Community Building : Builds Communities by Kareem Dayes

Community Building : Builds Communities a Vision for a Sustainable Neighbourhood in Church Grove, Lewisham by RUSS

Community Building Builds Communities 2. Why are sustainable neighbourhoods important? 2. Are there examples elsewhere? 3 – 4. What are the council’s aims? 5. What additional benefits does this proposal provide? 6. What are the main elements of the proposal? 7.

December 2013

What form does the proposed development take? 8 – 10.

0754 888 5609

How will the project be financed? 11 – 12. Rents Shared ownership Properties for sale Capital Receipt to the Council Borrowing requirement

www.theruss.org info@theruss.org

What building methods will be used? 12.

What is the sustainability strategy? 13. Education in sustainable development

How will self-‐builders acquire the necessary skills? 13 – 14. Apprentices Skilled Volunteers How will risks be managed? 14. Potential risks Measures to mitigate these risks How long will it take? 15.

How will the development be managed and maintained? 16 – 17.

What are the next steps? 17.

What is RUSS (Rural Urban Synthesis Society)? 17 – 18.

Who are the people involved in RUSS? 18 – 19.

This proposal is intended as a contribution to the debate about how to develop the Church Grove site as a self-‐build project. It has been developed by a group of Lewisham residents with experience of self-‐build in Lewisham and elsewhere with the aim of building not just houses but building a sustainable community.

Community Building : Builds Communities

This proposal is to create a sustainable neighbourhood on a vacant site in South London owned by Lewisham Council. The project is to provide high quality, truly affordable homes that will require little or no energy to run. There will be opportunities for people to acquire skills and improve their prospects of employment. The aim is to create a properly sustainable community in which residents have a stake and which is capable of adapting to change in the long term. The proposal seeks to build on Lewisham Council’s pioneering support for self-‐build over nearly 40 years and this has inspired the next generation brought up within the Walter’s Way self-‐build community to draw on the experience and expertise of those who designed and built that project to help develop this community building proposal. The project aims to meet the needs of the 21st century by radically reducing energy consumption and harnessing renewable resources to make the project self-‐sufficient in energy. Low carbon materials will be used and planting will be established to move towards carbon neutrality. The eco-‐ system of the site will be rehabilitated and space created for growing food. Waste and water will be recycled and organic waste will be composted for use as fertilizer and soil improver. Spaces will be created for community use. The existing community in Church Grove is tight-‐knit and active in local issues and any development on the site must be designed with this in mind. Situated on the banks of the Ravensbourne River this site is of particular importance and sensitivity. Both prospective residents and neighbours will be able to take part in developing the proposals to create a development that they can be proud of and which fits the needs and aspirations of our diverse modern community.

Why are sustainable neighbourhoods important?

In the UK we have had trouble over the years creating comfortable homes and neighbourhoods; there have been a number of reports suggesting that mass housing is too expensive, too small, too energy inefficient, too inflexible and too monotonous with no sense of place or belonging. Thousands of homes have been demolished prematurely because they are not sustainable in the long term. When sustainable development appeared on the global agenda 30 years ago at the Rio Summit the principle was recognized that any sustainable system, for instance housing, had to involve and have the support of the people affected for it to be successful. However, the role of residents in housing has not been understood in the UK. We rely overwhelmingly on mass housing whether it be speculative private housing or subsidised public housing neither of which include residents in the process of its design and construction. The current interest in Custom-‐Build is in part a reaction to the limitations of mass housing but there is a tendency emerging of reliance on national developers, contractors and consultants to promote custom-‐build and they have very different priorities to local small enterprises. A number of benefits arise from residents having an active role in the design, construction and management of their homes. Firstly, the behaviour of occupants is a major influence on energy consumption. They identify with the aim of reducing energy consumption and they tend to have a high level of both understanding and commitment. Secondly, self-‐builders designing and building for their own use tend to specify and build to a high standard of construction and energy and environmental performance. Thirdly, it is our experience that when people build for themselves as a group they build not just houses but they build a community; working together, dealing with professionals and organizations, overcoming obstacles and so on. They gain self-‐confidence and in some cases have established a sense of community that transcends membership of the original self-‐build group.

Are there examples elsewhere?

A prime example is the award winning Walter’s Way in Lewisham, which is often quoted as an exemplar where a very close community still exists 25 years later which facilitates shared childcare and social events including an annual street party. The self-‐builders, who were drawn from the housing waiting list, carried out nearly all of the building work with the exception of the foundations and roof covering. The simple, economical houses built using a very adaptable timber frame construction have now all been transformed by extensions and improvements by the residents, which has ensured the long-‐term sustainability of the development. There are only 3 of the original households now in residence. The Walter’s Way community has become a desirable place to live because of the lively community spirit that exists. One of the aims of this proposal is to build on our experience at Walter’s Way to create a new sustainable community but with long-‐term affordability incorporated in to the financial arrangements.

