Suburbia (2005)

Creating homes of choice, regardless of tenure or the

economic and social background of the occupants demands

that a range of issues be addressed including:

• Neighbourhood, amenity and location

• Mixed communities

• Design standards

• Private and communal external space

• Parking provision and management

• Allocations and lettings

• Maintenance and facilities management

• Resident and community involvement

• Service charges.

Failure to do so in the past led to the demolition of

thousands of homes, which had become impossible to let.

PART ONE: THE GUIDANCE

MYTHS AND REALITY – GETTING HIGHERDENSITY RIGHT

Myth

Higher density means tall blocks.

Reality

Higher density does not necessarily mean high-rise.

It is a common mistake to think that higher density means

high-rise. It is important to remember that higher densities

can be achieved by the different arrangements of buildings

on the site and their built form.

At a density of 75 homes per hectare houses with gardens

can be achieved instead of a high-rise block. Figure 1

illustrates this.

Myth

Only single people and childless couples can live in

higher-density homes.

Reality

Higher-density living can be successful for all household

types with varied economic circumstances, but only if it is

high-quality living, facilitated by quality design and more

intensive management, supported by appropriate

occupancy levels procured through sensitive lettings

policies – in other words an integrated approach is

required as illustrated in Figure 2 shown overleaf.

Table 1.1 Delivering higher density in suburban form

Housing type Density per hectare net Storeys

Courtyard housing 57 2

Terraced court housing 77 2 – 3

Mews housing 87 2 – 3

Mews housing ofterraced maisonettes 111 2 – 4

Mews housing withflats and maisonettes 120 2 – 4

Source: Andrew Wright Associates

Figure 1

HIGH RISE – LOW COVERAGE 75 UNITS/HA

KEY

MAISONETTES

HOUSE

APARTMENTS

LOW RISE – HIGH COVERAGE 75 UNITS/HA

MEDIUM RISE – MEDIUM COVERAGE 75 UNITS/HA

4 5

ABOUT THIS TOOLKIT

About part one:The guidance

Each of the eight sections in part one considers a key issue.

In addition to offering guidance, each section also includes

some key questions to ask and offers further resources if

you want to find out more about a particular issue. Process

notes, which suggest how to go about ensuring that certain

approaches are adopted, are also included. Each section

(where appropriate) considers environmental sustainability

in relation to both the building fabric and its surroundings

and the contributions that residents can make to it.

The sections are:

1 Neighbourhood, amenity and location

2 Mixed communities

3 Design standards

4 Private and communal external space and the

public realm

5 Travel, parking provision and management

6 Allocations and lettings

7 Management, maintenance and community engagement

8 Service charges.

Having looked at the guidance and other materials offered

in each section, if you require a more detailed means of

assessing a proposed scheme, or an element of a scheme,

then turn to the checklists at the back of the document.

About part two: The checklists

Part two contains a detailed checklist for each area. The

checklists comprise a series of questions and a simple

method of assessing proposals that will help you to identify

any areas that need further consideration.

Box 1

Compliance with Housing Corporation Design Quality Standards 2007

Core standards

The core standards apply as a minimum

requirement for higher-density family housing.

However, the core standards alone will be

insufficient to address the additional design and

management considerations associated with

successful higher-density family provision.

Additional standards

In order to address the factors affecting higher-

density housing for families, affordable housing

providers should additionally comply with the

principles set out in the London Housing Federation

publication, Higher Density Housing for Families: A Design and Specification Guide (2004).

The Housing Corporation also requires that, in

schemes providing family housing that comprise

more than 20 units of accommodation with densities

of more than 70 dwellings per hectare, a web-based

self-assessment evaluation should be undertaken.

This is freely available at

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

The results of the evaluation (received back by

return email) should not include negative results

exceeding 25%. Copies of the assessment should

be retained for audit purposes.

Source: Design Quality Standards (Annex 1) Housing Corporation (April 2007)

7

Technical notes 1 Density – some definitions

For the purposes of this toolkit higher density includes

all schemes over 70 dwellings per hectare.

Super density refers to schemes of more than 150

dwellings per hectare. Design for Homes has published

a guide that specifically tackles this and has been

promoted as a companion guide to this toolkit. It offers

some thoughtful guidance and 10 key

recommendations on developing at super density.6

2 Housing density measures

1 Dwellings or units per hectare or per acre

– this refers simply to the number of homes built

upon a site.

2 Habitable rooms per hectare/acre – this is the most

common measure used in London. For example, a

three-bedroom house with two double and one single

bedroom, kitchen, living room and bathroom counts

as having four habitable rooms. Small kitchens and

bathrooms do not count. If, however, the house had a

dining kitchen then it would have five habitable rooms

3 People or bed spaces per hectare/acre – using the

above example, the three-bedroom house sleeps up

to five people. This is what is meant by a bedspace.

Thus we talk of a three-bedroom, five-person house

as having five bed spaces. This offers an estimate of

the likely population of a scheme. However, it may

over-estimate this as some dwellings, especially in

market sale homes, may be under occupied.

4 Potential child numbers per hectare/acre –

a definition used in Capital Gains (LHF 2002)

is the number of children that can be housed

on a site in accommodation of two bedrooms or

over and assuming 50 per cent single parent

households (a proportion representative of inner

London housing association lettings). In the above

example, the child potential in a three-bed, five-

person house is four, allowing for a single parent.

Across a scheme of 50 homes, however, only 25

homes would be assumed to be headed by a single

parent rather than a couple.

5 A plot ratio is not a measure of density. It is the total

area of the building, i.e. the footprint or floor area

times the number of storeys, divided by the area of

the site. Thus if the size of site is one and the floor

area is three the plot ratio is three.

3 Net housing density – an approach

A net site density is the most commonly used approach

in allocating housing land in development plans and is

appropriate for development on infill sites where the

boundaries of the site are clearly defined and where

only residential uses are proposed. It is also

appropriate where phased development is taking place

in a major development area (perhaps spanning

different plan periods) and individual housing sites have

been identified.

A net site density is a more refined estimate than a

gross site density and includes only those areas that

will be developed for housing and directly associated

uses. This will include:

• Access roads within the site

• Private garden space

• Car parking areas

• Incidental open space and landscaping

• Children’s play areas where these are to

be provided.

It therefore excludes:

• Major distributor roads

• Primary schools

• Open spaces serving a wider area

• Significant landscape buffer strips.

Unlike gross, neighbourhood and town/district

densities, the density assumption used does not

need to reflect the inclusion of non-residential uses,

but is based solely on the form of housing

development envisaged.

Source: DETR, The Use of Density in Urban Planning, p 66-67 (1998)

4. Determining appropriate density

Factors that might help to determine an appropriate site

density include:

• Surrounding built form – perhaps with higher

densities at the centre of a site with lower densities

appropriate for families at the edges

of a site

• Capacity of the facilities – the number of people

needed to make these work and the amount of

existing public realm

• Housing types – the master plan will determine

these. Note that the market can skew provision as in

the current climate with smaller units being favoured

as they are the most profitable

• Need for different housing types – size tenures

and types.

Source: English Partnerships/ Housing Corporation, Delivering Quality Places:Urban Design Compendium 2 (2007)

6 Design for Homes, Recommendations for living at superdensity (2007)

6

Process note

Take an integrated approach to planning or evaluating higher-density schemes and proposals from the start: consider

all elements in the density wheel in Figure 2.

Where a scheme is being delivered through a S106 planning agreement, councillors in particular should ensure that

the final ‘product’ meets the planning obligations in respect of materials, design and construction quality.

Figure 2: An integrated approach to higher-density housing – the density wheel

8 9

Additional credits can be gained as part of meeting the

Code for Sustainable Homes by providing residents

with the necessary space and services to be able to

work from home.

Location of the development is also important when

assessing what low and zero carbon technologies to install

(an independent feasibility study should always be carried

out – see reference to CSH). For instance, community (or

district) heating which involves the use of a central boiler

plant (or other heat sources) to heat a number of buildings

or dwellings through a network of well-insulated

underground pipes.

Place-making through master planning

By bringing together key stakeholders in an area (for

instance as part of a stakeholder dialogue and facilitation

exercise) and establishing a vision and, in the case of larger

schemes exceeding 200 homes, adopting master planning

processes, higher-density schemes offer an opportunity to

create great places.

A clear, considered master plan developed by professionals

and local people together can lead to the physical, social

and economic revival of places.15 A master plan provides a

vision for an area. Spatial master plans set out proposals for

buildings, spaces, movement and land use in three

dimensions and match these aspirations with an

implementation strategy.

13 The Housing Quality Indicator system Version 4 (for NAHP 2008-10) (Housing

Corporation 2007) (HQI) is a measurement and assessment tool designed to allow

housing schemes to be evaluated on the basis of quality rather than simply of cost.

The HQI assesses the quality of a housing project using three main categories:

location, design and external environment

14 London Plan Density Matrix Review GLA (2006) 15 CABE, Creating successful masterplans: a guide for clients (2004)

Process note

Has the proposal or scheme been checked for

excellence in location using some proxy

measures – i.e. is the infrastructure including

public transport in place?

• Good access to facilities, schools and public

transport (the majority within 500m)

• Housing Quality Indicator scores compliant with

the minima identified in the Housing Corporation’s

Design and Quality Standards with an overall

score of greater than 75%13

• Public Transport Accessibility Levels of four to six

(PTAL levels) offers a sound basis to commence

the assessment of location14

• Is a well-managed, large, public open space

located within 10 to 15 minutes’ walk?

• Have the local health and education authorities

been informed of the new scheme and are they

prepared to deliver services that meet residents’

needs?

LOCATION AND AMENITY

The intensification of an area, especially through the

provision of larger schemes, offers the opportunity for

effective ‘place-making’ approaches. Furthermore, most

higher-density schemes are mixed tenure. For new

residents, including potential buyers, a key driver in

selecting a new home is the quality of the area in terms of

access to facilities and services, a sense of community,

safety and security. Location really does matter.9 The

presence of shops and schools and local services are all

considered to enhance the attractiveness of a locality for

homebuyers. Other surveys have also shown that schools

are crucial to this decision.10 Recent research for the Joseph

Rowntree Foundation (JRF) has found that many

respondents reported a sense of separation between their

housing scheme and the surrounding community.11

Ensuring the integration of the development within the

surrounding and existing community is essential for it to be

a successful scheme. Respondents to the JRF research

often reflected on what they felt was the safe zone of the

development as opposed to surrounding urban space which

felt less secure. There was an almost siege-like mentality

with residents perceiving crime encroaching upon the

scheme from the surrounding neighbourhood. The scheme

therefore has to fit into the wider area, not only in terms of

design, but also on a community level. Shared community

facilities (between the new development and the local area)

sometimes assisted this.

7 Communities Scotland: Summary research No 69, Issues in developing urban

housing in Edinburgh to meet the needs of a range of households (higher

density)(2005)8 CLG, Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing, para 13 (2006)9 CABE, What home buyers want: attitudes and decision making among

consumers (2005)

10 Op cit. 511 Bretherton J. and Pleace N., Joseph Rowntree Foundation, High Density and High

Success? Resident views on life in new forms of high density affordable housing

(forthcoming 2008)12 LSE: Density and urban neighbourhoods in London (2005)

continued on next page

1. NEIGHBOURHOOD, AMENITY AND LOCATION

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

Higher-density housing will never be successful in isolation and

therefore neighbourhood context is critical. The importance of actively

addressing a broad range of interrelated issues both in neighbourhood

and site design is required if successful housing is to be created.7

A CAUTIONARY NOTE

‘Design which…. fails to take the opportunities available for

improving the character and quality of an area and the way it

functions should not be accepted.’ 8

Good public transport is viewed as important or essential.

