Background An aspect that is worth highlighting of Marmalade Lane, the biggest cohousing community in the UK and the first of its kind in Cambridge, is the unusual series of events that led to its realisation. In 2005 the South Cambridgeshire District Council approved the plan for a major urban development in its Northwest urban fringe. The Orchard Park was planned in the area previously known as Arbury Park and envisaged a housing-led mix-use master plan of at least 900 homes, a third of them planned as affordable housing. The 2008 financial crisis had a profound impact on the normal development of the project causing the withdrawal of many developers, with only housing associations and bigger developers continuing afterwards. This delay and unexpected scenario let plots like the K1, where Marmalade Lane was erected, without any foreseeable solution. At this point, the city council opened the possibilities to a more innovative approach and decided to support a Cohousing community to collaboratively produce a brief for a collaborative housing scheme to be tendered by developers. Involvement of users and other stakeholders   The South Cambridgeshire District Council, in collaboration with the K1 Cohousing group, ventured together to develop a design brief for an innovative housing scheme that had sustainability principles at the forefront of the design. Thus, a tender was launched to select an adequate developer to realise the project. In July 2015, the partnership formed between Town and Trivselhus ‘TOWNHUS’ was chosen to be the developer. The design of the scheme was enabled by Mole Architects, a local architecture firm that, as the verb enable indicates, collaborated with the cohousing group in the accomplishment of the brief. The planning application was submitted in December of the same year after several design workshop meetings whereby decisions regarding interior design, energy performance, common spaces and landscape design were shared and discussed. The procurement and development process was eased by the local authority’s commitment to the realisation of the project. The scheme benefited from seed funding provided by the council and a grant from the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA). The land value was set on full-market price, but its payment was deferred to be paid out of the sales and with the responsibility of the developer of selling the homes to the K1 Cohousing members. Who, in turn, were legally bounded to purchase and received discounts for early buyers. As relevant as underscoring the synergies that made Marmalade Lane’s success story possible, it is important to realise that there were defining facts that might be very difficult to replicate in order to bring about analogue housing projects. Two major aspects are securing access to land and receiving enough support from local authorities in the procurement process. In this case, both were a direct consequence of a global economic crisis and the need of developing a plot that was left behind amidst a major urban development plan. Innovative aspects of the housing design Spatially speaking, the housing complex is organised following the logic of a succession of communal spaces that connect the more public and exposed face of the project to the more private and secluded intended only for residents and guests. This is accomplished by integrating a proposed lane that knits the front and rear façades of some of the homes to the surrounding urban fabric and, therefore, serves as a bridge between the public neighbourhood life and the domestic everyday life. The cars have been purposely removed from the lane and pushed into the background at the perimeter of the plot, favouring the human scale and the idea of the lane as a place for interaction and encounters between residents. A design decision that depicts the community’s alignment with sustainable practices, a manifesto that is seen in other features of the development process and community involvement in local initiatives. The lane is complemented by numerous and diverse places to sit, gather and meet; some of them designed and others that have been added spontaneously by the inhabitants offering a more customisable arrangement that enriches the variety of interactions that can take place. The front and rear gardens of the terraced houses contiguous to the lane were reduced in surface and remained open without physical barriers. A straightforward design decision that emphasises the preponderance of the common space vis-a-vis the private, blurring the limits between both and creating a fluid threshold where most of the activities unfold. The Common House is situated adjacent to the lane and congregates the majority of the in-doors social activities in the scheme, within the building, there are available spaces for residents to run community projects and activities. They can cook in a communal kitchen to share both time and food, or organise cinema night in one of the multi-purpose areas. A double-height lounge and children's playroom incite gathering with the use of an application to organise easily social events amongst the inhabitants. Other practical facilities are available such as a bookable guest bedroom and shared laundry. The architecture of its volume stands out due to its cubic-form shape and different lining material that complements its relevance as the place to convene and marks the transition to the courtyard where complementary outdoor activities are performed. Within the courtyard, children can play without any danger and under direct supervision from adults, but at the same time enjoy the liberty and countless possibilities that such a big and open space grants. Lastly, the housing typologies were designed to recognise multiple ways of life and needs. Consequently, adaptability and flexibility were fundamental targets for the architects who claim that units were able to house 29 different configurations. They are arranged in 42 units comprehending terraced houses and apartments from one to five bedrooms. Residents also had the chance to choose between a range of interior materials and fittings and one of four brick colours