A number of co-‐housing developments with an element of shared facilities have been completed in Britain including Stroud, Leeds and Lancaster. The groups involved have commissioned architects and builders but importantly have remained fully in control of the process of design and construction to create successful low energy sustainable communities.

What can be achieved when a group are able to organize for themselves has also been demonstrated recently at Ashley Vale in Bristol. This hugely impressive development embedded in an existing close knit community includes low-‐energy detached houses, sustainable social housing, conversion of an existing office building to apartments, community space and workshops; the sort of mixed use development that professional developers and local authorities find difficult to organize.

Sustainable developments which control pollution and bring the use of resources such as fuel, water and food into balance with the ability of the planet to supply our needs are critical. Our proposal demonstrates one way in which such neighbourhoods which are sustainable economically, socially and environmentally can be created and which can serve as a model for a new way of designing and building for the 21st century.

What are the council’s aims? This proposal meets the council’s stated aims…and goes further to offer a range of additional community benefits. The council wishes the scheme to -‐ • address housing challenges and under occupation and overcrowding Self9#builders# within Council housing stock in •  To#live#in#good# particular •  Get#people#oﬀ# homes#suitable#for# • provide training the#Lewisham# their#needs.# and housing#list# •  To#be#apart#of#a#safe# apprenticeships and#friendly# and other routes •  Community#led# community.# to future •  Permanent# employment aﬀordability* • be a community •  Create#a# led development sustainable# • achieve a very •  Create#an# neighbourhood# high level of aestheDcally# •  To#provide# sustainability beauDful# training* • be financially development# viable and where possible attract external funding

Lewisham#Council# •  Maximise#value#for#tax# payer# •  Address#the#wider#housing# needs#of#the#borough#

•  High#level#of# Self%build*to# reduce#costs.#

•  InnovaDve#design#and#construcDon# methods#to#achieve#high#levels#of# sustainability#that#exceed#regular# building#standards.# •  Create#a#posiDve#ecological#footprint#

RUSS#

Aims and Priorities! of Stakeholders!

What additional benefits does the RUSS proposal provide?

The principle is to establish a sustainable neighbourhood which will create a high quality living environment for the long term rather than just an estate of large houses for social rent with some training benefits. Such an approach offers the following additional benefits – • The proposal makes the best use of the site within the planning and other constraints and 34 dwellings are proposed. • This permits a greater range of homes targeted at a mix of people in housing need of different kinds. • This will create a community that better reflects the composition of the population as a whole. • Some dwellings are for shared ownership and outright sale which brings finance into the scheme. • The council will receive a cash receipt for a proportion of the land value • No grant or subsidy will be required to finance the scheme.

• • • • •

• •

The development will be designed and tested to the highest level of guaranteed energy efficiency using Passivhaus techniques. The development will be to the highest sustainability standard using Cradle to Cradle methodology. The design of the development will prioritise adaptability to ensure a long useful life. Shared facilities for the residents and wider community will be incorporated. Residents and neighbours will be encouraged to participate in the development of the proposals and design and thus have a real stake in its future. Control of the development will be with a partnership of residents, neighbours and the council. It is anticipated that the project will create a surplus in the medium term which will be reinvested on other schemes for community benefit.

O556*+P<*($

3"NN/+&,R$%*+*V,($ 23-4&/0&'()*5)6)(#7,)04* Q+*6=R$QS<&*+,$ .*2P+=$@TU$52$

8#,,30/49*:)%* 3!4$)*56*(*+,($7,28*9"':*6($

!"#$%&''($ $ !"#$%&'()*+#,)-* !"#$)*+,($

.$&/0/01*

-$."/(*($0$1'2,($

7*';W%/&':$

D&H$";$)*(&:*+,($

7*';$1&+2+<&+=$$

I"/+=JK':$L$)&<9JM""6$L$$ %&=J7N2''$

High levels of self-‐build & cross subsidy enable affordability with high standards and community benefits together with a capital receipt to the council

3"/+<&'$O&N($

>"$?62+,$

D"6*$E#*''&+=($ FG$

325&,2'$)*<*&5,$ @ABC$D&''&"+$

O::&P"+2'$%*+*V,($

What are the main elements of the proposal? Firstly, that consideration be given to developing & managing the project through a Community Land Trust, a non-‐profit, community-‐based organization that develops housing, workspaces, community facilities or other assets which remain in the public sector and which are made available at permanently affordable levels and which is controlled by the residents, local people and the council. This inclusive and democratic governance structure would manage the project to achieve maximum community benefit.