Density does not, of itself, account for positive or negative

attributes of particular urban areas. Other factors are crucial

in determining how such places are judged, for example:

• Higher levels of satisfaction are determined by access to

public transport, proximity to large and safe open spaces,

and also good access to shops and social facilities

• Lack of car parking is considered a major problem,

especially in more affluent areas.12

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

In considering the location, relationships with potential

places of work should be taken into account. For instance

the location should not make residents car-dependent and a

travel plan should be developed for the site to encourage

the use of public transport and cycling.

CABE suggests that the plan should:

• Show how streets, squares and open spaces of a

neighbourhood are to be connected

• Define the height, bulk and massing of buildings

• Set out suggested relationships between buildings

and public spaces

• Determine the activities and uses that will take

place in the area

• Identify the movement patterns for people on foot,

or by bicycle, car or public transport, as well as

looking at the needs of service and refuse vehicles

• Set out the basis for the provision of utilities and

other infrastructural elements

• Relate the physical form of the site to social,

economic and cultural contexts and take account of

the needs of people living and working in the area

• Show ways in which new neighbourhoods can be

integrated into existing communities as well as built

and natural environments.

10 11

THE KEY QUESTIONS1. Higher density need not mean high-rise – is the built

form suitable for the client group and area?

2. Is the density suitable for the proposed client group?

3. If there is a master plan for the area, does this scheme

conform to it?

4. Does the development fit and integrate with the

surrounding neighbourhood and community?

5. Have education, health, social services, the utilities and

other stakeholders been involved in planning services

for the increased population?

6. What plans are there to ensure that appropriate

infrastructure is in place by the time homes are sold

or let?

7. Wherever the scheme is located, does it score 75+

against Housing Quality Indicators for amenity and

location, including play?

8. Check for location of:

a. local shops

b. the main centre for shopping in the area, including

public transport to it

c. supermarket shopping, including public transport to it

d. leisure facilities

e. sports facilities

f. parks and play areas

g. doctors’ surgery

h. primary schools.

9. How close are the nearest public transport links?

i. trains

ii. trams

iii. tubes

iv. buses.

10. In London, has a Public Transport Accessibility Rating

exercise been undertaken? (The PTAL score should be

four to six)

11. Is a residential travel plan in place?

12. What are the sources of noise (industry, traffic, rail

lines) and how have these been addressed?

13. Given the amenity and location of the scheme what

plans (if any) are proposed for the provision of

additional community facilities for the exclusive use of

residents or the wider community?

14. Has a low (or zero) carbon feasibility study of the

location been carried out?

15. Is there an opportunity to link the development to an

existing source of energy infrastructure such as a

community heating or combined heat and power plant?

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor more information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS:

CABE, Creating successful masterplans: a guide for clients

(2004)

CABE, Councillors Guide to Urban Design (2003)

CABE/English Heritage, Guidance on Tall Buildings (2007)

CABE, Building for Life, Delivering great places to live: 20

questions you need to answer (2005)

CLG: Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) Housing

(December 2006)

Housing Corporation, The Housing Quality Indicator

system Version 4 (for NAHP 2008-10) (2007)

London Housing Federation, Capital Gains – making high

density housing work in London – summary (2002)

LSE, Density and Urban Neighbourhoods in London (2005)

Department for Transport, Making residential travel plans

work: guidelines for new developments (2005)

KEY WEBSITES AND DOWNLOADS:

Community Heating – a guide:

www.est/download.cfm?p=1&pid=337

Renewable energy sources for homes in urban

environments:

www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&pid=237

www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/housingbuildings/professionals

Code for Sustainable Homes Technical Guide, Chapter 1:

www.planningportal.gov.uk/uploads/code_for_sust_homes.pdf

www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/travelplans

www.cabe.org.uk

www.housingcorp.gov.uk

www.communities.gov.uk

Process note

In order to raise standards the following are

important contributing factors:

• Working together involving not just the planning

process but how people within, and external to,

the local authority work together

• Regular review of the council’s urban design

guidance

• Protecting design quality to ensure that what is

actually built reflects what was approved

• Championing qualities – councillors offering

leadership – acting as a design champion

promoting benefits of good design ensuring that

each development is seen in context rather than in

isolation16

• If tall buildings proposals are proposed,

consultation with both CABE and English Heritage

is encouraged to ensure that best practice is

adopted17

• Where super-density is proposed refer to the

guidance offered by Design for Homes18

• When assessing the location and amenities

offered, where possible, walk the area

• Try to get ‘underneath’ the initial statements about

the number of shops or the quality of transport

connections. For example, do the shops offer an

appropriate range of services? Is the journey to

the underground station safe and secure and well

lit at night?

16 CABE, Councillors Guide to Urban Design (2003)17 CABE/English Heritage, Guidance on Tall Buildings (2007)18 Design for Homes, Recommendations for living at superdensity (2007)

13

The Hills report noted the increased residualisation of social

housing since the 1980s arising from the increased

concentration of social rented homes on estates. Housing

policy emphasises the need to address this though the

development of cohesive, mixed tenure and mixed income

communities. In order to help mixed communities to work

consideration needs to be given to how the tenures are

integrated, especially in higher-density developments where

tenures are more likely to be cheek by jowl.

MIXED COMMUNITIES‘In the Mix’ advises that successful mixed communities will

need:23

• A critical mass of customers

• Knowledge about alternative retail or transport options

• Consultation with current or potential rival

service providers.24

19 DETR, Planning Policy Guidance Note 3: Housing (March 2000) 20 Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Foundations: Mixed Communities (2006)21 Chartered Institute of Housing, A good place for children? Attracting and retaining

families in inner urban mixed income communities (2006) 22 Hills J., Ends and Means: The Future Roles of Social Housing in England, London:

ESRC Research Centre for Analysis of Social Exclusion Report 34

23 Tunstall R et al, Housing Corporation English Partnerships and Joseph Rowntree

Foundation, In the Mix: A Review of mixed income, mixed tenure and mixed

communities (2006)24 Ibid25 Op.cit 16 p.2926 Ibid

2. MIXED COMMUNITIES

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

The Government ‘does not accept that different types of housing and

tenures make bad neighbours’.19

In relation to children and schools, mixed communities

require the following in order to work:

• A critical mass of numbers of potential students in each

year cohort

• Knowledge about current mix in local schools, available

places in these and other accessible schools, and likely

parent and school attitudes to each other

• Awareness of current school performance and likely

demand for places.25

The mix should also:

• Avoid a large income/education/social divide

between residents

• Provide opportunities and contexts for different residents to

engage with each other

• Allow people from different groups to live next door to or

opposite each other.

The design of the development should encourage

neighbours and other residents to meet through shared

parking areas, courtyards and footpaths.26

Opportunities and contexts for interaction should be created

through layout and design. Visible differences should be

avoided and mechanisms such as estate management

forums and community groups should be provided to

encourage integration.

INTEGRATING TENURE

Research by York University found that a greater degree of

tension existed among differing tenures in developments

where segregation was in place.27 This was most prominent

when there was physical separation, i.e. separate

blocks/areas, and if there were any apparent design

differences between the tenures. Much of this was a result

of pre-formed attitudes (on the part of low-cost home

ownership and owner-occupier residents) rather than direct

experience. In developments where design was comparable

across the scheme and RSL properties were not obvious,

the tensions were less apparent or did not exist.

There are two main approaches to mixing tenure:

• Pepper-potting, where tenures are scattered

throughout a scheme

• Clusters, where social rented homes are grouped around

a stairwell or in part, of a block such as on lower floors or

segregated in separate blocks.

Mixing of tenures is achieved by design and estate layout,

i.e. planned integration from the outset and through housing

allocations and lettings. The advantages of pepper-potting

are usually cited as:

• More socially inclusive

• Creating more cohesive communities

• Easier to manage – single overall management can be put

in place.

Disadvantages include:

• Perception that it is harder to market private sales

• Service charges cannot be so easily controlled and may

be unaffordable for social tenants on lower incomes where

extra amenities are planned for owners.

Mixed income new communities (MINCs) Research by the Institute of Housing and the Joseph

Rowntree Foundation considers the importance of the

supply of family homes in mixed new communities and the

constraints on this supply.

One of the key issues in the development of higher-density

housing is how to ensure that family accommodation is

provided, especially three-bedroom homes and above. The

Housing Strategy for London sets a target of 35% of new

social rented homes to be three bedrooms or above. By

varying density across the site and by adopting the

approaches to built form illustrated in Figure 1 and Table 1

in Section 1, more family homes can be accommodated at

higher densities.

Families can bring stability to an area. If sustainable and

inclusive communities that bring benefits to low-income

households are to be developed, this may in part depend on

an area’s ability to attract families who will purchase

market-rate accommodation too.

Benefits for schools and other services demand a critical

mass of families in all tenures. Factors important in

attracting and retaining families include larger homes,

acceptable secondary schools, and a sense of community.28

MYTH

Values are depressed by mixed tenure.

REALITY

‘Mixed tenure and mixed income were non-issues to residents – they

saw their neighbours as ‘ordinary people’.’ 20

‘Among all the residents we interviewed in both tenures, a majority at

both sites were either indifferent or positive about the mix. Some felt

that mix was inherently a good thing, and good for all residents.’21

Pho

to: A

shle

y B

ingh

am a

nd M

ark

Elli

s

27 Bretherton J and Pleace N, JRF, High Density and High Success? Resident views on

life in new forms of high density affordable housing (forthcoming 2008)28 Chartered Institute of Housing, A good place for children? Attracting and retaining

families in inner urban mixed income communities (2006)12

14 15

Buy to letBuy to let investment can create problems arising from

transient population, absentee landlords and variable

management standards. Such investment (which has

reached a level accounting for two out of every three new

homes for sale in London) also alters the intended tenure

mix. In a high-density scheme the impact of problems

arising from such properties can be more intense. Local

scheme managers should therefore be aware of which

homes are let out on this basis and attempt to ensure that

management standards are acceptable. During the

development stage consider limiting sales to investors and

offering management services across all tenures.

THE KEY QUESTIONS1. What mix of tenures and incomes is planned for the

development?

2. How have the different housing tenures been integrated

with each other?

3. Is the social housing element located in an equally

accessible and attractive position as the private

housing?

4. Is design quality similar for all tenure types?

5. Are there opportunities for the different tenures to meet

and integrate, for example through the common use of

communal areas or paths and streets?

6. What are the arrangements for managing tenure mix?

7. How is the buy to let investment market to be managed

to ensure that management standards are maintained

by private landlords?

8. Are some larger, family homes being provided?

9. If additional services are planned for the different

tenures, how have service charges been established

and are they affordable? (See Section 8.)

10. As part of your marketing activities are you promoting

the environmental credentials of these dwellings

(for instance, including information on the final CSH

certificate and Energy Performance Certificates in your

marketing packs)?

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor further information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS AND DOWNLOADS:

Bretherton J and Pleace N, JRF, High Density and High

Success? Resident views on life in new forms of high

density affordable housing (forthcoming 2008)

Chartered Institute of Housing, A good place for children?

Attracting and retaining families in inner urban mixed

income communities (2006)

Housing Corporation, English Partnerships and the

Joseph Rowntree Trust, In the mix, a review of mixed

income, mixed tenure and mixed communities (2006)

Hyde Housing Group, Hyde Principles – mixed tenure,

www.hyde-housing.co.uk

Joseph Rowntree Foundation, Economic segregation in

England: Causes, consequences and policy (2005)

Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Chartered Institute of

Housing: Creating and sustaining mixed income

communities: a Good Practice Guide (2006)

Rob Rowlands, Alan Murie, and Andrew Tice, JRF/CIH,

More than tenure mix: developer and purchaser attitudes to

new housing estates (2006)

ALG/LHF, ‘Think Big’: Delivering family homes for London

(November 2006)

Process note

• Decide the approach to tenure mixing at the

outset

• Ensure that the service charge implications arising

from this are considered early on in terms of

affordability and that these are built into financial

analysis of the scheme

• Attempt to manage the impact of buy to let.

