Re: Re: the microflat as a module in affordable inner urban design
From: Jock Coats (
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2002 10:31:01 -0600 (MDT)
This is all the rage in London at present. This is at least the third firm producing them. However in my opinion it is still on the wrong track. Whilst the design might be fine and I would probably be happy in one, they are still perpetuating a myth that ownership is the only really desirable form of tenure and pandering to that. It would be my contention that if the same principles were applied to building not-for-profit housing for community ownership renting would not be 'dead money'

In fact the principles probably make this the worst of all worlds. You pay for your mortgage but cannot expect anything more than an index linking of the resale price if it is linked to salary levels. You may actually fall further behind the ability to buy in the 'real' market as a result. This (scheme not design) is another example of the great conspiracy of commercial banks to take over from the rentiers as the biggest cash drain on society!

A better design and set of principles, in my opinion, and more affordable in many ways, is something like


Hans Tilstra wrote:

Here's a weblink to what seems like a clever inner urban modular design:

Imagine the potential to use this modular design as a basis for affordable
inner urban cohousing design - it could be feasible that larger households
would link multiple "microflats".

Still monologuing on urban design -

Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at]  Unsubscribe  and other info:

+  Jock Coats, Oxford Liberal Democrats, M3a Morrell Hall, OX3 0TU  +
+       T:+44 1865 485019 M:+44 7769 695767 F:+44 845 1275714       +
+   E(pref):jock.coats [at] Cix:jockox3 [at]   +
+     +

Cohousing-L mailing list
Cohousing-L [at]  Unsubscribe  and other info:

Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.