High quality, low energy homes will be provided for a number of target groups including-‐ • Families on low incomes in overcrowded council accommodation • Older people on low incomes wishing to move out of a council owned family house into a smaller home • Older people wishing to sell a family house to move into smaller accommodation within a mutually supportive environment. • Young families unable to afford to buy a small family house. • Young people who are unable to afford private rents Homes would be available on low social rents, so called affordable rents, shared ownership and outright ownership. In this way the new neighbourhood would reflect the age and income mix of the local population. The number of dwellings will be maximized within planning and other constraints to make the best use of the land and generate a surplus for the council to recycle in other developments. A high level of self-‐build labour will be used to radically reduce build costs and thereby create economic headroom for truly affordable homes, low energy dwellings with very low energy costs, space for growing food, equipment for managing water and waste and other environmental measures, for training and for providing shared community facilities. The income from sales of full and part equity in flats and houses together with low build costs will create the ability to provide higher quality, low energy homes at affordable costs in a low environmental impact community with shared facilities together with a capital receipt for the council to invest in provision elsewhere.

Relationship stakeholders and CLT

Other people interested in self-build and creating a sustainable community.

Self-builders invest time and energy

Invest into

Stakeholders

Private investors People from the wider London Community

Selected Self-builders

Lewisham Residents

Ladywell Community Church Grove Residents

Council invests via reduced rate on land price and logistical support

Tax Payers and Voters The Mayor

Lewisham residents invest political support and voluntary donations of time, energy or money

Community Land Trust

Lewisham Council

Councillors

Returns

(RUSS)

Stakeholders become members/shareholders. Membership is open to all local people so they can have a say in how assets are managed and used and how surpluses is reinvested.

Local MP

Any future monetary surplus generated will be reinvested into more community projects.

Officers

Received in the form of Community benefits as listed below

Community Benefits - Social Housing - Affordable Housing - Training and Education - Community Space - Enhance local ecology - Add value to local economy

Developed into

Holds/Owns and manages

Assets: Land and Property Church Grove Site

What form does the proposed development take?

The draft proposal is for 34 dwellings at a residential density of 98 dwellings per hectare or 380 habitable rooms/hectare. This is subject to further detailed development and consideration of planning and other constraints. Draft dwelling mix Dwellings for social rent -‐ 7 one bedroom, 2 person flats for people moving from under-‐occupied council dwellings. 7 five bedroom, 6 person houses for families moving from over-‐occupied council houses. 1 two bedroom, 4 person house for general needs. Homes for sale to older people moving out of under-‐ occupied houses and wishing to live in a mutually supportive environment 4 one bedroom, 2 person flats 8 two bedroom, 3 person flats Shared ownership homes for young families unable to afford private sector accommodation. 2 two bedroom, 4 person houses. 3 four bedroom 6 person houses Shared houses at affordable rents for young people unable to afford accommodation in the private sector. 2 six bedroom, 6 person houses. 3 of these dwellings will be designed to be suitable for residents who are wheelchair users. The need will be assessed in consultation with the Housing Department.

This provides – • 15 dwellings for social rent for 60 people • 12 homes for sale to 32 older people • 5 shared ownership homes for 26 people • accommodation for 12 young people in 2 shared houses

The mix of dwellings will be finalized in consultation with the Housing Department and in line with the needs of the self-‐build group.

A community hall, office and shared kitchen are provided. These facilities will provide for communal cooking and dining in the manner of a co-‐ housing group, community meetings, performances, physical activities and

childcare and will be available for local residents. The community facilities are situated adjacent to the entrance to the site and open onto a shared garden. The site has good bus and train connections nearby. The site access from Church Grove is very narrow and there has been a history of issues with access. For these reasons and in common with other recent nearby developments it is proposed to provide space for only a few cars. These would be electric cars managed as a car club available to the residents. Access is provided for emergency and refuse vehicles. During construction, one possibility is to supply the site with building materials by crane from the council depot on the opposite bank of the river to avoid unnecessary disturbance to the neighbours in Church Grove. The accommodation is arranged in two largely 3 storey terraces facing south 8m away from the river as required by The Environment Agency to form a green corridor along the river. The height of these buildings is reduced at the ends to 2 floors so as not to overshadow the adjoining private gardens. The gap in the buildings also has reduced heights and provides a view through to the river and beyond from within the site and from Church Grove. In front of these two buildings and separated from them by a street providing access to all the dwellings are two low 2 storey buildings of flats each building facing onto a shared garden. These buildings are attached to the existing terraces in Church Grove within the Ladywell Conservation Area and are designed to avoid overlooking of private gardens.