for the facade. Construction and energy performance characteristics Sustainability was a prime priority to all the stakeholders involved in the project. Being a core value shared by the cohousing members, energy efficiency was emphasised in the brief and influenced the developer’s selection. The Trivselhus Climate Shield® technology was employed to reduce the project’s embodied and operational carbon emissions. The technique incorporates sourced wood and recyclable materials into a timber-framed design using a closed panel construction method that assures insulation and airtightness to the buildings. Alongside the comparative advantages of reducing operational costs, the technique affords open interior spaces which in turn allow multiple configurations of the internal layout, an aspect that was harnessed by the architectural design. Likewise, it optimises the construction time which was further reduced by using industrialised triple-glazed composite aluminium windows for easy on-site assembly. Furthermore, the mechanical ventilation and heat recovery (MVHR) system and the air source heat pumps are used to ensure energy efficiency, air quality and thermal comfort. Overall, with an annual average heat loss expected of 35kWh/m², the complex performs close to the Passivhaus low-energy building standard of 30kWh/m² (Merrick, 2019). Integration with the wider community It is worth analysing the extent to which cohousing communities interact with the neighbours that are not part of the estate. The number of reasons that can provoke unwanted segregation between communities might range from deliberate disinterest, differences between the cohousing group’s ethos and that one of the wider population, and the common facilities making redundant the ones provided by local authorities, just to name a few. According to testimonies of some residents contacted during a visit to the estate, it is of great interest for Marmalade Lane’s community to reach out to the rest of the residents of Orchard Park. Several activities have been carried out to foster integration and the use of public and communal venues managed by the local council. Amongst these initiatives highlights the reactivation of neglected green spaces in the vicinity, through gardening and ‘Do it yourself’ DIY activities to provide places to sit and interact. Nonetheless, some residents manifested that the area’s lack of proper infrastructure to meet and gather has impeded the creation of a strong community. For instance, the community centre run by the council is only open when hired for a specific event and not on a drop-in basis. The lack of a pub or café was also identified as a possible justification for the low integration of the rest of the community. Marmalade Lane residents have been leading a monthly ‘rubbish ramble’ and social events inviting the rest of the Orchard Park community. In the same vein, some positive impact on the wider community has been evidenced by the residents consulted. One of them mentioned the realisation of a pop-up cinema and a barbecue organised by neighbours of the Orchard Park community in an adjacent park. Perhaps after being inspired by the activities held in Marmalade Lane, according to another resident.

The Broadwater Farm Estate The estate, built in the full swing of modernism, is a paragon of the movement’s defining characteristics. The building density is notably high compared to the surrounding single-family terraced houses. There is a clear separation between vehicles and pedestrians, with platforms and deck accesses. The ensemble comprises twelve high-rise precast concrete blocks and towers, which extend over a public-owned site of 18 hectares, which is unusually large by today’s standards. Facilities were also provided for residents, offering them the essential amenities. Upon completion in the early 1970s, the estate comprised 1,063 flats and was home to between 3,000 and 4,000 residents. As was the case with numerous other modernist housing estates across the country,  Broadwater Farm was significantly affected by the seminal work of  Alice Coleman, Utopia on Trial (1985) on the concept of “defensible space”.  Proponents of this theory posited that design had a deterministic impact on crime rates and social malaise in low-income urban communities. Although Coleman's study faced harsh criticism from academics for its questionable methodology and oversimplification of complex social problems (Cozens & Hillier, 2012; Lees & Warwick, 2022), her recommendations led to the implementation of a multi-million-pound government-funded programme for remedial works in thousands of social housing blocks nationwide; known as the DICE (Design Improvement Controlled Experiment) project. Broadwater Farm was targeted by the programme after it attracted considerable attention following the serious riots that occurred at the estate in 1985 (Stoddard, 2011).  A number of initiatives were undertaken with the objective of regenerating and improving the quality of the built environment, with the earliest works beginning in 1981. Under the DICE project, a significant number of the overpass decks that connected the estate on the first floor were demolished on the grounds that they were conducive to the formation of poorly lit and isolated areas that were facilitating criminal activity and anti-social behaviour (Severs, 2010). In the wake of the Grenfell Tower tragedy, new fire safety regulations and inspections have been introduced, resulting in two blocks of flats being deemed unfit for habitation (BBC, 2022). The Large Panel System (LPS), which was commonly used in the 1960s, has been identified as the primary cause for the demolition of the Tangmere and Northolt blocks due to the significant risk of collapse in the event of a fire. These essential repairs will be part of the largest refurbishment project ever undertaken in the estate. It will comprise a combination of retrofitting, redevelopment and infill, resulting in an increase in the number of housing units and a significant enhancement of the urban layout and public spaces across its 83,000 sq. m.   