1716

8 Environmental sustainability. The Code for

Sustainable Homes offers an opportunity to address

sustainability in new high-density developments,

ensuring that homes deliver real improvements in key

areas such as carbon dioxide, water use, waste

management and building materials. However,

consideration of location factors is of paramount

importance if the sustainability of the proposed

development is to be maximised. Factors such as

transport, local education and health amenities should

be closely considered.

The Town and Country Planning Association (TCPA)

emphasises that integration of water, landscape and

built form is essential in order to create a high-quality

environment and enhance local biodiversity. It

recommends that the master-planning team should

develop a clear green space strategy that makes a

positive contribution to local biodiversity. It notes that it

will also need to resolve a number of conflicting

requirements, in particular the need for appropriate

residential density, good practice in urban design

(placemaking, connectivity and enclosure) and good

access to daylight and sunlight. It goes on to say that at

densities of over 100 dwellings per hectare the tensions

between good urban design and day lighting become

more apparent. Built form will need to be ‘manipulated

and sculpted to ensure adequate sunlight to amenity

space as increasing density will limit the amount of

natural light available’.35

9 The link with maintenance. From the outset the

design of higher-density developments, and especially

communal areas, should have in mind future

maintenance requirements and facilities management

and incorporate whole life costing. Failure to make this

link can lead to the specification of materials and

components that may not be robust enough to

withstand the greater intensity of use in communal

areas in particular. The performance of materials should

be monitored over time and, where effective, inform

future design specifications and codes.

35 TCPA, Sustainable energy by design (2006)

Photo: Ashley Bingham and Mark Ellis

Box 2

GLA Design principles for a compact city -

Policy 4B.1

The Mayor will, and boroughs should, seek to

ensure that developments should:

• Maximise the potential of sites

• Promote high-quality inclusive design and create

or enhance the public realm

• Contribute to adaptation to, and mitigation of, the

effects of climate change

• Respect local context, history, built heritage,

character and communities

• Provide for or enhance a mix of uses

• Be accessible, usable and permeable for all users

• Be sustainable, durable and adaptable in terms of

design, construction and use

• address security issues and provide safe, secure

and sustainable environments (policy 4B.6)

• be practical and legible

• be attractive to look at and, where appropriate,

inspire, excite and delight

• respect the natural environment and biodiversity,

and enhance green networks and the Blue

Ribbon Network

• address health inequalities (policy 3A.23).

These principles should be used in assessing

planning applications and in drawing up area

planning frameworks and DPD policies. Design and

access statements showing how they have been

incorporated should be submitted with proposals to

illustrate their impacts.

Source: GLA, The London Plan (2004)

DESIGN QUALITIESHigh-density housing generally makes a big impact on the

neighbourhood, in some cases owing to its scale and how

the blocks are massed together. Therefore high-quality

layout, setting and use of materials is required to offset the

potential disadvantages of the greater bulk of the buildings.

Furthermore, in terms of creating a sense of place that is

well integrated into the surrounding community, or which, if

of sufficient scale, creates the local ambience, the design

qualities of higher-density schemes that should be

considered include:

1 Character. The sense of place and history. How

landscapes, natural features, distinctive buildings,

skylines, local culture all contribute to this.

2 Continuity and enclosure. A place where public and

private spaces are distinguished as are the contributors,

which include streets and footpaths. Enclosing streets

by buildings and trees of a scale that feels comfortable.

No wasted space that is not maintained.

3 Quality of the public realm. A place where people

want to be with a feeling of safety and security suited to

the needs of everyone, including disabled and older

people, with well-designed lighting and street furniture.

4 Ease of movement. A place that is easy to go to and to

move around and is connected. Densities should be

highest where access to public transport is best. Routes

should be accessible and they should lead to where

people want to go. The design of streets should be

carefully considered.33

5 Legibility. Factors that contribute to this are landmarks,

good views, lighting, signage, all of which make a place

understandable.

6 Adaptability. A place that can be flexible and change

easily. Are the buildings adaptable and are important

historic buildings reused?

7 Diversity. A place with variety, meeting the needs of

diverse communities and cultures with a variety of

architectural styles.34

3. DESIGN STANDARDS

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

‘Careful attention to design is particularly important where the chosen

local strategy involves intensification of the existing urban fabric.

Successful intensification need not mean high-rise development or

low-quality accommodation with inappropriate space. The density of

existing development should not dictate that of new housing by stifling

change or requiring replication of existing style or form. If done well,

imaginative design and layout of new development can lead to a more

efficient use of land without compromising the quality of the

local environment.’29

A CAUTIONARY NOTE

The fact that new homes on a new development do sell is no

guarantee that the experience of residents living there will be entirely

good, or that the development will be successful in the long term.30

MYTH

Higher density means questionable design quality.

REALITY

‘Innovative architecture and design often offered a sense of space

and light within the homes. Residents often reported that they did

not feel that they lived at “high densities”, even though this was

the case.’ 31

29 CLG, Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (2006)30 CABE, A sense of place: what residents think of their new homes (2007)31 Bretherton J and Pleace N, JRF, High Density and High Success? Resident views on

life in new forms of high density affordable housing (forthcoming 2008) 32 PRP Brent Joint Commissioning Partnership, Drawing lessons for Brent: A report on

quality in recent high density mixed tenure housing (2007)

33 See for example, CLG/ DfT, Manual for streets (2007)34 CABE, Councillors Guide to Urban Design (2003)

Pho

to: A

MA

Ale

xi M

arm

ot A

ssoc

iate

s

1918

The sustainability agenda and the trend towards

super-density has led to further critical principles:

• Cross-ventilation should be considered wherever possible

as the only alternative to cross-ventilation is air

conditioning. Hot summers can lead to increased carbon

footprints if this alternative is adopted.

• Higher-density housing solutions should have an increased

emphasis on the quality of space, appropriate orientation,

sunlight, daylight and views to maximise the quality of

internal and external spaces within developments.41

CABE’s Building for LifeCABE offers 20 questions to assess overall scheme design

and location in its publication Building for Life: Delivering

great places to live: 20 questions you need to answer, which

now forms part of achieving compliance with the Housing

Corporation’s Design and Quality Standards.42

INTENSITY OF USE AND THE COMMON AREAS

More important than numerical density is the concept of

intensity of use.

Even though, in the case of non-rented accommodation,

properties are often under-occupied, schemes should be

assessed in terms of bedspaces (people) per hectare in

addition to dwellings per hectare in order to calculate the

number of people living on a site and hence the likely level

of intensity of use and occupancy.

Many of the issues that need addressing when considering

higher-density affordable family housing occur in the shared

areas between the communal entrance to a group of flats

and the private entrance to an individual flat. Many issues

are therefore ‘core-related’.

These issues include security and entry systems, mail

delivery, lifts, stairs, refuse disposal, links to underground

car parks etc. The importance of addressing each of these

areas properly tends to increase as the number of dwellings

and occupants served by a core increases, simply because

the intensity of use of each area is greater. Figure 3.1

illustrates this concept. Please note that these diagrams are

to illustrate the concept of the core area and that the third

option potentially would fail to deal with the important issue

of cross-ventilation highlighted opposite.

Figure 3.1 Typical floor plans showing different flat

groupings around a core

Source: London Housing Federation, Higher-density housing for families: a design andspecification guide (2004)

THE LONDON DENSITY MATRIX

The London Plan Density Matrix review offers advice on

both site and design.36 It notes that, in general, sites over

two hectares have the potential to define their own setting.

The setting needs to be in accordance with the location of

the site (i.e. distance to the town centre) and with the over-

arching aspirations of the area as defined in regional and

local planning documents. The guidance also refers to the

need, in London, to implement the design principles for a

compact city set out in Box 2, page 17.

RESIDENTS’ PREFERENCES

With some exceptions, the following factors are ranked by

residents in the following order of importance:

1 Security

2 Sound insulation

3 Dwelling size

4 Good quality open space

5 Privacy37

The most recent research into residents’ views has found

that, in general, the aspects of scheme design that were

viewed most positively were the extent of natural light and a

high degree of insulation. Internal space is also highly rated.

Dissatisfaction was higher in relation to other aspects of

design, including inadequate sound-proofing, a lack of green

areas and, to a lesser extent, factors that were perceived to

reduce site security. Poor provision of parking space,

particularly for visitors, created dissatisfaction for residents

across most schemes.38

36 GLA, London Plan density Matrix review (2006)37 London Housing Federation, Capital Gains: making higher density housing work in

London (2002) and Design for Homes Popular Research, Perceptions of privacy and

density in housing (2003)38 Bretherton J. and Pleace N., JRF, High Density and High Success? Resident views

on life in new forms of high density affordable housing (Forthcoming 2008)

39 Ibid and for guidance see also Energy Saving Trust, Daylighting in Urban areas: A

guide for designers (2007 ed)40 Op.cit. 36

41 Design for Homes, Recommendations for living at superdensity (2007)42 CABE, Building for Life, Delivering great places to live: 20 questions you need to

answer (2005)

DESIGN OF HOMESSuccessful schemes exhibit certain features, which

designers should take into account. For example, the level

of natural light within flats, houses and apartments is an

aspect of the design that is commonly cited by residents

as important. As well as producing a pleasing ambience

within their homes, a good level of sunlight is viewed

positively as helping, alongside modern insulation,

with energy efficiency.39

Successful schemes tend to exhibit the following features:

• They fit well into the existing urban scale and street pattern

• High-quality building materials have been used which

appear to be standing up to the test of time

• Some personal outdoor space is provided

• Car parking provision is low but there is excellent access

to public transport

• Security standards are high

• Space and storage standards are generous.40

The London Housing Federation offers design standards

that cover 15 areas or factors to be taken into account in

designing for families at higher densities. A number of

principles are also offered. Ideally:

• No large family units (three bed +) should be provided

above the fourth floor

• Schemes should meet Secure by Design standards, now

covered by the Code for Sustainable Homes (2007)

• Internal space should be flexible, giving consideration to

future use

• Separate kitchen to living area should be provided

• Floor area is as important as bedroom numbers

• Lifetime Homes standards should be met

• Some external private space (balcony or roof terrace)

should be provided

• Higher-quality sound proofing is required as

densities increase

• Robust and high specifications should be chosen with a

view to reducing long-term maintenance costs.

Pho

to: A

shle

y B

ingh

am a

nd M

ark

Elli

s

2120

Water conservation should also be addressed. Significant

high-density developments will require more water to be

treated, stored and consumed, and will increase the amount

of waste water to be treated at sewage treatment works.

Such developments may also potentially increase surface

water run-off. Sustainable development should make

efficient use of water and minimise the risk of flooding.

Buildings can be designed to maximise the recycling of

rainwater and wastewater, and to manage surface water

run-off as close as possible to its source.

SUSTAINABLE URBAN DRAINAGE SYSTEMS AND

FLOOD RISKS

Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems (SUDS) should be

considered for incorporation into developments, including

water features and possibly green roofs that also encourage

biodiversity. Although it should be noted that the cost/benefit

that green roofs represent is questionable when compared

to providing high-quality open space.

Planning Policy Statement 25 (PPS25) sets out Government

policy on development and flood risk.46

PPS25 will heavily influence the nature of high-density

development in areas of high flood risk. The policy identifies

that a key priority in terms of managing flood risk should be

reducing flood risk to and from new development through

location, layout and design, incorporating sustainable

drainage systems (SUDS). Opportunities offered by new

development to reduce the causes and impacts of flooding

(e.g. surface water management plans; making the most of

the benefits of green infrastructure for flood storage,

conveyance and SUDS; recreating functional floodplain; and

setting back defences) should be considered at design

stage. All developments must also be appropriately flood

resilient and consideration should be given to if/how any

associated costs may be offset at higher densities.