How will the project be financed?

The proposed financial model for the Church Grove scheme is based on a quantum of residential units that comply with planning policy, in terms of density, height, and overlooking, together with a mixture of tenures that reflect the general population of the borough of Lewisham. The basis of the scheme finances is that overall it will be self-‐financing GLA Affordable Housing Grant will not be applied for, to allow the group to set rent levels that are affordable for each member of the community. Rents The rents are based on Council’s Affordable Housing policy rents, with an average discount of 30% in addition to recognize the value of the “sweat equity” contributed by the self-‐builders., i.e. part of the construction costs normally expected under a residential build contract will be saved by the residents undertaking a proportion (30% average) of the construction work themselves. There are 2 shared houses proposed, each of which will be occupied by 6 single people who wish to live in a shared environment, and who would not normally qualify for Council housing because they have a very low priority and because there is very little suitable stock available. In these shared houses the rent is based on a flat rate rent of £70 per week Proposed rent levels £/week are as follows – 1 bed 2 person flat £92 2 bed 4 person house £118 4 bed 6 person house £134 6 bed 6 person shared house £420 Shared ownership Again, the value of these dwellings is discounted against current market values. Firstly, RUSS will retain a proportion of the equity value to enable the completed units to be truly affordable, and secondly, the offer price also reflects an average of 30% sweat equity discount. As an example, a new 2 bed house in this area is valued at, say £320,000 a discount of 30% of the market value is applied, equal to £96,000 leaving

£224,000 of equity. The shared owners are allowed to purchase up to 40% of the initial value on offer, i.e. £89,600 with RUSS “holding” the balance of the equity up to £134,400 (depending on the percentage purchased on the first tranche). This may vary but a minimum of 30% equity would be the required starting purchase price, giving a minimum investment of £67,200. Rent of 2% of unsold equity would be charged on the equity not purchased, as a contribution to enable RUSS to service any debt. The rent would vary between £52/week for a 40% stake in the equity and £60/week for a 30% stake which would be coupled with a lower mortgage payment. For the larger 4 bed units, market value is assessed as £630,000. This is beyond the affordability range of most local households, so it is recommended that RUSS hold 50% of the open market value and purchasers are offered 30% of the balance of £315,000. Rents on unsold equity remain at 2% equal to £85/week. By retaining equity, RUSS will be able to control who the completed properties may be sold on to, should individual shared owners decide they wish to sell and move on. Properties for sale The properties for sale are targeted at older people who are under-‐ occupying an existing property they own that has become too large for them to manage. There are 12 properties initially allocated for sale. This is where RUSS retains 20% of the market value as a mechanism to control future allocations, which also has the effect of making the completed units more affordable. The cost of these properties are: 1 bed 2 person flat £198,000 2 bed 3 person flat £288,000 Rent on unsold equity is not proposed on these units, but a Service Charge of £80 per month to contribute to the running costs of the estate. There is an assumption that no sweat equity discount is applied to these units, although this may be possible.

Capital Receipt to the Council The financial viability assessment shows an indicative capital receipt to the Council of £1.2m. This is prior to a more detailed cost plan, which will be determined following the appointment of an Employer’s Agent/Quantity Surveyor, and tendering of the construction works. Borrowing requirement In order to pay for the completion of the build, there is a 30 year mortgage of £2,014,477 which can be serviced by the rents. This is based on an average 30% sweat equity for the self-‐builders. It is envisaged that cost savings of 30% over contractor built dwellings will be achieved for most of the houses but that few of the flats will be self-‐built as they are aimed at older people (although we have had a number of retired people successfully self-‐build houses). The average 30% saving across the development which has been assumed is a conservative estimate.

What building methods will be used?

The form of the buildings is kept relatively simple. This makes them easier to build and easier to achieve the high levels of airtightness required in low energy buildings. The buildings are all based on structural cross walls with non-‐loadbearing walls to front and back. The internal partitions are also non-‐loadbearing. This permits windows and doors to be positioned at will and allows for long-‐term adaptability which is an essential feature of any sustainable building. The foundations will be carried out by a contractor as a discreet operation prior to self-‐builders starting on site. The proposal is for steel screw piles which are quick, do not create disturbance to neighbours and do not create any spoil which is particularly useful on a site subject to contamination as we understand this is. The proposal is for timber fame construction which is relatively easy for inexperienced builders to acquire sufficient skill to carry out. The proposal is to establish an on-‐site temporary factory to fabricate the structural frame. This technique is often employed on housing sites and achieves cost reductions and time advantages, achieves good quality and makes best use of the skills available. The proposal is to build to Passivhaus standard. This delivers ultra low energy buildings with tested and guaranteed performance at affordable costs. This is in contrast to most low energy buildings in the UK which do not deliver their designed performance.