The Urban Design Framework (UDF) is a comprehensive document that sets out a series of actionable and tangible improvements for the estate. Produced by Karakusevic Carson Architects (2022) and commissioned by the Haringey Borough Council, the UDF serves as a masterplan for the ongoing regeneration of the estate. This document is the result of an extensive stakeholder involvement process. It proposes a series of five urban strategies that, taken together, provide a blueprint for holistic regeneration. These strategies account for the short, medium and long-term development of both the estate and its community. Given the substantial size of the complex, the scale of the surrounding neighbourhood, and the intricate web of relationships within it, long-term planning holds significant importance. These aspects were emphasised through the proposed interventions that enhance the connections between the dwellings and the urban context. The impact of the estate on the surrounding area and the need for a cohesive urban landscape are addressed through designs that integrate the estate into the city fabric, rather than isolating it. The improvement plan includes the construction of new residential units through the redevelopment of the blocks earmarked for demolition and the refurbishment of the remaining blocks. The architectural firm has developed a "bank of projects," a comprehensive repository of proposed interventions arising from engagement with the community as well as a site analysis,  which is organised around five core principles: streets, open spaces, ground floors, character, and homes. Resident engagement The inhabitants were actively involved in the creation of the UDF. A series of community engagement events, held between 2020 and 2021, provided a platform to gather the voices of residents and enabled planners to better understand their aspirations and needs, identify the key improvements required, and initiate the design process that would incorporate their views into the masterplan. This process was complemented by the establishment of the Community Design Group (CDG), formed by residents and community members who not only expressed a desire, but also demonstrated the capacity, to assume a more active role in the design process.  In addition, the council has set up a website that documents and displays the schedule, events, latest news and updates on the ongoing regeneration process. This website provides comprehensive information for residents, the general public, and any interested parties seeking to gain insight into the current status of Broadwater Farm. Placemaking strategy In contrast to pervasive narratives about the flawed design of council estates, the spatial qualities and existing sense of belonging within the community were identified as the starting points for the placemaking strategy. The original configuration of the estate was conceived around community facilities and courtyards, which have been retained, augmented, formalised, and linked by a circuit of pedestrian and cycle paths. The deficiencies of the original design, such as the anonymous and segregated ground floor, have been addressed by establishing a network of public spaces that prioritise human scale and facilitate movement throughout the estate. These new public spaces facilitate social interaction, providing areas of activity complemented by indoor amenities and spaces for local retailers. In this way, the ground level becomes an anchor for diverse activities aimed at enhancing the sense of security. The masterplan revolves around five principles which in turn incorporate a series of strategies: 1. Safe and Healthy Streets: The improved design shifts away from 'streets in the sky' to enhance street accessibility. It promotes intermodal transport with a new bus route into the estate and the addition of cycle lanes. The road network within the estate has been simplified to be more efficient and encourage walking. A "green" street connects key community facilities and green spaces. Overall wayfinding is enhanced through better street lighting, improved block entrances, and designated car-free areas. Part and parcel of reactivating the ground floor is creating opportunities for new activities through a redesign aimed at more efficient parking solutions to meet current needs. 2. Welcoming + Inclusive Open Spaces: Although the estate features several courtyards and open areas, residents have expressed a feeling of being in a “concrete jungle”, as noted in the community brief. The proposed improvements focused on enhancing the existing courtyards to ensure accessibility and facilitate various activities. In addition, a new community park is planned at the heart of the estate as part of the redeveloped area, designed to be a versatile and welcoming space for current and future residents alike. A hierarchy of shared and public spaces has been redesigned to create a seamless transition into and out of the estate. This seamless and unified experience of the public realm is enabled by specific elements such as play areas and seating that allow people of all ages to socialise and interact in an informal yet purposeful manner. Workshops were conducted with specific population groups, including young women and girls or older residents, to ensure that the future estate will be as inclusive as possible. Key topics such as perceived safety in the communal areas, activities and sports facilities, as well as overall design considerations, were discussed during these sessions.  