Effective working with the Environment Agency, other

operating authorities and other stakeholders to ensure that

best use is made of their expertise and information is of

paramount importance.

URBAN HEAT ISLANDS (OVERHEATING)

The London Climate Change Partnership notes that ‘the

term urban heat island is used to describe the dome of

warm air that frequently builds up over towns and cities. The

precise nature of the heat island varies from one urban area

to another and it depends on the presence of large areas of

open space, rivers, the distribution of industries and the

density and height of buildings. In general, the temperatures

are highest in the central areas and gradually decline

towards the suburbs.47 Research in Manchester, for

example, has shown that an average maximum surface

temperature of 31°C may vary by up to 6°C between

low-density and high-density areas.48 Higher summer

temperatures will lead to increased demand for cooling

systems and for more open space, especially in higher

density areas where personal open space is at a premium.

The efficient management of water resources also requires

planning and management. If housing density is too high

(perhaps resulting from a desire to be more energy efficient)

this can result in higher temperatures leading to more urban

flooding through the resultant increase in convectional

rainfall.

Built form, massing, spacing of blocks and siting of windows

can all impact upon the overheating effect. Furthermore, to

offset the impact of this, air conditioning may be installed

without regard to the carbon emissions that these systems

create or the intensity of the heat rejected, which may result

in overheating in an adjacent dwelling. It is now critical that

developers and designers of higher-density developments

are more aware of climate change and the actions that can

be taken to offset this effect. The main design issues that

can be used to mitigate the effects of climate change

include:

• location

• site layout

• buildings

• ventilation and the potential for night cooling

• drainage

• water

• outdoor spaces

• connectivity

Regional Climate Change Partnerships have developed

advice that applies to all developments but is particularly

relevant in higher-density developments as building height

and intensity contribute further to the over-heating effect.49

The Energy Saving Trust also offers specific guidance for

designers on reducing overheating. It examines those

factors that affect it such as solar and internal gains and

approaches to construction and how to reduce these in the

case of both traditional construction and framed buildings.

The Energy Saving Trust also offers information on the

effective design of, and approaches to, ventilation.50

46 CLG, Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (2006)47 London Climate change Partnership/GLA, Adapting to climate change: a checklist for

development :Guidance on designing developments in a changing climate p.67

(November 2005 )

48 Presentation by Robert Shaw of TCPA, Adaptation Strategies for Climate Change in

the Urban Environment (March 2007) 49 Op.cit 4650 Energy Saving Trust, Reducing Over heating a designer’s guide (2005)

43 Op.cit. 31 and 4144 Habinteg/JRF, Lifetime Homes: Living well together- achieving sustainable flexible

homes in higher density neighbourhoods (2003)45 www.nea.org.uk/Working_with.../Local_authorities/Affordable_warmth_beacon_toolkit

The London Housing Federation (LHF) Guidance

considers the following factors in relation to each built

form type:

1 Access and security

2 Shared circulation areas and facilities

3 Lifts

4 Waste disposal and recycling

5 Incoming services, risers and meters

6 Post and deliveries

7 Parking

8 Private open space

9 Semi-private, shared open space

10 Street-level storage (for example, for bicycles)

11 Lifetime Homes

12 Wheelchair units

13 Space standards, storage and amenity within the

dwelling

14 Privacy and sound insulation

15 Clothes drying

The work of Design for Homes in relation to super density

and the PRP study of high density in the London Borough of

Brent offer further and more recent guidance in relation to

common areas or the core of the building and on the

internal layouts of the dwellings that build on the LHF

standards. In relation to access and security, for example,

both reports argue that 25 homes is the maximum that

should be served by secure door entry and that over this

level some form of local presence, such as a caretaker or

concierge supported by CCTV, is preferred.43

LIFETIME HOMESThe Lifetime Homes Standard can be incorporated into all

higher-density developments. Lifetime Homes are ordinary

homes incorporating 16 features that can be applied

universally to housing design at minimal cost. Each feature

adds to the comfort and convenience of the home.

Building to Lifetime Homes Standard typically adds 1% or

less to a scheme’s development cost.

Habinteg HA have provided specifications and dimensions

that meet the Lifetime Homes in a higher-density situation.44

SECURITYDevelopments should be designed to ensure that people

feel safe and secure: where crime and disorder or the fear

of crime does not undermine quality of life or community

cohesion.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY In order to develop more sustainable homes new

developments must address issues relating to energy,

water, pollution, ecology, management, health and

wellbeing, materials, surface water run-off, waste and

transport. Transport in relation to higher-density schemes is

dealt with in Sections 1 and 5 of this toolkit.

The Code for Sustainable Homes (CSH) is a set of

sustainable design principles covering performance in nine

key areas including: energy usage and carbon dioxide

emissions, water, materials, surface water run-off, waste,

pollution, health and wellbeing, management and ecology.

It introduced a single, national standard to be used in the

design and construction of new homes in England. It is

mandatory for all new Housing Corporation funded

developments to meet the CSH level 3 from April 2008.

The private sector must also now report on what level of

the CSH their newly built dwellings have reached. It differs

from the BRE’s EcoHomes scheme in several key regards,

including being assessed at the level of an individual

dwelling and setting minimum mandatory standards for

energy, water, material, waste and surface water run-off,

which must be met before even the lowest level of the Code

can be achieved. It also requires each dwelling to receive

an interim and final CSH certificate.

Developing at higher densities provides opportunities to

improve energy efficiency. Similarly, it seems likely that

community heating or CHP schemes and on-site renewable

energy provision will be more viable at higher densities.

The London Plan 2008 requires developers to follow the

‘energy hierarchy’; that is to maximise energy efficiency of

each dwelling first, then consider decentralised forms of

energy supply, such as CHP, and then finally look to reduce

the remaining demand for energy from on-site renewables.

On larger developments it is helpful to explore the possibility

of using energy services company (ESCOs) and

Multi-Services Utility Company (MUSCO) models to support

the financing and operation of low carbon technology and

manage the scheme to achieve greater levels of

sustainability.

Affordable warmth, fuel poverty and energy strategies

should be developed for each scheme and residents should

be involved in helping to deliver these.45

A waste management and recycling strategy should

incorporate a construction site waste management plan

and household waste storage and recycling facilities.

Underground waste disposal can also be considered.

The design of the dwellings should take this into account.

2322

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor further information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS FOR AN OVERVIEW:

CABE, A sense of place: what residents think of their new

homes, (2007)

CABE, Delivering great places to live: 20 questions you

need to answer (2005)

CABE, Councillors Guide to Urban Design, (2003)

CABE/English Heritage: Guidance on Tall Buildings (2007)

Design for Homes, Recommendations for living at

superdensity (2007)

English Partnerships Delivering Quality Places: Urban

Design Compendium 2 (2007)

GLA, London Plan Density Matrix Review (2006)

London Housing Federation, Higher-density housing for

families: a design and specification guide (2004). Order from

www.housing.org.uk

London Housing Federation, Capital Gains: making

higher-density housing work in

London (2002) and Design for Homes Popular

Research, Perceptions of privacy and density in housing

(2003)

MacCormac, R., MJP Architects, Redefining Suburbia

(2005). Order from www.mjparchitects.co.uk

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (2006)

PRP, Drawing lessons for Brent: A report on quality in recent

high density mixed tenure housing (2007)

KEY DOCUMENTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY:

CLG, Planning Policy Statement: Planning policy and

climate change: Supplement to PPS 1 (2006)

Energy Saving Trust, Reducing overheating a designer’s

guide (2005)

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&pid=260

Energy Saving Trust, Daylighting in Urban areas: A guide

for designers (2007)

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&pid=1128

Checklist for development: Guidance on designing

developments in a changing climate (November 2005 )

Energy Saving Trust, Achieving Air tightness in new

dwellings case studies (CE248),

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&pid=1093

Energy Saving Trust, Energy efficient ventilation in

dwellings – a guide for specifiers (GPG 268)

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&pid=276

GLA/LEP, Making ESCOs work: Guidance and advice

(2007)

GLA/London Climate Change Partnership, Adapting to

climate change: a TCPA Shaw R., Colley M, and Connell R.,

Climate change adaptation by design: a guide for

sustainable communities (2007)

TCPA, Sustainable energy by design: a TCPA ‘by design’

guide for sustainable communities (2006)

KEY WEBSITES ON ENVIRONMENTAL

SUSTAINABILITY:

www.cabe.org.uk

www.energysaving trust.org.uk/housing

www.energysaving trust.org.uk/bestpractice

www.fabermaunsell.com

www.sd-commission.org.uk

www.securedbydesign.com

51 See for example, CABE/CLG Preparing design codes- a practice manual(2006)52 Recommendations for living at superdensity Design for Homes (2007)53 Op cit.42

THE KEY QUESTIONS1 Does the scheme fit well into existing urban scale and

street pattern?

2 Are public and private space easily distinguishable?

3 Does the scheme meet the relevant level of the Code for

Sustainable Homes (2007)?

4 Have robust and high specifications been chosen with a

view to reducing long-term maintenance costs and

withstanding intensity of use throughout the communal or

core area?

5 How many dwellings share a secure entrance,

staircase/access gallery?

6 What waste management and recycling systems are

proposed?

7 How has overlooking and privacy been dealt with in the

design?

8 Are room sizes particularly generous?

9 What are the storage facilities? Have the Housing

Corporations updated storage requirements been

complied with?

10 Are balconies large enough for all occupants to sit out at

a small table?

11 Is the dwelling accessible to those with mobility

requirements?

12 How have Lifetime Homes Standards been met?

13 What provision has been made for information

technology in the home?

14 Has whole life costing been taken into account?

15 Has affordable warmth been considered and, if so, what

energy saving measures are incorporated into the

homes?

16 What approach has been adopted to offset

‘overheating’?

Process note – design overview

CABE emphasises the importance of building

consensus through collaborative working:

• This would involve the local authority, for example,

in showing leadership

• Meeting with house builders

• Engaging local communities

• Creating local development frameworks

• Organising study tours

• Developing master plans and design codes.51

Housing associations should ensure that

proposals are evaluated by staff likely to

manage the scheme in the long-term and, where

possible, by potential residents.

In the case of super-density (150 homes per

hectare or above) the recommendations on

making flats work for families, addressing

privacy and organising and accessing flats set

out in Recommendations for living at

superdensity should be carefully considered.52

Process note – environmental sustainability

An environmental sustainability strategy should

be developed integral to the design and

feasibility study which will incorporate design

features and focus on energy efficiency, waste

management and water conservation. Both the

fabric and the use of the building by residents

should be considered.

• Think ahead and plan in from the outset

• Ensure that all team members have this as a

priority whether management or development

• Assess the site in relation to environmental

sustainability and its potential

• Use the checklist for climate change offered by

the London Climate Change Partnership and

design advice produced by the Energy Saving

Trust53

• Ensure that design takes into account orientation

to sunlight, daylight maximisation

• Consider carbon effectiveness in relation to

construction methods and the environmental

impact of materials

• Attempt to incorporate low and zero carbon

heating sources

• Develop appropriate strategies such as waste

management and encourage residents to be

energy efficient, which can be monitored once the

building is in occupation.

2524

63 Design for Homes Popular Research, Perceptions of privacy and density in housing (2003)64 GLA, Guide to preparing play strategies: Planning inclusive play spaces for all

London’s children and young people (2005)65 See for example the local biodiversity action plan at www.ukbap.org.uk

66 For further information on Living Roofs see www.london.gov.uk/mayor/auu/

or www.livingroofs.org

Higher-density housing is most successful when the privacy

of residents is supported by community spirit. This can be

encouraged by consulting prospective residents about the

design and facilities of the development and involving them

in how the neighbourhood is run once the scheme is

occupied. Ideally, developers should consult with future

residents before finalising plans for new housing

developments.63

Less successful examples arise where the communal

spaces are too close to the housing, often at the back,

where people want to be more private. Or where there is a

varied mix of people living in the development, children,

young adults and older persons’ use of the communal area

may be in conflict.