What is the sustainability strategy?

Sustainability is a term often used but rarely defined. We are basing our concept and principles on the Cradle to Cradle method of design created by William McDonough and Dr Michael Braungart. This is a framework to inform decisions to enhance the environment instead of the more usual approach of minimizing negative environmental impacts. This involves avoiding harmful products and specifying quality ones, enhancing biodiversity, air quality, water quality, replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy, designing for deconstruction and recycling and designing for comfort and delight. Our approach to achieving environmentally sustainable communities lies partly in the low energy homes built using environmentally friendly materials and so on, but also more significantly in fostering good habits and decision making from the residents themselves. For example, any benefits of having photo-‐voltaic cells will be negated if people leave the lights on and appliances are left on stand-‐by all the time. This is why we believe the best sustainability measures are low cost, low tech measures that have a direct impact on people and their relationship with their environment. Growing food is the most direct way we can all reduce our carbon footprint, but it also offers people an opportunity to improve their diet and create new relationships with their neighbours. Composting reduces emissions associated with waste disposal and creates a positive materials flow that saves water and energy. Although not as glamorous as some hi-‐ tech solutions, we believe humble activities such as these will have a greater long-‐term benefit for people and the environment. Coupled with innovative design that maximizes the use of solar energy and passivhaus standards that vastly reduce heating needs, it is possible to create a carbon neutral community. In the long term we believe it is possible to create a carbon negative community. This is something that will become necessary if we are to fulfill our international obligations to reduce emissions. Instead of viewing this challenge as a costly exercise of green tokenism, it is an opportunity to reduce living costs for residents and enhance the local environment. Education in sustainable development It is proposed to establish a hub for education in sustainable development on site in partnership with the London Regional Centre of Expertise on

Education for Sustainable Education who are affiliated with the United Nations. The project would serve as a working example of sustainable community development to inspire others and we would monitor progress towards attaining sustainability targets and share this information so people can learn from our efforts. This would feature developing awareness of the River Ravensbourne, its history and the current River Restoration Plan. Children and others would learn about its wildlife and the benefits of reintroducing beneficial species.

How will self-‐builders acquire the necessary skills?

The aim of the design is that it is relatively simple and cost effective. The necessary skills will be acquired via a process of training and talent identification. The build will be organized into a series of phases and each phase will require a dedicated team of self-‐builders and apprentices lead by a professional tradesman who’s role it will be to train and manage the team for that specific task and to provide quality control. When one team finishes on one building and moves on to the next, the following team will begin work on the preceding teams ‘completed’ site, and so on. In this way people will be doing the same job across the site so that the self-‐builders become knowledgeable and competent in specific skills and will produce high quality work. It also means that all the buildings will be built together and completed together instead of different people working on their own house and working at different speeds. Once a team completes a phase across the site, they will begin the process again on the next task. The majority of training will take place on site. Team leaders will be experienced experts and professional trades people. They will train and supervise the self-‐builders. We will also get experienced self-‐builders from past successful projects to come and mentor self-‐builders, offering them advice, help and motivation. An on-‐site factory will form the heart of the project. This will be a space where people can be taught new skills and how to use simple machinery. It will allow sections of the buildings to be pre-‐fabricated in a controlled environment and allow things to be produced in batches, making the project run more efficiently. The factory will be a temporary structure constructed by the self-‐builders. This will provide an early opportunity to discover who within the group has talents for different jobs. It will also be a

good team building exercise. This will be important in deciding how the teams are formed. In the early stages it will be key to identify individual skills and talents. We will organize activities and workshop days prior to construction on site to assist in this process. This will also provide an opportunity to train and prepare people with basic skills and an understanding of health and safety before going on site. Apprentices We have formed a partnership with a local social enterprise who specialize in training young and disadvantaged youths on construction sites, providing accredited training and work experience. We will work with them to integrate the optimum number of apprentices into the project and our experience is that this can provide useful labour and expertise for self-‐ build projects. This could also provide opportunities for some of the self-‐ builders to obtain qualifications along the way. Grants are available for this aspect of training and it is envisaged that this would be self-‐financing. Skilled Volunteers There is a growing international network of self-‐builders and people interested in sustainability. People are increasingly looking for opportunities to travel and volunteer in community projects in return for free accommodation and food. Organizations such as WWOF and the POOSH.org exist to connect volunteers with community projects around the world. They could be used to bolster manpower on site if and when needed and to find skilled labour. Synchronized properly with the schedule on site, these networks offer an opportunity to attract extra energy, enthusiasm and expertise for next to no cost. For all these elements to work together effectively there will need to be careful planning and organization. We propose a live update on the progress of each phase of the build so all elements can be scheduled properly. We will also keep a schedule of skills and personnel within the group so we can make best use of the human resources available to us.