3. Ground Floors with Activity: A significant design flaw in the existing estate was the poorly lit areas adjacent to the garages that dominated the ground floor of the blocks — a common design feature in residential architecture of the time. Residents involved in the process pointed out the importance of increasing the sense of security when moving around these areas. A street-based design that activates the ground floor by enabling a greater variety of activities was central to the strategy. Alongside a clearer street layout and improved block entrances, bike racks, bin storage, and opportunities for non-residential and community uses were proposed to benefit both residents and the wider community. By repurposing areas previously used mainly for car parking into active spaces and by enhancing frontages with residential, commercial or community spaces, clear thresholds and boundaries are created to promote permeability and smooth transitions. Community facilities and local businesses are strategically located at corners and key activity nodes, facilitating passive surveillance and overlooking the public realm. The choice of materials also contributes to opening up the ground level; glazed lobbies and entrances connect indoor communal areas with adjacent outdoor spaces visually. Similarly, secondary entrances to existing blocks will be used to balance their function and prevent the creation of hidden or less frequented areas. Improved public lighting, new signage and a control system complement these strategies.  4. Broadwater Character & Scale: The architectural style known as Brutalism played a significant role in popularising the 'problem estate' narrative in Britain. This style was embraced by many of the country's modernist architects, leading to its prevalence in the social housing built during that period. Characterised by the predominant use of concrete, this style was celebrated by critic and advocate Reyner Banham for its memorable image, a clear exhibition of structure and honest expression of the material (Boughton, 2018). The monumentality and stark aesthetics of Brutalism provided an ideal setting for experimentation in the vast estates that were built during the latter half of the 20th century. These characteristics are evident in the design of Broadwater Farm. Broadwater’s design framework acknowledges the latent potential of the existing architecture while addressing issues of materiality, building height, the links and spatial relationships between the infilled and redeveloped areas and the connection between the estate and its surroundings. The boundaries of the estate were revised to address the issue of it being perceived as an isolated entity, which was a common problem with many modernist estates. This was due to the fact that they were often of a particular size and density, which set them apart from their neighbours. In order to create a seamless transition with the surroundings, clear entrances to the estate are proposed, new materials are used that better match those of the vicinity, and a massing strategy is employed to avoid abrupt transitions in building heights. The character of the estate was approached in a manner reminiscent of Kevin Lynch’s (1964) five elements of the city —paths, edges, districts, nodes and landmarks—, with particular emphasis on their importance in establishing a sense of place and enhancing the legibility of the urban environment. The proposal has engaged in a meticulous study of the local context, re-signifying existing elements such as the Kenley Tower, which has been retained as the tallest mass in the ensemble, in order to maintain its landmark character.     5. Good Quality Homes: The new blocks, arranged in courtyards that reflect the existing pattern of the estate, will replace the Tangmere and Northolt blocks. They will occupy a privileged position at the heart of the estate and offer an opportunity to transform the overall look of the scheme. These new blocks, complemented by infill development on nearby sites, will result in the creation of 294 new residential units, representing a net increase of 85 homes. The new dwellings, comprising three and four-bedroom family homes, will be managed by the council and rented out at social rates. A significant proportion of residents who participated in the public consultation highlighted the necessity for larger and more spacious accommodation, particularly for large families. In response to these demands, the design of the new flats incorporates larger and more flexible spaces as a key feature. Those who previously resided in the demolished blocks will be given priority for the new homes. Furthermore, the introduction of new parks, public spaces, workspaces and a new well-being hub, which will house a doctor's surgery and other services, will help create a more active and dynamic ground floor, with activities that enhance the sense of place and welcome pedestrians. The architects have conducted an analysis of potential infill solutions to activate the ground floor, including the addition of one-bedroom flats that fit into the structural grid of the existing blocks. This in turn addresses the need to create a community that includes people of all ages and family types. Management & Maintenance The UDF exemplifies how regeneration projects can address current needs while allowing for future adaptations. This people-centred project fosters a sense of ownership through participation, which is crucial for the sustainability of the intervention. Stewardship is key, especially for the new collective spaces being created. Instead of a deterministic design approach, the framework considers what types of spaces can enhance the overall quality of life. It integrates social, economic, and environmental aspects that define the living and working experience in the area. These considerations are captured in the “Strategy for a Sustainable Neighbourhood.” The bank of projects is a repository of proposed interventions within the project,  illustrating the considerable interest in the long-term effects of the regeneration project and the substantial potential for future development. This section of the framework underscores the necessity for the formulation of a phased, structured and comprehensive planning and delivery strategy that allows for flexibility and input from existing and future residents. Consequently, management and maintenance are regarded as integral aspects of the design, alongside other tangible elements of the built environment. With an approach strongly focused on creating social value and reducing the disruptive effects of regeneration. The architects have worked with the community to develop a masterplan that emphasises the use of existing assets, minimises demolition and establishes a hierarchy of priorities to maximise the positive impact in the long term.

