Scottish Government

CHAPTER THREE CASE STUDIES

Case study purpose and selection

Case study purpose and criteria

3.1 The original research tender proposed the undertaking of 6 case studies representing a range of different approaches to good practice in the development process, with a focus on how design has been integrated into house-building organisations' programmes and on how barriers to design have been overcome. In addition to this focus on developers' practices, each case study was to be centred round a demonstration project that is an exemplar of the type of product which good practice in the development process can achieve.

3.2 The criteria for selection of the case studies are explained in Chapter One (1.44 to 1.47). Re-capping, these included:

• Key issues (identified in Phases I and II)
  • key stages and steps in the development process
  • key themes arising in the research
• Firm type and size
• Type of setting
• Geographic location (as a check criterion)

Case study selection

3.3 Table 3.1 shows the case studies developed and their selection criteria. The table shows the case studies in the order in which they are presented in this section, which has been organised according to the relevance of their demonstration projects to two key stages in the development process identified in the earlier phases of this research - land assembly and release together with master planning, and the planning application stage - with an additional set of case studies illustrating one-off or bespoke designs that have been used (or are intended to be used) subsequently as standard house-types. The latter category included 3 rather than the intended 4 case studies due to the response from developers when approached to be included as case studies.

Table 3.1 Case studies included in the study

Justification of case studies

3.4 The key criterion for selection was the "key issues" exemplified by the particular development processes, which have been summarised very briefly in the table above. Cross-checking with the other criteria, the proposed selection of case studies provides the following spreads in relation to each of these:

Firm type and size

Table 3.2 Location of case study developers' HQ

Source: E-mail survey

Table 3.3 Size of case study developer according to development programme

Source: E-mail survey

3.5 The proposed case studies therefore reflect the range of firm types and sizes that have participated in the research through the e-mail survey. It could be said that there is very minor under-representation of small firms ( i.e. less than 100 units/year) and slight over-representation of medium-large firms ( i.e. 200-499 units/year), though this apparent slight bias is somewhat artificial as 2 of the selected companies are on the threshold between small and medium-small, and between medium-small and medium-large respectively.

Type of setting

3.6 The proposed case studies cover a broad range of types of setting.

Table 3.4 Type of setting of case study demonstration project

Geographic location

3.7 Using the geographic areas that are the basis for Homes for Scotland's regional committees, and comparing with the areas where the respondents to the e-mail survey indicated they have been most active in the past five years, the spread of case study demonstration projects is as follows:

Table 3.5 Geographic location of case study demonstration projects

Source: E-mail survey

3.8 Summarising: East Central Scotland, Lothian & Borders and Grampian are represented approximately in proportion to the areas worked in by respondents to the e-mail survey, while Strathclyde is slightly over-represented and Highland and Moray are not represented. This is a satisfactory spread, especially considering the fit to the above dominant criteria.

Case study data collection

3.9 The 12 potential case study developers selected from the 24 interviewed were contacted and 10 eventually agreed to be included as a case study in the research. A pro forma data collection guide was completed jointly by the researchers and each case study developer (see Annex 3), and case study demonstration projects were visited by members of the Research Team together with the developers during June 2007. All illustrations used in the case studies were supplied by the respective developers and the consultants they worked with. As with Phase II of the research, developers participating in the case studies generously gave time to collecting the data and accompanying members of the Research Team to the project sites.

Key lessons from the case studies

3.10 The main focus of the case studies is to illustrate how barriers and constraints have been overcome, with reference to those identified in the previous phases of the research. Key lessons regarding practices that have overcome such barriers are presented here.

Land assembly and release with master planning

3.11 The first 3 case studies illustrate how the issue of land assembly and release can be addressed in order to facilitate an opportunity for good design in housing development. In this regard the main points these case studies show are that:

• the packaging and release of land for development will often entail close collaboration between different stakeholders, with landowners, local authorities and developers all having roles to play, and all having the potential to take a leading role - private sector in the Park Lane / Renfrew Riverside case study (then further developed by the local authority), local authority in Taylor Woodrow / Wester Inch, and landowner in Ogilvie Homes / Mactaggart & Mickel / Stewart Milne - The Drum
• a key advantage that assembly of large areas of land for development can offer is certainty to incoming developers through the provision of infrastructure and agreed design guidelines through instruments such as masterplans
• conversely such assembly and preparation of land for development entails risks for those stakeholders investing in land reclamation, building of infrastructure and preparation of planning and urban design guidance.

Engaging with the planning system

3.12 As stated in the previous section, the first 3 case studies provide examples of the usefulness of masterplans in providing guidance to house-builders, as well as of the different processes whereby such masterplans can be prepared. The following 4 case studies provide examples of further ways in which house-builders have engaged with other actors within, and related to, the planning system. Two of these also include some form of guidance through the use of a masterplan (Miller Homes / Tower View) and a planning brief (McCarthy & Stone / Eden Court), but a key aspect that these cases illustrate is the importance of the relationship with the planners:

• early discussions with planners are held to be important by some house-builders, influencing the purchase or not of land (Tighmor I & H Brown / Laidneskea);
• negotiation with the planners can be protracted and can often lead to major changes to the initial proposals (Miller Homes / Tower View; Applecross / Eyre Place);
• strong visualisation tools such as 3D computer modelling can help house-builders show planners and other stakeholders what is being proposed (Applecross / Eyre Place);
• a good working relationship with the planners (and other decision-making organisations and departments) can influence the choice of external consultants engaged by house-builders (Tighmor I & H Brown / Laidneskea) as well as how the design process develops (McCarthy & Stone / Eden Court).

Adapting housing designs to different sites

3.13 The last 3 case studies illustrate processes which included the development of house designs that responded to specific site issues and which have then been used (or are intended to be used) elsewhere by the house builders. Three types of process are illustrated:

• the development of specific space standards that are appropriate for a given market segment, with the resulting layout then being replicated elsewhere with only minor adaptation to street layout being required (Stewart Milne / Kepplestone);
• the development of a 'contemporary' design for a specific site which provided the house builder with an opening into a different market, which has then led to re-use of the new product on another site and its potential inclusion in the firm's stock of standard types, as well as to the development of further types with similar aesthetic (CALA Homes / Jordanhill); and
• the development of a house type that responded to a given topography, which the house builder is considering adapting and using on other sites in the future, though will be limited in the range of locations it is adaptable to due to its originally highly site-specific design (Mactaggart & Mickel / Aidan's Brae).

The relationship between the design process and product

3.14 The case study demonstration projects, which were selected on the basis of suggestions from companies interviewed in Phase II of the research, often do not reflect the standard processes in place in the companies involved. In this sense several of the case study demonstration projects have been learning experiences for the house-builders, and as such reflect innovative practice.

3.15 The case studies show that the assessment of how the design process affects the product in terms of design quality is very much dependant on the perception of design quality, which - as shown in Phases I and II of the research - varies according to different interviewees and firms. Therefore processes identified in the case studies by the developers as leading to good products may be taken as suggestions of ways forward which may facilitate a good result, but these need to be considered in combination with what is regarded as a good product in the firm's approach to development.

Other issues

3.16 Phases I and II of the research identified a wide range of design-related issues in addition to the key areas addressed above. The following table summarises a range of significant issues and indicates which case studies provide particularly interesting examples of how these have been addressed in practice. This can served as a guide to using the case studies.

Table 3.6 Main issues illustrated in the case studies