Intergenerational Living Development is a PHC-serviced project to investigate, develop and demonstrate a repeatable model for high-quality, affordable intergenerational housing.
The concept begins with the possibility of two or more related households living within a deliberately designed residential environment that provides both genuine independence and selected shared facilities. An initial architectural concept uses an H-shaped arrangement, with separate residential wings for different generations connected by shared living space and opening towards common outdoor facilities. This is an initial design hypothesis rather than a prescribed solution.
The wider project will examine how architecture, land use, shared infrastructure, financing, ownership, legal structures and community arrangements could combine to provide younger households with secure and attractive homes while enabling older generations to contribute capital and remain independent, involved and supported.
The intention is to develop more than a single family home. The project will investigate whether the principles can be turned into a repeatable development model capable of supporting individual family projects, multi-family communities and larger developments in the UK and internationally.
PHC Service will maintain the project evidence base, Concerns, Actions, decisions, specialist inputs, lessons learned and readiness information. Architects, planners, lawyers, financial advisers, developers, engineers and other disciplines will remain independent specialist services contributing to the project as required.
Overall: Executive Summary
A practical 90-day plan to move Project 519, Intergenerational Living Development, from an early concept into a controlled feasibility position. The aim is to establish sponsorship, governance, evidence, options, affordability assumptions and decision gates without pretending that site, funding, tenure, design or operating model are already settled.
[+] Purpose
Create a controlled early-stage project basis:
confirm accountable sponsorship and decision rights
define the feasibility scope and evidence needed
capture assumptions, risks, actions and decisions in one controlled record
test the intergenerational living concept against need, affordability and practicality
prepare a clear recommendation on whether to proceed to a full business case
The purpose is not to sell a finished scheme. It is to find out whether a viable, dignified and affordable intergenerational housing model can be made real.
[+] What “Success” Looks Like (by Day 90)
By Day 90, success means:
an accountable sponsor and simple governance route are confirmed
the housing problem, intended users and affordability target are clearly described
the current design concept has been tested against credible alternatives
planning, legal, financial and operating-model issues are visible
key stakeholders have been mapped and early feedback has been captured
a decision-ready feasibility pack exists, including risks, options, assumptions and next-step recommendation
Any areas not yet established should be explicitly recorded rather than implied.
Phase 1: Days 1–30 (Stabilise & Baseline)
Phase 1 establishes control of the project. It clarifies what is known, what is assumed, who can make decisions, what evidence is needed and what must not be treated as settled. The output is a clean project baseline for the feasibility phase.
[+] Objectives
Confirm the project mandate and decision ownership.
Create a single controlled view of assumptions, risks, actions, evidence gaps and early decisions.
Define what the next feasibility stage must prove before the project can move toward a full business case.
[+] Actions
Confirm sponsorship: identify the accountable sponsor or interim decision owner and record delegated authority for the next 90 days.
Define project framing: agree the purpose, intended beneficiaries, housing problem and boundaries of the current feasibility work.
Create project controls: set up a decision log, action log, assumptions log, risk register and evidence register.
Review current concept: document the H-shaped or other emerging design ideas as options to test, not approved solutions.
Identify evidence gaps: list missing information on site, planning, affordability, tenure, funding, legal structure and operating model.
[+] Deliverables by Day 30
Project Mandate v1: purpose, scope, exclusions, sponsor, decision route and next gate.
Feasibility Control Pack v1: assumptions, risks, issues, actions, decisions and evidence gaps.
Need Statement v1: concise statement of the housing problem and intended users.
Option Test Brief: criteria for testing design, tenure, affordability and operating options.
[+] Measures
Accountable sponsor or interim decision owner confirmed.
All known assumptions and open issues recorded with owners.
Initial risk register created, including affordability, planning, legal, funding and operating-model risks.
Feasibility scope agreed without making premature development commitments.
Phase 2: Days 31–60 (Align & Standardise)
Phase 2 turns the controlled baseline into evidence. The project should test whether there is a viable route for need, design, affordability, planning, legal structure and operating responsibilities before selecting a preferred model.
[+] Objectives
Develop and compare credible options rather than locking onto one early architectural answer.
Test affordability, stakeholder value, privacy, accessibility, planning feasibility and operational practicality.
Identify the conditions that must be true for the project to remain viable.
[+] Actions
User and need testing: define prospective younger and older participant groups, desired benefits and unacceptable compromises.
Design option appraisal: compare the current concept with alternative layouts and levels of shared space.
Planning and regulation review: obtain early advice on likely planning, building control, fire safety, accessibility and housing-standard issues.
Finance and affordability work: create initial capital, operating and affordability assumptions, with sensitivity tests.
Legal and tenure review: identify possible ownership, rental, lease, family-equity, partnership or community-led structures and their risks.
Stakeholder mapping: identify prospective residents, family participants, local authority, neighbours, funders, advisers and potential operators.
[+] Deliverables by Day 60
Options Appraisal v1: comparison of design, tenure, operating and funding options.
Affordability Assumptions v1: target households, payment assumptions, capital inputs and operating-cost considerations.
Planning and Regulatory Issues Note: early constraints, approvals and specialist questions.
Stakeholder Map and Engagement Plan: who needs to be involved, when and why.
[+] Measures
At least three credible design or operating options compared against agreed criteria.
Affordability assumptions documented with clear uncertainties.
Specialist questions for planning, legal, finance and operation are identified.
Stakeholder feedback is captured as actions, risks, assumptions or decision inputs.
Phase 3: Days 61–90 (Embed & Improve)
Phase 3 converts the evidence into a decision-ready position. The project should identify whether there is a preferred route worth developing into a full business case, or whether further investigation, redesign or closure is the more responsible decision.
[+] Objectives
Prepare a clear recommendation for the next formal gate.
Define the preferred option only if the evidence supports one.
Set out the next-stage scope, cost, governance and evidence requirements without overstating certainty.
[+] Actions
Consolidate evidence: bring together needs, options, risks, costs, stakeholder feedback and specialist findings.
Select or defer preferred option: recommend a route only where it is supported by evidence; otherwise define further work needed.
Prepare next-stage plan: set out scope, budget estimate, advisers, milestones and approval gates for a full business case or feasibility extension.
Confirm governance: define sponsor, board or review group, delegated authorities and escalation thresholds for the next phase.
Produce decision pack: state what is known, what is not yet established, what has been ruled out and what decision is requested.
[+] Deliverables by Day 90
90-Day Feasibility Summary: evidence, findings, risks, assumptions and open questions.
Recommended Route Paper: proceed, pause, redesign, extend feasibility or stop.
Next-Stage Business Case Plan: scope, resources, governance, cost estimate and decision gates.
Updated PHC Records: questions, strategic plan, manifesto, business case and control logs aligned to the latest position.
[+] Measures
A clear go, no-go, redesign or further-feasibility recommendation is available.
Major uncertainties are explicitly recorded, not hidden in optimistic language.
Next-stage cost and resource needs are stated at an appropriate early level of confidence.
Governance can make a decision based on evidence rather than concept enthusiasm alone.