Where do you find your architects?
For new design-led projects, architects are typically appointed through consultant frameworks, alongside existing working relationships and recommendations. The framework route is important because it gives us access to architects with the right experience and specialism for affordable housing, while also ensuring the procurement route is robust.

On partnership schemes, the developer will often appoint or already have their own architect in place. In that context, our role is slightly different. We are not always selecting the architect directly, but we still need to assess the design quality, test whether the proposals meet our requirements, and demonstrate through our internal approval process that the scheme aligns with good design, deliverability and long-term management principles.

What are you looking for when selecting architects?
I look for architects who can work fluently between vision and reality. Strong design thinking is important, but so is an understanding of viability, tenure requirements, funding conditions, planning risk, service charge, maintenance and resident experience. A good architect in this sector needs to understand that social housing has its own unique challenges. There are a lot of different stakeholders involved: residents, planning authorities, funders, employers’ agents, contractors, housing management teams, maintenance teams, legal teams and internal governance. The best architects can navigate all of that without losing sight of the resident or the sense of place.

I’m particularly interested in architects who understand that affordable housing still deserves ambition, dignity and delight. Good design does not have to mean expensive design, but it does need to be intelligent. It is about creating homes and neighbourhoods that feel considered, rooted and genuinely good to live in.

What’s the one thing an architect could say or do that would make you not want to work with them?
Treat viability, service charge or housing management requirements as issues that sit outside the design process. In affordable housing, those things are part of the brief. If an architect sees bin stores, refuse tracking, maintenance access, communal areas, long-term management, service charge or tenure requirements as someone else’s problem, that is a red flag.

The strongest architects understand that constraints are not the enemy of good design. They are the material you have to work with. Service charge is a good example. Shared spaces, landscape and communal features can add huge value, but they need to be balanced against long-term affordability for residents.

To what extent are you inclined/able to embed regenerative design principles into your project briefs?
There is definitely an appetite, but it has to be embedded in a way that is deliverable, fundable and measurable. I studied architecture at the University of Sheffield and then practised as an architectural assistant for a year after graduating, so regenerative design principles are something I have explored both academically and in practice. I understand the ambition behind designing places where human and natural systems can co-exist and evolve over time, but I also see the delivery challenge of translating that into projects with real constraints.

For housing associations, regenerative thinking is highly relevant because we are long-term custodians of places. The challenge is making sure these principles move beyond language and become part of actual decisions around site layout, drainage, planting, materials, maintenance, resident use and long-term stewardship. For me, regenerative design in affordable housing has to be practical rather than decorative. It needs to help create places that are socially, environmentally and financially sustainable over the long term.

Where do architects often fail in meeting housing association requirements?
I would not want to overstate this, because in my experience the architects working through our frameworks are generally very capable and bring the specialist skills needed for these projects. Where issues can arise is usually around the practical realities of long-term management. A scheme might look strong in planning terms, but if it creates things like high service charge items, complicated maintenance, awkward refuse arrangements, or inefficient layouts, those issues become very real for residents and housing teams. For example, sometimes it is the simple reality of the bin store that determines whether a place works well day to day. Those elements are not glamorous, but they are absolutely part of good design.

How much influence do architects realistically have on scheme viability in your projects?
At the start of a project, architects influence almost everything. If the massing, layout, unit mix and site strategy cannot support viability in some form, the scheme will struggle from the outset. Architects influence viability through density, layout efficiency, housing types, levels, external works, materials, specification and the way abnormal constraints are resolved.

Their influence also continues as new information comes in from other consultants. Things such as, ground conditions, drainage, highways, planning feedback, utilities, fire requirements and cost information can all shift the design. The key is how the architect responds to those constraints while keeping the project viable and still protecting the quality of place. A good architect can unlock a difficult site. A poor response to constraints can quietly unravel one.

What should architects understand better about working with housing associations?
That housing associations are not simply clients buying units. We are long-term owners, managers and stewards of the places being created. Decisions made at design stage can affect residents, neighbourhoods and operational teams for decades. That is why the architect’s role is so important. Affordable housing is not a lesser design challenge. In many ways, it is a more complex one. You are designing within funding constraints, planning requirements, tenure standards, maintenance considerations, service charge pressures and real affordability issues. But within that, there is still huge scope for creativity. The best architects understand the social purpose and still bring design ambition to the table.

What keeps you awake at night?
Usually viability, not monsters. More seriously, it is the gap between the homes we need to build and the conditions we are trying to build them in. There is huge demand for affordable housing, but schemes are increasingly challenged by construction costs, planning risk, funding uncertainty, abnormal costs and long-term affordability for residents. I also think a lot about whether we are creating places that will still feel good in 10, 20 or 30 years. Housing associations will still be there long after completion, so the quality of decisions made now really matters.

What’s something you could talk about for hours?
The relationship between housing, landscape and long-term wellbeing. I’m fascinated by how the spaces between buildings shape people’s experience of home, community and belonging. Alongside my housing role, I have delivered RHS award-winning show gardens, often with community or charity partners. That has made me even more interested in how landscape-led thinking can be brought into housing and regeneration. Sometimes the most powerful parts of a place are not the buildings themselves, but the thresholds, gardens, streets, courtyards and shared spaces that help people feel rooted.

What’s a goal that you have for the next 12 months?
Professionally, I want to keep building my experience in development and regeneration, particularly around early-stage scheme viability, design coordination and community-focused outcomes. I’m especially interested in regeneration that is commercially deliverable but still rooted in design quality, community engagement and long-term stewardship. I think the most exciting projects are the ones that bring together viability, social value, landscape, sustainability and a strong sense of place, rather than treating those things as separate conversations. Personally, I would love to say that in 12 months I’ll be able to make the perfect croissant, but for now I remain deeply grateful for the Lidl bakery.