好色先生TV

When the One Brighton housing development opened in 2009, it aimed to set a benchmark for sustainable living and design. The 172-unit scheme was the UK鈥檚 largest private car-free development. Its construction included Britain鈥檚 greenest concrete frame (post-tensioned with 50% cement GGBS replacement, 100% recycled aggregate) and also made use of sustainable construction materials such as natural clay blocks and wood fibre insulation. In order to reduce carbon emissions, extensive use was made of sustainable energy resources such as photovoltaic panels and an on-site biomass boiler, both of which provided around half of the development鈥檚 energy requirements with the remainder sourced from 鈥済reen electricity鈥�.

But One Brighton was about more than just the physical aspects of sustainability; it aimed to promote the kind of sustainable, community-based social lifestyle that would complement the development鈥檚 environmentally conscious design. Accordingly, residents were encouraged to grow their own food on a rooftop allotment, extensive recycling facilities were integrated into the buildings鈥� waste system, a car club was established and a 鈥済reen鈥� caretaker would oversee management and maintenance.

Designed by architects Feilden Clegg Bradley and built as a joint venture between developers BioRegional Quintain and Crest Nicholson, One Brighton marked an evolution of the low-carbon design and lifestyle philosophy famously pioneered at the landmark BedZED development in south London in 2002. It was also the world鈥檚 first One Planet Community, an ambitious global network that aims to create sustainable neighbourhoods from as far afield as Canada to Portugal.

All that was back in 2009. But what of it now? Five years after its opening, BioRegional has published a detailed post-evaluation report that seeks to assess One Brighton鈥檚 impact. This provides a timely opportunity to gauge whether One Brighton has actually lived up to its pioneering sustainability agenda.

Have its carbon emissions been as low as expected? How have its sustainable design-features weathered? And, perhaps most importantly, has it fostered the kind of social community in which people are more likely to adopt a low-carbon, sustainable lifestyle?

Community

Community spirit is often the hardest thing to create on a residential development. One Brighton went to considerable lengths to create a robust sense of community with dedicated community facilities like a cafe, offices, allotments and, significantly, public access right through its central courtyard. According to Andrew Breary, One Brighton鈥檚 green caretaker, this last aspect in particular has been critical in 鈥減reventing vandalism, maintaining security and creating a sense of place鈥�.

Equally, the rooftop allotments have proved hugely popular. Twenty-eight have been provided, and while this was clearly never going to transform One Brighton into the bastion of food self-sufficiency One Planet principles promote, both Breary and BioRegional co-founder Pooran Desai reveal that a far bigger ratio of one allotment for every three properties would probably be needed to satisfy demand.

But for One Brighton resident Ruth Anslow, the lack of a strong community spirit is one of the most disappointing aspects of living there. 鈥淲e hoped [a sense of community] would be there when we moved in but it doesn鈥檛 really exist. But this is a wider social issue that will take more than just one development to fix.鈥�

Although Anslow, who co-founded a local eco-supermarket, claims that she lacks the 鈥渃ommitment鈥� to tend to an allotment herself, she admits to 鈥渓oving鈥� the idea and confirms that they are popular with many of her neighbours.

One possible explanation Desai offers for the relative lack of community spirit is the 鈥渢ransitory residential population鈥� present at One Brighton due to its high proportion of foreign students from local universities.

Energy

BioRegional鈥檚 report into how One Brighton has performed claims that it has achieved a 67% reduction in carbon emissions when compared with the average UK home. Desai voices his ambition to increase this to 90%. Residents must sign up to purchase energy produced on-site, an arrangement that has caused some consternation on other eco-developments where renewable power is sourced on-site but has led to higher bills. But Desai maintains that when the communal boiler servicing charge is also taken into account, energy costs for residents are around 20% cheaper than the local market would provide. Anslow has her reservations: 鈥淲e actually thought energy costs would be cheaper but it works out as roughly the same unit cost as we鈥檇 probably be paying elsewhere. We were slightly surprised when we moved in though, the letting agent hadn鈥檛 previously made us aware of the services standing charge.鈥�

One unexpected problem Desai reveals is an energy surplus. 鈥淏ecause the buildings are using less energy than predicted, the boilers are actually too big. In summer they can use as little as 30% of the total load. In hindsight we鈥檇 probably have a boiler half the size. It鈥檚 really a question of design optimisation and unfortunately a lot of consulting engineers don鈥檛 yet have enough experience of renewable energy to design the most efficient system.鈥�

Overheating

With climate change leading to higher temperatures and greater legislative emphasis on better insulation and airtightness, overheating looks set to become one of the biggest environmental problems facing British new-build housing. Obviously for a development with environmental aspirations as progressive as One Brighton鈥檚, its potential impact could be particularly damaging.

Luckily, overheating does not appear to be an issue here and both residents and Desai seem happy with how the building is performing. Anslow claims that her flat is 鈥渃omfortable, spacious and well designed to a high spec, and is not compromised in any way by the development鈥檚 environmental agenda.鈥�

One Brighton鈥檚 avoidance of overheating is in large part due to its east/west orientation, which may be as a result of the team learning from BedZED鈥檚 north/south bearing. Units are also designed with relatively high ceilings and often with exposed concrete soffits. However, Desai does admit that while overheating on the development is not a problem, there are related issues he would address on future projects. 鈥淭he west facade probably gets hotter than we鈥檇 like sometimes, in the future we鈥檇 probably apply some kind of solar coating to a facade with the same orientation. That said, the west facade has been designed to accommodate the future installation of shutters, so this well could emerge as a retrofit solution down the line.鈥�

Parking

Parking is often the most contentious issue on any residential development. One Brighton developed a novel way to deal with these problems: it simply got rid of parking. And BioRegional鈥檚 Desai is unapologetic. 鈥淚t saves build costs, it saves residents money, it provides more space for apartments, which makes it a more attractive commercial decision, and it encourages more collaborative consumption, such as car sharing and clubs.鈥�

Desai鈥檚 advocacy of this position is unsurprising. But while a car-free zone may be appropriate for One Brighton, where Brighton train station is only a four-minute walk away, what of elsewhere? 鈥淚t鈥檚 a question of lifestyle and design, other developments like A2Dominion and Bicester Eco Town have followed One Brighton鈥檚 lead,鈥� says Desai.

And what of the residents鈥� perspective? Anslow is equally positive. 鈥淲e gave up our car years ago - with the station so close, we just don鈥檛 need it.鈥�

Does this suggest then that car-free developments like One Brighton might only be attractive to those already pursuing a car-free lifestyle? Not according to Brighton & Hove City Council. As their head of planning & public protection Martin Randall explains, in the five years since One Brighton鈥檚 completion the council has incorporated many of its features into wider planning policy. 鈥淲hen other developers would come to us and say 鈥榥o, car-free isn鈥檛 feasible鈥�, we were able to point to One Brighton as an example of what鈥檚 possible. Also, in terms of ultra-low carbon residential developments, it really set the sustainability benchmark we鈥檝e tried to implement elsewhere. For instance, 40% of new housing developments now include food growing facilities.鈥