Final published version
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
Research output: Contribution to Journal/Magazine › Journal article › peer-review
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Development of new cohousing
T2 - lessons from a London scheme for the over-50s
AU - Scanlon, Kath
AU - Fernández Arrigoitia, Melissa
PY - 2015/3/1
Y1 - 2015/3/1
N2 - There is increased interest in the UK in cohousing as a desirable alternative for older people. The economics of developing cohousing differ from the normal model for residential development; in particular, the participatory nature of the process increases the time required and there are higher risks for both resident/purchaser and developer. We examine the nature of supply and risk using the case of a new senior cohousing community in south London. Given its evident benefits, senior cohousing may eventually become more widespread, and perceived risks will fall. However, the nature of the residential development process means that cohousing will always be at a disadvantage when competing for land in high demand areas like London, and the time required for participatory processes increases costs. To currently increase the small number of cohousing communities in the UK and ensure affordability, targeted measures may be necessary to enable groups to access land and mitigate the higher costs associated with longer term collaborative processes.
AB - There is increased interest in the UK in cohousing as a desirable alternative for older people. The economics of developing cohousing differ from the normal model for residential development; in particular, the participatory nature of the process increases the time required and there are higher risks for both resident/purchaser and developer. We examine the nature of supply and risk using the case of a new senior cohousing community in south London. Given its evident benefits, senior cohousing may eventually become more widespread, and perceived risks will fall. However, the nature of the residential development process means that cohousing will always be at a disadvantage when competing for land in high demand areas like London, and the time required for participatory processes increases costs. To currently increase the small number of cohousing communities in the UK and ensure affordability, targeted measures may be necessary to enable groups to access land and mitigate the higher costs associated with longer term collaborative processes.
KW - Cohousing
KW - London
KW - Older people
KW - Residential development
KW - Risk
U2 - 10.1080/17535069.2015.1011430
DO - 10.1080/17535069.2015.1011430
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:84954372833
VL - 8
SP - 106
EP - 121
JO - Urban Research and Practice
JF - Urban Research and Practice
SN - 1753-5069
IS - 1
ER -