CHILDREN’S PLAYA key element in the success of communal space is to

ensure that where there is family accommodation proper

provision is made for children to play. Children’s play must

be adequately catered for but may be provided off-site

where it is accessible and close-by, particularly in the case

of smaller schemes. Mapping of provision is therefore

essential especially in developments where few homes

have private gardens. Provision will need to be made for the

management of such a facility. The plan should include

means of resolving conflicts between children and residents

living in areas adjoining play spaces. The GLA’s Guide to

preparing play strategies offers helpful guidance.64

Green spaces can help to overcome the challenges posed

by increased housing density. Higher-density housing

requires a range of private communal and public spaces to

be adequately connected in order to create a more

successful scheme. Additional credits can be obtained

under the HEA 3 Private Space Chapter 7 health and

wellbeing section of the CSH.

The Sustainable Development Commission advises that

developers plan for high-quality, well-maintained green

spaces, such as sports areas, community gardens and

parks, in all new communities56 and the external

environment is one of three key aspects of the

HQI version 4.57

Greenwich Peninsular, in London, has been called an

‘exemplar of landscape design’, with over a sixth of the site

dedicated to parkland and public open space.58

4. PRIVATE AND COMMUNAL EXTERNALSPACE AND THE PUBLIC REALM

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

‘For the urban renaissance to be realised there will need to be

adequate provision of suitable open and other green spaces

particularly in areas of high housing density.’ 54

CAUTIONARY NOTE

‘But the resulting “solution” that is being provided, three-story

townhouses without private gardens, without communal or civic space

and still without the building blocks of a successful community

(shops, schools, public transport) and surrounded by a sea of tarmac

is leading us up a dangerous non-garden path.’ 55

Research shows that private outside space, and the

provision of gardens in particular, is valued highly. Front

gardens are also viewed as important as a buffer between

the private base and the public realm. CABE has found that,

despite the fact that 82% of residents of new schemes

thought that their development was attractive, 40% thought

that there was not enough public open space and 48%

thought that there was not enough play space.59 This

dissatisfaction was reflected by the JRF study.60

Prevention of flooding is also relevant to the provision of

external space.

Balconies and roof terraces are also valued but must be

safe for children to make them acceptable and they must be

big enough to seat the family. Ideally no less than 3m2, they

should also afford a degree of privacy through screening.

COMMUNAL OUTDOOR SPACEShared open space requirements for a site should relate to

the site area, the density of the site and the proximity to

local high-quality public spaces.61

Shared open space encourages community interaction, and

should be designed to reflect practical and recreational

requirements by providing facilities such as drying greens,

toddler play areas, pleasant seating areas and allotments.

The landscaping of these areas should also be pleasant to

overlook and hence provide a connection to nature in a city

living context.

The classic garden square, as seen in Chelsea and South

Kensington in London, provides an excellent model for

preserving privacy and amenity. The perimeter block model

with communal space positioned at the back of properties

creates more problems of privacy.62

Pho

to: D

avid

Mill

ingt

on

54 (PPG11 para. 2.36)55 Wayne Hemingway56 Sustainable Development Commission, Building Houses or Creating Communities? (2007)57 Housing Corporation, Housing Quality Indicators: version 4 (2007)54 (PPG11 para. 2.36)58 CABE, Start with the Park: Creating sustainable urban green spaces in areas of

housing growth and renewal (2005)

59 CABE, A sense of place: what residents think of their new homes (2007)54 (PPG11 para. 2.36)60 Bretherton J and Pleace N, JRF, Resident views on life in new forms of high density

affordable housing (2007)54 (PPG11 para. 2.36)61 Design for Homes Popular Research, Perceptions of privacy and density in housing (2003)62 Ibid

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY The Code for Sustainable Homes expects that new homes

will be developed with ecological factors in mind. Where

higher-density developments are planned there is an

opportunity to ensure that the ecological value of any site is

protected and enhanced. Importantly the environmental

impact of the development should be minimised. Urban

areas are important for wildlife. Gardens, parks and other

urban green spaces often have high biodiversity value.

However, modern building techniques, with their tendency

towards clean architectural lines and the use of hard-

wearing and impermeable materials, have inevitably limited

the opportunities for wildlife to colonise the built

environment. Planned open spaces can counteract

this effect.

In order to conserve and enhance biodiversity it is important

that a variety and matrix of habitats are provided. There

is enormous potential for green roofs, green walls and

complementary features to provide new nesting and

foraging habitat for a wide variety of species, and to connect

existing urban green spaces.65 66

27

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor further information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.eastthames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS ON EXTERNAL SPACE AND THE

PUBLIC REALM:

CABE, Spaceshaper: A User’s Guide (2007)

CABE, Green Space Strategies: A Good Practice Guide

(2004)

CABE, Start with the Park: Creating sustainable urban

green spaces in areas of housing growth and renewal

(2005)

CABE, Design Reviewed: Urban Housing (2004)

CABE, What homebuyers want: attitudes and decision

making amongst consumers (2005)

Design for Homes Popular Research, Perceptions of

privacy and density in housing (2003)

GLA, Guide to Preparing Play Strategies - Planning

inclusive play space and opportunity for all London's

children and young people (2005)

GLA, Guide to preparing open space strategies (2004)

KEY WEBSITES AND DOWNLOADS ON EXTERNAL

SPACE AND THE PUBLIC REALM:

www.securebydesign.com

www.publicrealm.info/prian_about_mentors_links.html

www.cabe.org.uk/public space

www.livingroofs.org

www.foodupfront.org

67 CABE, Design Reviewed: Urban Housing (2004) 68 CABE, What homebuyers want: attitudes and decision making amongst

consumers (2005)69 CLG, Code For Sustainable Homes: Technical Guide Section 8 Security (2007)

THE PUBLIC REALM AND COMMUNITY SAFETYTo achieve a sense of security and safety there should be a

clear distinction between private or communal space in the

form of terraces, gardens and courtyards and what may be

expected to be public such as streets, public squares or

even the water’s edge.67

Street lighting and a sense of the ability to exercise some

stewardship of the public realm assist in a sense of security.

Reconciling security of the private realm and the desire

to accommodate multiple private cars presents a

design challenge.68

Sometimes the public realm interfaces with the communal

areas of the scheme and cannot be adopted easily by the

local authority. Where this is the case a management

strategy will be required for the public realm.

The Code for Sustainable Homes also has a section on

managing security.69

KEY QUESTIONS 1 What provision/facilities are available for play for under

5’s, under 12’s and older young people either on the

development or close by?

2 What external communal space is provided and how is

this separated from the public realm?

3 Is there a strategy for adoption of the public realm by the

local authority? If not, how will this be managed?

4 How will any strategy be funded and how does it impact

on the affordability of service charges?

5 How will the ecological value of the site be maximised?

For instance, what planting and landscaping scheme

is proposed?

6 What proportion of homes has access to a

private garden?

7 What proportion of homes has access to a roof terrace?

8 What proportion of homes has access to a balcony?

9 What size is the balcony (3m2 is a preferred minimum as

set out in HQI version 4 section 5.2.7)

10 How have issues of environmental sustainability been

addressed in relation to external space – for example:

• Has the environmental impact of the materials used

for the children’s play areas been considered?

• How has the ecological value of the site been

protected or enhanced?

• Is biodiversity encouraged through the provision of

high-quality green spaces and/or ‘green roofs’?

• Is there is an opportunity for the provision of locally-

grown food products and urban agriculture in private

and communal space?

11 Have you appointed an Architectural Liaison Officer or

Crime Prevention Design Advisor at the design stage?

26

28

PLANNING, PROVISION AND MANAGEMENT

Negotiations regarding section 106 obligations should

ensure proper consideration of the parking needs of

affordable housing residents. The English Partnerships

toolkit highlights the most appropriate car parking approach

according to density of development and housing typology.

It reviews common car parking treatments and evaluates

how successful they are in providing adequate levels of

safe parking with a high-quality environment.73

In the case of higher density, parking should not dominate

the public realm and undercroft or underground car parks

should be considered. The ‘Home Zone’ philosophy, which

improves road safety by giving priority to people over

vehicles in residential areas, should also be considered.

The level of provision should take into account:

• proposed household composition and likely car

ownership

• facilities for deliveries

• maintenance vehicles

• carers’ vehicles

• parking for visitors.

The needs of disabled persons to have access to a car

should be provided for.

Management schemes should be considered at the outset

to enable the fair allocation of limited spaces and the proper

control of parking.

73 English Partnerships, Car Parking what works where? (2006)

London will have 280,000 extra cars by 2016, as the city’s

population swells by 800,000 over the same period.

However, the high cost of land in the capital means that the

majority of new housing developments will have limited

parking. The number of private parking spaces in London

has remained the same since 1999; meanwhile in central

London the number of restricted on-street parking spaces

has fallen by 27% and unrestricted on-street spaces have

fallen by 9%. Experts predict parking increasingly will

become a source of conflict between neighbours competing

for limited spaces.

The lower levels of car parking provided since PPG3

standards were introduced is the most frequently mentioned

of all problems encountered by those buying higher-density

homes. The car continues to be regarded as an absolute

necessity: only young people, without families living in

London, appear prepared to consider public transport as an

alternative to car ownership.72

70 Trevor Beattie, Regional Director for English Partnerships speaking at the ‘Designing

Affordable Housing’ conference (9 May 2006) 71 LHF, No Parking (2006)72 CABE, What homebuyers want: attitudes and decision making amongst consumers

(2005)

5. TRAVEL, PARKING PROVISIONAND MANAGEMENT

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

‘Car parking should not be seen as an after-thought. Well-designed

car parking is inseparable from good urban design.’70

CAUTIONARY NOTES

‘A high-density development without provision for any parking at all

on site: aren't we being hoodwinked into imagining a new breed of

residents who walk or cycle everywhere, whose visitors do the same,

who don't have shopping delivered, who don't have their refuse

collected, who don't have direct access to emergency services,

who keep so quiet and such a low profile that they don't make any

impact on the area?’71

Car parking standards are given in the London Plan as

shown in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1

*Flat developments in areas of good public transport accessibility and/or town centres

(PTAL ratings 4-6 should aim for less than one space per unit). The needs of disabled

residents however will need to be taken into account in developments with low parking

provision so that adequate space is either on site or in convenient dedicated on-street

spaces are identified occupants.

Source: London Plan (2004) Table A4.2 Maximum Residential Parking Standards

Underground parking has failed significantly on some

higher-density housing schemes in the past. Great care is

required in the design and key issues such as lighting,

ventilation and security. If this is not the case then the space

that is provided for parking could negatively impact on the

scheme as a whole.

Research for the London Housing Federation on parking

and higher-density schemes has shown that public transport

is seen by a significant proportion of respondents as less

reliable, convenient and flexible than cars. This problem is

magnified where a journey involves more than one route or

mode of transport, i.e. bus and train.

Predominant

housing type

Car-parking

provision

Detached and

semi-detached

houses

2 – 1.5 spaces

per unit

Terraced

houses and

flats

1.5 – 1 space

per unit

Mostly flats

1 to less than 1

space per unit*

29

Photo: Design for Homes

30 31

74 CABE, Design Reviewed: Urban Housing (2004)

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITYAs noted in Section 1, a residential travel plan can help to

limit car usage. Good practice in the design and

management of limited car parking includes innovative

approaches such as the development of car clubs, car

sharing and the use of travel plans. Consideration should be

given to whether a car club operator such as Streetcar,

Whizzgo or City Car Club can be involved with the

development from the start to secure effective marketing of

the car club to potential new customers.