How will risks be managed?

We have found that self-‐builders are highly motivated to succeed and that they will overcome any obstacles to ensure a successful outcome. The principle difficulty is generally the time it takes to persuade institutions; local authorities & funders to support proposals.

Contrary to the need to keep it simple, there is a temptation to overload projects with expensive project management which can render the whole enterprise uneconomical. In our experience the risks can be overstated. The reality is that whilst self-‐build certainly takes time, self-‐builders do not generally fail to complete, produce shoddy work or let costs run away; they have their financial future at stake and want to make sure that what they build will be good, comfortable and cheap to run. Their usual response is that it is hard work but worth it for the real benefits of economy and satisfaction that follow. It is our experience that self-‐build can start to go wrong when the self-‐builders feel alienated and not in control of the design and building process. It would be tragic to fall into the same trap that organizations fell into in the 90’s by wishing to control the process too closely rather than providing a level of support that enabled self-‐builders to get on with it. Potential risks include – • rising costs, • extended timescales, • turnover of self-‐builders, • poor construction and • misuse of funds. Measures to mitigate these risks include – • providing accurate promotional material and managing expectations, • providing support from professionals with self-‐build experience • keeping the organization, design and method of construction as simple as possible, • maintaining self-‐builder’s motivation by ensuring that their needs are being fully recognized and that they are fully involved in the decision making, • maintaining a waiting list of potential self-‐builders who are trained and ready to build • providing adequate training, • emphasizing the need for adequate planning and not starting on site until everything is ready • setting targets and monitoring progress and • maintaining a transparent accounting system.

How long will it take?

It is estimated that 12 months will be required for the planning stages before starting on site. This will include understanding the requirements of the self-‐builders, the council, funders, neighbours and other stakeholders, undertaking the design of the houses and the site layout in consultation with stakeholders, planning approval, detail design, obtaining building and other approvals, preparing sub-‐contracts for piling and other contractor built elements and securing funding. This time is also necessary for potential members of the self-‐build group to understand the time, effort and commitment to realize a successful project and for those for whom the commitment is too much to drop out before starting on site. The self-‐builders need to acquire an understanding of the development process, how to organize and work together as a group and training in building skills. It is estimated that he construction will take 18 months in three phases, the first being foundations and possible drainage and other infrastructure by a contractor followed by dwellings for sale and shared ownership. This will bring income into the project after 12 months construction which will then be used to construct the social rented part of the development.

Months Briefing Design Planning Detail sub-contracts Piling site factory build sale build rent training funding building Regs

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

How will the development be managed and maintained?

The proposal is for the land and property to be managed by a Community Land Trust who will represent the different stakeholders. Residents will all be members. The Trust is regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and must submit a publicly available annual report and audited accounts. The Trust will be transparent and run democratically with annual elections

of the board with all members eligible to vote.

Lewisham Council will have nomination rights for the social housing, however, members will have the opportunity to not approve someone for a tenancy if they have a reasonable objection. All potential residents will have an interview and meet their potential new neighbours beforehand. If oversubscribed, members will vote on who to select as new residents.

The Board

Board elected by members

Other people interested in Selfbuild and sustainability

- Board must represent the various different groups of people within the association. - Must have required skills and expertise to fulfil the aims of the association. - Maximum size of the board is 12 people. - The board must elect a Chair. - The board must report back to members. - Must be volunteers. - The business of the association shall be directed by the board. - Must organise regular meetings and an annual general meeting for all members. - Must ensure the aims and objectives of the association are furthered. - Must abide by the rules of the association (see appendix).

Secretary - The board must appoint a secretary who is responsible for organising and keeping minutes of meetings. Secretary must also make any returns on behalf of association to the Financial Conduct Authority.

Self-builders

Members

All members must have at least one £1 share. All members get one vote, no matter how many shares they own. Must abide by the rules of the association.

Lewisham Council

Local People

Church Grove Residents

The board can delegate roles to subcommittees and has the power to transfer the exercise of any of its powers to employees of the association on such terms as it determines (within the boundaries of the rules - see appendix).

Sub-committees/Employees

- It may be required to create steering groups and sub-committees in order to complete certain tasks on behalf of the association. The Board has the power to do this.