The relationship of the scheme to the existing or proposed

transport infrastructure is vital. Residents must feel safe

walking or cycling and have easy access to public transport

systems thus reducing the need for the car.74

CYCLE STORAGE

The provision of secure cycle storage in accordance with

HQI version 4 and the Code for Sustainable Homes is of

particular merit in higher-density schemes.

KEY QUESTIONS1 What provision has been made for parking on the

scheme for:

• Residents

• Delivery

• Carers

• Maintenance vehicles

• Visitors

2 How has car parking been allocated across the tenures?

Does the affordable housing have appropriate access to

some of the provision?

3 How have the needs of disabled persons been

catered for?

4 Where parking provision is less then 50% (i.e. one car

parking space per two dwellings), what provision has

been made for alternatives to car ownership and usage?

5 Is there a plan to manage and control illegal parking?

6 What is the impact of proposed parking arrangements on

service charges?

7 Is there a dedicated travel plan and ideally a co-ordinator

to promote alternative transport options and to organise

community events such as Bike to Work Week and

Green Transport Week?

8 Is information readily available to residents on local

public transport options?

9 Can vouchers be used when residents first move in to

entice them to try out different ways of travelling other

than using the car?

10 Are secure cycle stores provided?

11 Is there a controlled parking zone around the site to

discourage parking and to encourage uptake of the

car club?

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor further information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS AND WEBSITES ON TRAVEL

AND PARKING:

CABE, What homebuyers want: attitudes and decision

making amongst consumers (2005)

CABE, Design Reviewed: Urban Housing (2004)

English Partnerships, Car Parking what works where?

(2006)

CLG, Residential car parking research (CLG 2007)

Department for Transport, Making residential travel plans

work: good practice guidance (September 2005)

Department for Transport, Making car sharing and car

clubs work – A good practice guide (2005)

DETR, Planning Policy Guidance Note13: Transport,

available at www.planningportal.gov.uk

GLA, London Plan (2008)

London Housing Federation ‘No Parking’: Making zero or

limited parking work on higher-density housing schemes –

the research report (2006)

www.carplus.org.uk

Process note

• Cross-departmental teams should be

established to ensure that housing managers

are involved at the outset and are able to

establish travel and parking policies prior to

handover.

• Parking control policies should be developed for

each scheme to suit the particular

circumstances.

• Service charges relating to the control and

security of parking provision and car clubs

should be added to the calculations developed

at feasibility stage for the overall service charge.

• A residential travel plan should be produced for

each scheme.

33

77 Octavia Housing and Care, extract from draft strategy for managing higher-density

housing (unpublished work)

• Prospective tenants’ ability to sustain tenancies and their

level of support needs should be considered during the

allocation of a development

• Support needs should be identified clearly in the

nomination process to enable schemes to assess the

nominees’ ability to sustain tenancy

• Ideally seek a maximum of 10% of lettings going to those

who require support in terms of mental health, substance

misuse or due to leaving care

• Consider the use of starter tenancies in conjunction with

local authority partners

• Allocations should reflect the diversity of the local area77

KEY QUESTIONS1 Is there a proposed local allocation and lettings plan for

the scheme?

2 What occupancy levels are proposed?

3 What is the likely child density of the scheme, i.e. what

numbers and age ranges are proposed?

4 Where vulnerable persons are to be housed what plans

are proposed for providing support?

5 What settling-in processes are proposed to assist

individuals and the new community to ‘bed down’?

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor further information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS ON ALLOCATIONS AND LETTINGS:

Housing Corporation, Access to housing information

sharing protocol (2007)

CLG, Allocation of Accommodation: Choice Based Lettings -

Code of Guidance for Local Housing Authorities (2007)

Housing Corporation, Choice Based Lettings – Good

Practice Note 12

London Housing Federation, Capital Gains: making

higher-density housing work in London (2002), available

from www.housing.org.uk

KEY WEBSITES ON ALLOCATIONS AND LETTINGS:

www.housemark.co.uk

www.cih.org

www.housing.org.uk

Process note

• Steps should be taken early in the planning of

the scheme to agree a local lettings policy with

the local authority.

Research has shown that successful higher-density

schemes have:

• A higher proportion of older residents without children

• Child densities that are lower than average social

housing schemes

• A spread of age groups among children

• Low occupancy in individual homes (at 75% or below),

i.e. with a spare bedspace or bedroom. (These rates of

occupancy are a consequence of scheme maturity and

have evolved over time.)

In the social housing sector residents spend more time in

their homes each day than residents of the private sector.

This can lead to a greater sense of intensity of use than in

private schemes where occupants might often be away at

weekends or during holiday periods.

Lettings plans and protocols with partner local authorities

should be developed and ideally such plans should replicate

the profile of more mature schemes and take into

account the:

• balance of household type

• occupancy levels

• intensity of use

• child densities and age profiles

• tenancy histories

• vulnerability.

6. ALLOCATIONS AND LETTINGS

In London there is tremendous pressure to house homeless

families and to tackle overcrowding in social housing.

But child numbers need to be managed if the housing of

families in higher-density schemes is to be successful in the

longer term.

25% of the total number of residents is probably the

maximum child density level for high-density housing

developments and 45% is probably the maximum for all

housing scheme types.

• Where young children will be housed, adequate amenities

for play must be provided.

• Mechanisms should be devised to keep personal data up

to date, for example, a census in which residents are

asked to update their circumstances.75

With the above in mind, schemes should seek to achieve

the following:

• Families with children limited to 40% of lettings

• Some under-occupancy by one person is preferred where

possible to allow for family growth

• Attempt to have a good balance of ages – equal split

between the different ages instead of a concentration of

either very young children or teenagers

• Lettings details should include any history of any rent

arrears and anti-social behaviour, care and support

requirements with contact details, medical needs, and

information on potentially violent nominees

• Any information provided should meet the requirements of

the Data Protection Act but the Housing Corporation’s

information sharing protocol should help to obtain

relevant information76

• The sustainability of a community is often dependent on

the mix of the different economic status of its residents.

Therefore, ideally, 35% of lettings should be made to

applicants in full or part-time employment

• In order to promote good tenancy management and to

attempt to control anti-social behaviour, emphasis should

be placed on allocating properties to tenants who have

proven success in managing tenancies in the past

MYTH

Higher density does not work for families.

REALITY

What matters is not the number of children on a given scheme buthow services, lettings and levels of occupancy have been plannedto take the impact of the numbers of children into account.

75 London Housing Federation, Capital Gains: making higher density housing work in

London (2002)76 Housing Corporation, Access to housing, information sharing protocol (2007)

32

34 35

COMMUNITY INVESTMENT

Programmes of community investment should be developed

to support economic and social regeneration of the area.

Some higher-density developments are not likely to be

perceived automatically as desirable by local residents and

therefore community consultation of some kind, whether

public meetings, or local quality panels, gives residents an

opportunity to be consulted and have a say about the nature

of a planned higher-density scheme.

Residents should be given the opportunity to manage and

maintain communal facilitates and on larger schemes

consideration be should given to securing long-term funding

through establishing a Community Development Trust,

for example.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY

Educating residents about how to minimise their

environmental impact is to be encouraged. Information

about savings from not leaving appliances on standby,

efficient use of central heating, returns on investment from

installing higher levels of insulation, using water efficiently,

and so on should be readily available. There is evidence

that measures like these can lead to a substantial reduction

in residents’ carbon footprint. Using public transport and

cycling rather than driving can further reduce residents’

environmental impact and can be encouraged by adopting

the approaches outlined in Section 5.

Ideally, landlords should work with residents to raise

awareness of environmental issues. The Code for

Sustainable Homes offers an approach to developing a

Home User Guide that tackles these issues, including the

use of water and approaches to recycling.80

Key areas of work would include:

• Raising environmental awareness

• Enabling customers to reduce their physical

environmental impact

• Getting customers involved in recycling, monitoring

their energy and water consumption

• Raising aspirations and accessing opportunities

for training and community funding on

environmental projects.

Process note on environmental sustainability in

relation to resident awareness

• Appoint an officer to work with residents on this

issue or make this part of someone’s job role

• Develop a Home User’s Guide for each scheme

with induction courses for residents or ensure that

this features in residents’ handbooks

• Offer courses on environmental sustainability

• Develop a facilities management manual to

ensure that staff understand the environmental

aspects of scheme design

• Work in partnership with organisations such as

the Energy Saving Trust and Tenant Participation

Advisory Service to engage residents.

80 CLG, Code for Sustainable Homes, Technical Guide section 8, Management (2007)

The success or otherwise of higher-density developments

depends on all the elements of the density wheel outlined

previously in this toolkit. However, management and

maintenance approaches are also critical to long-term

success. Such approaches and policies should be agreed

early in the development of each scheme, with managers

involved early on, especially at the design stage to ensure

that, amongst other things, whole life costing issues are

taken into account. The link between design and

maintenance and, for example, feedback on the

performance of components, is essential to long-term

effectiveness. A robust management and maintenance

protocol should be developed by housing/estate managers,

especially where more than one landlord has a presence on

a site, well in advance of handover.

Ideally a facilities management manual should be created,

and started early, whilst the scheme is still under

construction.

On larger schemes, in the case of mixed use and mixed

tenure schemes involving a private developer, preference is

for similar lease conditions for all and that consideration be

given to using a single management provider.

Security can be enhanced through residential caretakers

and concierges operating CCTV systems, offering a local

presence and giving residents easy access to the

management staff and vice versa.

78 London Housing Federation, Capital Gains: making higher density housing work in

London (2002)79 Housing Corporation, Access to housing, information sharing protocol (2007)

7. MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

‘How a scheme is managed and maintained is more important to

scheme success than the density of it.’78

CAUTIONARY TALE

‘The nature of higher-density housing means that there are more

shared facilities and there need to be robust processes in place to

oversee these, such as residents’ involvement in the management

process and ensuring high standards of management and

maintenance.’79

Estate agreements, a strong community network and

community development plans developed with residents all

contribute to the management approach.

A speedy and personal response to complaints and to any

reported anti-social behaviour is crucial.

A management protocol will need to be carefully considered

on a scheme-by-scheme basis to incorporate:

• maintenance services

• management of the public realm

• maintenance of the public realm including

community facilities

• management of any communal and community facilities

• environmental sustainability (not only applicable

to higher density of course)

• service charges (see later)

• concierge, caretakers and other site based staff

• security

• management of car parking

• refuse disposal and recycling

• bulk refuse and abandoned vehicles

• post and deliveries

• graffiti and vandalism

• provision and management of play areas.

RESIDENT INVOLVEMENT

Residents should be involved and consulted, particularly

on plans to develop the community on their estate as

community and resident engagement helps to ensure

sustainability in the long term. In particular, resident

involvement in the design of open spaces can reap rewards

in the long term.

The establishment of residents’ associations representing all

tenures should be encouraged as a contributor to

scheme success.

36 37

THE KEY QUESTIONS1 During the design process has whole life costing,

including supply of plant equipment, capital costs,

maintenance and disposal costs been considered as part

of the impact on future management and maintenance?

2 If renewable technologies are going to be installed, has

an appropriate low and zero carbon feasibility study been

carried out?

3 If this is a mixed tenure or multi-landlord scheme, is a

single management provider proposed across all

tenures? If not what proposals are in place?

4 What evidence is there of a planned and specific

approach to managing higher density?

5 Is there a robust management and maintenance plan in

place and does your development plan link to your asset

management plan?

6 What approach is being adopted to raise awareness of

environmental sustainability issues with residents

including approaches to energy use, waste recycling and

water consumption?

7 What approaches to security have been adopted – is a

concierge planned? How is this service to be funded?

8 What approach is being adopted regarding anti-social

behaviour and delivering the government’s

Respect agenda?