A maintenance fund will be established funded by a service charge and the Trust would be responsible for managing the community facilities. Any surplus generated from future sales or rental income after debts have been paid off will be re-‐invested in the creation of more community schemes of a similar nature. The society is obliged by its rules to re-‐invest any surplus in projects that will bring benefits to the community that they represent.

What are the next steps?

Lewisham Councill have initiated a process to establish a self-‐build group. The aim we understand is to have this group in place in the New Year. • Once this group is in place the process of establishing the brief for the development will start; the needs and desires of the self-‐ builders, the requirements of the council, consultation with the neighbours in Church Grove and other stakeholders. This could be undertaken using tools specifically designed for helping groups articulate development issues such as the Voicebox tool developed by CABE. • Appoint design team. • Agree with Lewisham and selected self-‐builders the particulars of the scheme, i.e. density, mix and types of accommodation. It is envisaged that members of the self-‐build group would participate in a process of participatory design involving site visits to completed projects, sessions on the basics of house design and housing layout and workshop sessions developing options for house plans and site layouts working with models and 3D modeling software. There would also be a programme of design sessions with individual households. This process would establish the principles for the house designs, site layout and specification of materials. • Agree the governance of the project. We believe that a Community Land Trust is the best route, and have already founded an organization in RUSS. All participants would become members and elect a new board to represent the membership. • Secure the finance and agree capital receipt and conditions for transferring the land, agree rents and prices for shared and outright ownership properties. Secure development loans and commitments for long-‐term mortgages.

•

• • • • • •

Initiate training. This will include construction training but also educating members of the group in the development process, how to organize, house design, site layout and the specification of materials. Finalize design and submit for planning permission. Create a detailed schedule for construction for all phases. Talent identification of self-‐builders. Put tenders out to contractors for elements of the work. Organize construction teams and identify team leaders. Begin work on site.

What is RUSS (Rural Urban Synthesis Society)?

RUSS has been incorporated as a Community Land Trust since 2009 and we have charitable status. Founded by a diverse group of Lewisham residents with ties to the Walter Segal self-‐build scheme at Walters Way, we established RUSS with the aim of creating cutting-‐edge sustainable housing for the community. There is clearly a need for housing, but we also feel there is a need to develop sustainable housing that employs alternative technologies to create a community that has a positive footprint. We want to see people given the opportunity to learn new skills and to offer training in new ecologically friendly building techniques. Our goal is to create a model that can be replicated and adapted on other sites with communities in and around South London. A brief history: we raised the £1000 necessary to pay for the legal fees of incorporation through a number of local music events where local musicians and artists performed in support of our aims. Since 2011 we have been campaigning and promoting the idea of a sustainable self-‐build scheme on the Church Grove site. We held an open day at attended by expert speakers and local people. We have raised over £20,000 from further events and a non-‐profit community share issue and in September 2013 we were awarded a Technical Assistance grant of £3,600 from the Community Land Trust Network. RUSS is incorporated as an Industrial Provident Society for the Benefit of the Community and the key point is that our activities must be for the benefit of the community not just for the benefit of our members as is the case for a co-‐operative. The main features are –

•

• • •

All members must be shareholders, all shareholder are members. All members only get one vote no matter how many shares they own. This ensures no one individual can assume control of the organization. Organizations can become members and elect a representative There is no profit or dividends paid to shareholders. If the association is wound-‐up or dissolved any remaining assets must be transferred to a charitable body with objects within or similar to that of the association.

Currently the Directors of RUSS are – • Paul Capel, Msc Sustainable Architecture – a resident of Walters Way Paul has renovated his home to be one of the most energy efficient homes in the country using all renewable sources of energy. • Barbara Hicks, Yoga Teacher and retired Primary school teacher – an original Walters Way self-‐builder, Barbara has extensive experience of what it is like to build your own home whist simultaneously bringing up a young family and working full-‐time. • Dave Dayes, Yoga Teacher and experienced self-‐builder – also an original self-‐builder at Walters Way, Dave has since renovated his family home so it is now part powered from renewable energy sources reducing his energy bills by more than 50% in the process. Moving forward we need to expand our membership to further represent the local community and we will increase the size of our board to reflect the membership.

Who are the people involved in RUSS?