9 How is play to be managed?

10 What are the plans for resident involvement and

empowerment across all tenures including the

management and maintenance of the community

facilities?

11 What proposals are offered for community development

and the funding and use of any communal facilities?

12 How do you ensure that your buildings are adequately

maintained and refurbished to a high standard?

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor further information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS ON MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE

AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:

• Bretherton J and Pleace N, JRF, High Density and

High Success? Resident views on life in new forms of

high density affordable housing (Forthcoming 2008)

• CLG, Code for Sustainable Homes, Technical Guide

section 8, Management (2007)

• National Housing Federation, Capital Gains – making

high density housing work in London, available from

www.housing.org.uk

• National Housing Federation, Community cohesion

(2004)

• National Housing Federation, Community engagement

(2004)

• Stephen Hounsham, Green Engage, Painting the

town green – how to persuade people to be

environmentally friendly

• Tunstall R, East Thames Housing Group, Housing

Density: What do residents think? (2002)

• Energy Saving Trust, Energy efficient ventilation in

dwellings – a guide for specifiers (GPG 268),

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&

pid=276

• Energy Saving Trust, Using Whole life costing as a

basis for investments in energy efficiency guidance

(CE119),

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&

pid=254

• Energy Saving Trust, CE83 Energy efficient

refurbishment of existing housing,

http://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/download.cfm?p=1&

pid=243

• EcoHomes XB, A guide to the Ecohomes methodology

for existing buildings – Sustainable Homes Ltd

• Three Regions Climate Change Group, Your Home in

a changing climate – retro-fitting existing homes for

climate change impacts (2008)

KEY WEBSITES ON MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE

AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:

www.housemark.co.uk

www.cih.org

www.housing.org.uk

www.lowcarbonbuildings.org.uk/info/installers

www.greentomato.org

www.wwflearning.org.uk/community-engagement

www.london.gov.uk/diy

38 39

THE KEY QUESTIONS1 What service charges are proposed per unit?

2 Are the service charges considered to be affordable

and have they been included in assessing overall

affordability levels?

3 What steps have been taken to limit the level of service

charges (e.g. proposed adoption of communal areas or

designing service charges out by limiting communal

areas or capitalisation of some part)?

4 Can the service charges be clearly accounted for and

clarified for residents?

5 Can residents influence the cost of management and

provision of services?

FURTHER INFORMATIONFor further information try visiting the following websites or

consulting the references listed below. Most are available on

the web-based resource:

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

KEY DOCUMENTS ON SERVICE CHARGES:

• Design for Homes, Recommendations for living at

superdensity (2007)

• HACAS Chapman Hendy, What price sustainability?

Keeping service charges affordable in mixed tenure high

density developments (2004)

• National Housing Federation, Capital Gains – making

high density housing work in London (full report available

from National Housing Federation)

• PRP, Brent Joint Commissioning Housing

Partnership, Drawing Lessons for Brent: A report

on quality in recent high density mixed tenure

housing (2007)

KEY WEBSITES WITH INFORMATION ON SERVICE

CHARGES:

www.housing.org.uk

www.housemark.co.uk

www.cih.org

www.housing.org.uk

Process note

Consider the scheme as early as possible to assess

the affordability of service charges, ensuring that

scheme design, management plans and financial

projections take affordability into account.

At the outset consider how service charges can be

capitalised as part of the funding framework.

Research by HACAS offers the main guidance available on

this issue at the time of writing this second edition of the

toolkit. It should be noted, however, that research is being

undertaken by Cambridge University on the affordability of

service charges in higher-density housing which should be

available later in 2008 to inform this issue.

The York University research found that in terms of

affordability, low-cost home ownership residents found living

in the schemes to be the most financially difficult.84 One

particular reason given was (perceived) excessive service

charges (accompanying both rent and mortgage) and that

the reasons for these charges were not communicated in

an effective manner. The affordable housing within the

schemes became somewhat less affordable when service

charges were included. This was all the more emphatic to

residents when they felt the maintenance and management

of the site was not good value in terms of the service

charges required.

8. SERVICE CHARGES

GREAT EXPECTATIONS

‘In any well-managed estate agreement on standards and service

charges can reduce risks and maintain the value of the investment.’81

CAUTIONARY TALES

‘If tenants have a choice about whether or not to accept housing on

a higher-density estate they may opt for cheaper alternatives which

would have implications for the socio-economic profile of

higher-density schemes.’82

‘There is a perverse effect on integrating tenures as housing providers

are encouraged to separate out the servicing arrangements for market

and affordable housing to keep costs down.’83

The HACAS research noted that the service needs and

associated costs of mixed tenure schemes are influenced

by a wide range of factors including:

• The nature and intensity of use and the extent to which

the public realm is adopted

• The requirements of purchasers who may expect a

higher level of service provision (and higher design

specification) than typically provided in the affordable

housing. This is exacerbated in higher value schemes

• Building height will impact on the need for lifts and

services related to utility supply and waste disposal

• In larger blocks, there may also be case for concierge

and caretaking provision, increasing associated

service costs

• The extent of tenure integration

Service charges tend to be higher in schemes designed at

super-density levels. Design for Homes notes that the

current business model does not in all cases allow for the

level of service charge that is required by super-density

housing.85 It suggests (as does the Brent study86) that

services charges be capitalised, or at least some part of

them, to offset annual costs to residents. The Design for

Homes report makes the following recommendations that

offer a way forward at the current time:

• Consider minimising service charges early on in the

design stage

• Partly capitalise service charges where possible

• Encourage investors to take returns from long-term

growth thereby enabling capitalisation to take place

• Public funders should recognise that the capitalisation

of service charges should be seen as a legitimate

project cost

• Residual land calculations should take into account the

capitalisation of service charges

• Planning briefs should specify acceptable service

charges (and management and maintenance

requirements) to enable these costs to be taken into

account in residual land value calculations.87

81 CABE, Better neighbourhoods: Making higher densities work (2005)82 HACAS Chapman Hendy, What price sustainability? Keeping service charges

affordable in mixed tenure higher density developments (2004)83 Ibid84 Bretherton J. and Pleace N., JRF, High Density and High Success? Resident views

on life in new forms of high density affordable housing (forthcoming 2008)

85 Design for Homes, Recommendations for living at superdensity (2007)86 PRP, Brent Joint Commissioning Housing Partnership, Drawing Lessons for Brent:

A report on quality in recent high density mixed tenure housing (2007) 87 Op.cit 81 section 10

4140

1. NEIGHBOURHOOD, AMENITY AND LOCATIONCHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

1.1 Overview

Higher density need not mean high-rise – is the built form

suitable for the client group and area? Does it integrate well

into the surroundings and neighbourhood, for example?

Is the density suitable for the proposed client group – are

families and children to be housed and in what numbers?

If there is a published master plan for the area, does this

scheme conform to it?

Have education, health, social services and others been

involved in planning services for the increased population?

1.2 Location and environment

Is the scheme located in an existing residential area? If not,

what plans are there to ensure that infrastructure is in place

by the time homes are sold/let?

Wherever the scheme is located, has a check been carried

out and does it score 75+ against Housing Quality Indicators

for amenity and location?

1.3 Proximity of amenities

Research on resident preferences shows that ideally

amenities should be within a 500m radius of the scheme.

Check for proximity of:

• Local shops

• Main centre shopping including public transport to it

• Supermarket shopping including public transport to it

• Leisure facilities

• Sports facilities

Sub total

1 Look at each question and, using the right-hand

assessment column, decide whether level P, O or N

is appropriate.

2 At the end of the section count up the number of Ps Os

and Ns to assess the overall position. If you have mainly

Ps, for example, the scheme proposals would appear to

address the issues.

3 Mark up the scheme assessment table below showing

whether each section is Positive, Negative or Neutral

overall.

4 Total each column.

5 This will give an indication of the areas that might need

further investigation or discussion with developers and

colleagues, but also will show whether the proposals are

positive or negative overall.

6 Record any notes or suggestions that occur to you as you

go along in the column provided.

NB: To prevent duplication some cross-referencing

has been included in the checklists.

How to use these checklists

Assessment is subjective and can be very complex.

Try using this simple ‘PON’ system to get an overall

feel of the quality of scheme proposals:

• P = Positive – scheme appears to address issue

or criteria

• O = Neutral – neither positive or negative

• N = Negative – scheme does not appear to

address this issue.

These checklists can be completed online at

www.east-thames.co.uk/highdensity

PART 2: THE CHECKLISTS

Phot

o: D

avid

Milli

ngto

n

Scheme Assessment Table

Section Positive (P) Neutral (O) Negative (N)

1 Neighbourhood, amenity and location

2 Mixed communities

3 Design standards

4 Private and communal external space

and the public realm

5 Parking provision and management

6 Lettings and allocations

7 Management, maintenance and

community engagement

8 Service charges

Total

(Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 1 of the toolkit.)

42 43

2. MIXED COMMUNITIES CHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

Total

Cross reference proposals against Sections 7 and 8:

Management, maintenance and community engagement,

and service charges

Achieving the right ‘mix’ can help a scheme to cohere – what

mix of tenures and incomes is planned for the development?

Is design quality similar for all tenure types, as this can assist

with integration?

Are some larger, family homes (three-bed plus) being

provided (this can help to make a scheme more settled as

families often stay longer on a scheme)?

What are the arrangements for managing this tenure mix?

For example, is a single multi-tenure approach proposed or

are there to be several management providers on site?

What approach is planned to ensure that the impact of the

‘buy to let’ investment market is managed in such a way that

management standards are maintained by private landlords

and the transience of the population is reduced?

If additional services are planned for the different tenures how

have service charges been established and are they

affordable to all groups? (See section 8.)

Are there opportunities for the different tenures to meet and

integrate through the common use of communal areas or

paths and streets, for example?

What community development proposals are there to

encourage community cohesion?

There are many options for integrating tenures, from scattering

tenures across the site (pepper-potting) to segregation by floor

or block. Each has advantages and disadvantages and

different impacts on services, and therefore will need to be

managed accordingly. How have the different housing tenures

been integrated with each other?

Is the social housing element located in an equally accessible

and attractive position to the private housing?

1. NEIGHBOURHOOD, AMENITY AND LOCATIONCHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

Total

In London, has a Public Transport Accessibility Rating (PTAL)

exercise been undertaken? (PTAL score should be between

4-6. If lower the scheme may not be well located in relation to

transport links.)

Is a residential travel plan in place that offers residents

information on getting around and avoiding car usage in

particular?

1.5 Noise

What are the sources of noise (industry, traffic, rail lines) and

how have these been addressed to limit their impact on

residents’ quiet enjoyment of their homes?

1.6 Community facilities

Given the amenity and location of the scheme what plans (if

any) are proposed for the provision of additional community

facilities for the exclusive use of residents or the wider

community to encourage cohesion?

• Tubes

• Buses

1.3 Proximity of amenities (continued)

• Parks

• Doctors’ surgery

1.4 Public transport

For accessibility purposes, to protect the environment and

given likely limited car parking facilities, how close are the

nearest public transport links? Check for:

• Trains

• Primary school

• Trams

(Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 2 of the toolkit.)

44 45

3. DESIGN STANDARDS

45

CHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

3.3 Site layout and form

How does the scheme layout and use of communal areas

(internal and external) allow for neighbourly interaction?

Does the layout of the scheme allow for easy access to it and

circulation around it?

Are public and private spaces easily and clearly distinguished

from each other?

Do plans for public open space avoid wasted space that could

become neglected?

What is the journey going to be like from a parked car or bus

stop to the entrance of the scheme and to individual home

entrances?

Will the above journey feel safe, well lit and attractive to use?

How does design address the issue of residents’ privacy by

preventing overlooking, for example between blocks?