Kareem Dayes is a local volunteer and member of RUSS. Growing up in Walters Way he has always had an interest and passion for self-‐build. Recently he has helped his father Dave Dayes install alternative technology to make the home more energy efficient and largely powered by renewable energy. This experience has inspired Kareem to seek a more sustainable way of living in London. Through his experience living in a housing co-‐ operative in New Cross and through extensive research Kareem discovered the Community Land Trust (CLT) movement and decided to create a new CLT with the aim of collaborating with local people to build a sustainable community in London. As a young single male living in London Kareem finds private rents too expensive for his low income as a musician and is seeking alternative ways to find affordable housing in London. Through his Community Interest Company 12 Tone C.I.C Kareem has managed to raise

over £4000 pounds for RUSS from music events and record sales. Kareem has also helped RUSS produce this proposal with content derived from his research. Jon Broome is a leading sustainable architect who has led the way in self-‐ build in the UK for nearly 30 years. He worked on council housing for Lewisham in the 70’s and was joint architect with Walter Segal for the hugely successful self-‐build projects of the 80’s. He then went on as founder Director of Architype to work on self-‐build co-‐ops in Downham, Brockley & Grove Park as well as neighbouring boroughs Greenwich & Southwark as well as community self-‐build projects in Camden & Islington, Brighton, Colchester, Birmingham & Sheffield. He then developed energy efficient social housing which won The Housing Corporation Gold Award and Jon Broome Architects was voted Sustainable Housing Design Practice of the year in 2010. He is a Certified Passivhaus Designer and has been working on Passivhaus designs for housing associations. He is currently architect for a ‘shell and fit out’ self-‐build project for Circle Housing Trust in North London. Jon Broome was co-‐author of ‘The Self-‐Build Book’ 1991 and contributor to ‘Housing & the Environment’ and ‘Architecture and Participation’ and author of ‘The Green Self-‐Build Book’2007. Jon has self-‐built two houses in Lewisham and so is familiar with the issues at first hand. He is a lifelong resident of the borough and his family have lived next to the site in Church Grove for over 100 years across four generations during which time the site has been a laundry, a foundry, a school and now an opportunity to develop the local community for the 21st century.

Steve Chance is an award winning architect, and has been providing additional support helping to envisage a sustainable community led project, including feasibility studies, and he has extensive experience of creating beautiful, innovative residential buildings. His practice Chance de Silva is experienced in carrying out small-‐scale residential development -‐ buying neglected sites and building new homes. Chance de Silva have three eco-‐homes on site near Wood Vale, Lewisham and recently completed 'Casadanza', an award-‐winning development in CroftonPark, Lewisham. In 2013 they completed 'One Lancs' with self-‐ builder Simon Head, and in 2014 they will be building a new house in Hackney and developing a site at London Fields. Steve was previously the director in charge of the Peckham Partnership regeneration in Southwark and designer and director for the restoration of Brockwell Park Lido. Gianni Rocchi is a Lewisham resident and member of the Ladywell community, Gianni Rocchi has also provided a lot of energy and advice helping us to imagine and present a vision for the vacant Church Grove site. Gianni has years of experience creating bespoke modern design that meet the needs and aspirations of clients, and also designed the house extension and renovation for Dave Dayes and Barbara Hicks in Walters Way. Gianni Rocchi is a self-‐employed architectural consultant who has worked alongside Steve Chance at Pollard Thomas Edwards and at Chance de Silva. These projects include: Naish Court regeneration (117 mixed tenure homes), the Peckham Partnership (44 homes) and Chance de Silva projects 'Casadanza' and 'E-‐LO Vale' (eco-‐houses). David Leah: Lewisham resident and active member of the community. A Partner is a small, specialist company (Red Loft) developing public housing on behalf of Local Authorities, ALMO’s, and housing associations. Moved from Manchester to study in London and has lived in Lewisham for nearly 30 years. Has worked in public housing in London for most of his adult life. Tony Rich : Joint Director of London Community Building, a Lewisham-‐ based social enterprise established to generate social benefit through building, construction and maintenance. This is achieved by generating training and employment places for target groups such as: 18-‐24 years olds not in education, employment or training (NEETs), long-‐term unemployed, people with mental health needs, ex-‐servicemen and ex-‐offenders. They

aim to include paid work experience and training opportunities in all their projects. They are focused on helping their trainees move onto employment or self-‐employment. They work to link project benefits directly to local residents. They provide a cost-‐effective and professional service. All work is carried out to a high standard and trainees receive full site supervision. All work has full public liability insurance cover. London Community Building have helped RUSS produce this proposal and are will work with us in partnership to provide apprenticeships and training opportunities for local people within the proposed Church Grove community led self-‐build project. Rural Urban Synthesis Society Ltd, RUSS, is registered with the FSA as an Industrial and Provident Society for the Benefit of the Community No. 30624R. It is registered with HMRC as a Charity No. XT18342

Contact

info@theruss.org 0754 888 56 09 – Kareem Dayes 11 Walters Way Honor Oak Park London SE23 3LH For the latest news and information please visit our website

www.theruss.org

Details on membership and our community share issue can also be found on our website.