Are the blocks arranged and oriented to make the best use of

natural light, for example avoiding over-shadowing?

Does the design of the blocks enable cross ventilation (to

which the only alternative is air conditioning)?

What proportion of family dwellings has direct access to the

street? This should be high as this can reduce the impact of

the presence of children and is more convenient for families.

Sub total

3.4 Communal entrances and the core area

Is the entrance area welcoming, well-lit and with clear signs

proposed, etc?

How many dwellings share a secure entrance, staircase or

access gallery? Ideally this should not exceed 4-6 dwellings

and long corridors with opposing doors should be avoided as

this has been shown to create more conflict between neighbours.

Is a cleaner/caretaker’s store provided to ensure easy access

to materials and equipment on site?

3. DESIGN STANDARDSCHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

3.1 Overview

Cross reference with sections 5 and 7

Does the scheme conform to the following standards:

• London Housing Federation’s Guidance on design

standards for higher-density housing for families

• Housing Corporation Housing Quality Indicators

(version 4 2007)

• Housing Corporation Design and Quality Standards

(April 2007)

• Expectations of the London Plan (2004 and its

alterations) in relation to housing density

• Diversity requirements including the design needs of

BME communities.

3.2 Visual impact

What finishes are proposed to the externals of the scheme so

that it fits appropriately within the local environment?

What is the relationship to surrounding buildings, the local

environment and existing street patterns? Does the scheme

fit in well and is it in character?

Does the scheme design take into account future management

and maintenance with regard to factors set out in Section 7 and

particularly with regard to the effective management of

communal/core areas and whole life costing issues?

Have robust and high specifications been chosen with a view

to reducing long-term maintenance costs and withstanding

intensity of use throughout the communal or core area,

including lifts?

Does the scheme conform to Lifetime Homes requirements as

set out in the Code for Sustainable Homes and Living well

together – achieving flexible homes within high density

neighbourhoods (Habinteg Housing Association)

Does the scheme confirm to the requirements arising from the

Code for Sustainable Homes, including:

• Energy and carbon dioxide emissions

• Water

• Materials

• Surface water run-off

• Waste

• Pollution

• Health and wellbeing (except ‘Lifetime Homes’, see below)

• Ecology

• Management

Does the scheme fit in well with the existing urban scale and

street pattern and have a sense of ‘place’?

Sub total

(Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 3 of the toolkit.)

46 47

4. PRIVATE AND COMMUNAL EXTERNAL SPACE AND THE PUBLIC REALM

CHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

4.1 Communal external space

What provision/facilities are available for play for under 5’s,

under 12’s and older young people either on the development

or close by?

What external communal space is provided?

What proposals are in place to manage any public realm that

forms part of the development?

Is wasted open space avoided, which can become neglected

and lead to a decline in the scheme?

What planting and landscaping scheme is proposed?

How have issues of environmental sustainability been

addressed in relation to external space – for example how has

the ecological value of the site been protected or enhanced?

Have ‘green roofs’ been incorporated into the development or

is there an opportunity for urban agriculture in private and

communal space for example?

4.2 External private space

What proportion of homes has access to a private garden?

What proportion of homes has access to a roof terrace?

What proportion of homes has access to a balcony?

What size are balconies (3-4m2 is a preferred minimum)?

Total

3. DESIGN STANDARDS CHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

Total

3.5 The dwellings

How does the design address external noise sources?

How are rooms arranged in relation to each other?

Bedrooms should not be below living rooms, for example.

What is the quality of sound insulation – is it above the norm

to enhance privacy for residents?

Ideally, no larger family units (three bed +) should be provided

above the fourth floor as this is considered too inconvenient

for families and can lead to anti-social behaviour when

children do not have easy access to external areas.

Are room sizes particularly generous? Larger rooms make the

feeling of density less apparent. Are the rooms above, at, or

below Parker Morris standards?

What are the storage facilities and have the Housing

Corporation’s updated storage requirements been complied

with? This is particularly important in flats where a garden

shed is not an option.

How does layout and design allow for future adaptability?

Can room sizes be altered, for example?

What are the arrangements for clothes drying?

How does the design address adequate ventilation without

the need to resort to air conditioning?

What approaches have been adopted with regard to

environmental sustainability issues? For example, has the

impact of urban heat or ‘over-heating’ or the potential for

flooding been considered in the design (see Section 3 for

further information)?

Have heating and hot water systems been specified with a

view to both energy efficiency and affordability? For example,

are renewable energy sources used in any way or combined

heat and power specified?

What other energy-saving measures are incorporated into

the homes, such as A++ Energy Saving Recommended

appliances?

Does the design tackle water conservation?

Is there a waste management strategy including facilities for

recycling, for example, built into the design of the common

areas and the dwellings?

What provision has been made to future proof the dwellings to

adapt to and mitigate the impacts of climate change including

flooding water stress and overheating?

What provision has been made for information technology in

the home? Is there an adequate space for personal

computers, for example a study area within the dwelling?

Is the dwelling accessible to those with mobility requirements?

(Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 4 of the toolkit.)

48 49

6. ALLOCATION AND LETTINGSCHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

Is there a proposed local allocation and lettings plan for

the scheme?

What balance is sought between household sizes and

income ranges?

Is there a plan to enable social homes to be let at less than

full occupancy to enable families to grow and prevent

overcrowding from developing?

Has an estimate been made of how many children (ages up to

18 years) are likely to occupy the homes in the scheme,

especially the social homes? Best practice suggests that child

density should be managed and controlled through lettings

processes if possible. This prevents undue strain on local

services and schools and can help to limit complaints arising

from perceptions of or actual anti-social behaviour.

Is a balance of ages of children proposed (e.g. not all two

year olds) so that as the scheme ages it avoids a

concentration of children of the same age?

Is the local lettings plan incorporated into any choice-based

lettings scheme? Choice can lead to more stable schemes in

terms of turnover of households.

Has any proposal been made about the preferred levels of

economic activity of social residents? (For both community

balance and as a proxy for intensity of occupation it may be

that there is a preference to ensure a percentage of working

households.)

Is tenancy history to be taken into account when letting

homes? For example, sometimes those households with a

history of anti-social behaviour may find living in higher-density

homes more of a challenge.

Where vulnerable persons (perhaps with a history of mental

health problems or substance abuse) are to be housed what

plans are proposed for providing support?

What settling in processes are proposed to assist individuals

and the new community to ‘bed down’?

What are the sales and marketing proposals for sale homes?

Do they include information on the environmental

performance of the dwellings?

Total

5. TRAVEL, PARKING PROVISION AND MANAGEMENTCHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

Total

Cross reference with Section 8: Service charges

Has an assessment of the household composition and likely

car ownership been made to ensure proper provision of

parking?

What provision has been made for parking on the scheme for:

• Residents

• Deliveries

• Carers

• Maintenance vehicles

• Visitors

How has car parking been allocated across the tenures?

Does the affordable housing have appropriate access to

some of the provision?

How have the needs of disabled persons been catered for?

Where parking provision is less then 50% (i.e. one car parking

space per two dwellings) what provision has been made for

alternatives to car ownership and usage?

Is there a dedicated residential travel plan and ideally a

co-ordinator to promote alternative transport options and to

organise community events? Can vouchers be used when

residents first move in to entice them to try out different ways

of travelling apart from using the car?

Is information readily available to residents on alternative

public transport options?

Is there a plan to manage and control illegal parking?

Is there a controlled parking zone around the site to

discourage parking and to encourage uptake of a car club?

Does the design help to prevent illegal parking through raised

kerbs and planting schemes for example?

What provision has been made for motorbike parking?

Are secure cycle stores provided to encourage cycling?

Where underground or undercroft parking is proposed, what

measures have been incorporated to ensure security and

pleasant access to these areas?

(Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 5 of the toolkit.) (Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 6 of the toolkit.)

50 51

CHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

What are the proposals for communal satellite dishes?

What approaches to security have been adopted – is a

concierge planned? How is this service to be funded?

How is play to be managed?

What performance standards and KPIs are offered as a

means of demonstrating good standards of management

and maintenance?

What lease/tenancy conditions are proposed?

In the case of a mixed-tenure scheme are these to be the

same for all tenures?

What approach is adopted to managing anti-social behaviour?

What are the plans for resident involvement across all tenures?

What proposals are offered for community development and

the funding and use of any communal facilities?

Total

What approach is being adopted to raise awareness of

environmental sustainability issues with residents, such as

approaches to energy use, waste recycling and water

consumption?

7. MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 7. MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT CHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

7.1 Overview

Has the impact on future management and maintenance of the

scheme been considered as part of the design process in

relation to all the factors listed below? Cross reference to

Section 3: Design standards, to ensure that these services

have been designed in from the outset.

What management and maintenance resources are planned

for the project?

What management and maintenance structures are to be put

in place?

If this is a mixed-tenure or multi-landlord scheme, is a single

management provider proposed across all tenures and, if not,

what proposals are in place?

7.2 What evidence is there of a planned and specific

approach to managing higher density including:

• Refuse disposal and recycling, including the disposal

of bulk items?

• Maintenance of soft and hard communal landscaped areas

and public realm, including community facilities?

• Management of core and shared circulation areas

(entrances, lifts, stairs and corridors, etc)?

• Bulk storage, street level storage and internal storage,

including storage of dirty items?

• Post and deliveries?

• Cleaning and caretaking services, including window cleaning?

Sub total

(Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 7 of the toolkit.)

52 53

• Bretherton J. and Pleace N., JRF, High Density andHigh Success? Resident views on life in new forms ofhigh density affordable housing (forthcoming 2008)

• CABE, Building for Life, Delivering great places to live:20 questions you need to answer (2005)

• Design for Homes, Recommendations for living atsuperdensity (2007)

• English Partnerships/Housing Corporation, Deliveringquality places – Urban Design Compendium 2 (2007)

• London Housing Federation, Capital Gains: makinghigher-density housing work in London (2002)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This second edition of the toolkit was updated by Helen Cope of

Helen Cope Consulting Ltd and funded by East Foundation, part of

East Thames Group.

The second edition draws on research undertaken by many

individuals and organisations.

• London Housing Federation, ‘No Parking’: Making zeroor limited parking work on higher-density housingschemes (2006)

• London Housing Federation, Higher-density housing forfamilies: a design and specification guide (2004)

• MacCormac R., MJP Architects, Redefining Suburbia(2005)

• PRP, Brent Joint Commissioning Housing

Partnership, Drawing Lessons for Brent: A report onquality in recent high density mixed tenure housing (2007)

THE FOLLOWING REFERENCES WERE OF PARTICULAR VALUE:

Pho

to: A

shle

y B

ingh

am a

nd M

ark

Elli

s8. SERVICE CHARGESCHECKLIST

Comments, concerns Assessment

and suggestions P O N

Has a projection of the likely service charges been provided,

ideally at feasibility stage?

(Please note that advice and guidance on this checklist can be found in Section 8 of the toolkit.)

What service charges are proposed per unit?

Do service charges vary across the tenures in the case of a

mixed-tenure scheme?

Are the service charges considered to be affordable?

How is this demonstrated?

What steps have been taken to limit the level of service

charges (e.g. proposed adoption of communal areas or

designing service charges out by limiting communal areas)?

Are there plans to subsidise service charges to ensure

affordability, for example through the capitalisation of them?

How will residents be able to influence the cost of the

management and provision of services?

Total

Thanks also to contributors including Robert Shaw formerly of the TCPA and now with Faber Maunsell and Peter Thompson and Fiona Booth of East Thames.

While all reasonable care and attention has been taken in preparing this guide, East Thames Group regrets that it cannot assume responsibility for any errors or omissions.

DELIVERING SUCCESSFULHIGHER-DENSITY HOUSINGA TOOLKIT – SECOND EDITION

£14.95

© East Thames Group 2008

ISBN 978-0-9543932-2-9