Housing affordability has many interpretations and definitions. Across the European Union, the most common indicator used to measure housing affordability is the price-to-income ratio. According to Eurostat (2023), if a household spends more than forty percent of its disposable income on housing, the household is overburdened with housing costs. Throughout the EU, from 2010 and 2018, the average rate of housing experiencing overburdening rate is approximately ten per cent, although there are significant fluctuations among Member States. Housing affordability is a complex issue influenced by local housing prices and income levels. It cannot be measured on a national level in absolute terms, given the variation in housing costs and incomes across different localities. For instance, housing may be deemed unaffordable in major Croatian cities, whereas it may be more accessible in smaller mainland towns due to a lower demand. Both homeowners and tenants in Croatia are struggling with an excessive burden of housing costs due to their low income and the low energy efficiency of their homes. Furthermore, housing prices are influenced not only by housing supply and demand but also by the cost of financial capital, such as the interest rates. When interest rates are lower and financing is more affordable, both individual and institutional investors are incentivized to invest in real estate, particularly in Croatia where the equity market is underdeveloped, and alternative investment options are limited. This phenomenon contributes to market speculation and drives up housing prices, especially for units designated for short-term renting during tourist seasons rather than long-term rentals. As a result, despite an increase in the supply of housing units, there is no corresponding decrease in housing price level. According to Caturianas et al. (2020), “evidence also shows that secondary property ownership is widely used in many EU Member States as an investment, to supplement absent or low second-tier pension arrangements by those who are inadequately covered by such arrangements.” These developments supported the financialization and commodification of housing markets. What is even more important for countries like Croatia, due to its dependence on tourism, is the following argument: “evidence also shows that foreign investment increases local house prices and reduces the rate of home ownership in the area, especially in places where housing stock reacts more slowly to housing price changes” (Caturianas et al., 2020). The current housing market in Croatia is overheated, as stated by the European Systemic Risk Board (ESRB, 2022). One of the main reasons is the state withdrawal from the housing market, leaving it now subjected to speculative investments. Although this has not yet been addressed in the literature, public discourse in Croatia suggests that the housing units currently on the market are priced unrealistically high by sellers and that a price correction is likely in the near future. Therefore, measures to improve housing affordability should not be universal. For example, increased investment in social or public rental housing in the continent's rural towns would not increase the quality of life of residents, thus other solutions must be sought. Given the lack of national housing strategies and top-down approaches, we examine the emerging bottom-up approach of cooperative housing as a possible solution. Collaborative housing in EU One possible direction of housing policy development in Croatia could be towards collaborative housing options. Collaborative housing is an umbrella term for various collective self-organised forms of housing, such as co-housing, cooperatives and other collaborative housing forms (Czischke et al., 2020). What these models share is a strong emphasis on user participation, fostering reciprocal relationships among residents, and promoting mutual respect and solidarity within the community. Financing for these forms usually comes from crowdfunding and alternative financing sources. Often, collaborative housing projects have a target group of residents, e.g. young or the elderly (Czischke, 2018). A housing cooperative is a model where a property is owned and operated by an association, with members of the association residing in it. Members do not own the dwelling outright but instead own a share of the association’s assets and have the right to use one of its properties (Norden, 2024). Usually, the housing cooperatives use resources pooled from future residents and construct housing. In some models, a cooperative owns the buildings, while the land remains under the ownership and oversight of the local government. This arrangement helps prevent market speculation and ensures that the housing units remain affordable over the long term. In times of housing crisis, countries such as Italy, Switzerland, and France promoted cooperative housing as a housing option, thereby giving it credibility and legitimacy. However, Croatia inherited a negative connotation associated with the term cooperative housing from the socialist era and still needs to break away from this dependence. Compared to Western countries where collaborative housing is emerging, it is not well-developed in Central and South-Eastern European countries. The housing market in these countries is characterised by low quality dwellings and poor energy efficiency, with a 20-30% rate of housing deprivation (Pósfai & Jelinek, 2022). However, Pósfai and Jelinek (2022) identify two specific obstacles hindering progress in the cooperative housing sector: (1) loan maturities are too short, and (2) the underdeveloped financial market does not support the expansion of activities. Thus, one potential solution is catalytic capital that would bridge the gap of missing long-term financing. One form of this type of financing is a complementary loan. The enabling institutions must be intermediary organisations that collect and structure capital, which they then lend to the end user, while also supporting them in utilising the investment more effectively. The broad target population for collaborative housing in Central and Eastern European countries primarily includes young people seeking to move out of their parents' home, elderly individuals with low income who live alone, single parents, and tenants facing financial difficulties in paying the rent (Pósfai & Jelinek, 2022). On the other hand, the narrow target group consists of “financially relatively stable, but still unable to solve their housing problems. The potential demand of this group signals a niche in the housing finance market” (Pósfai & Jelinek, 2022). The main goal for this target population is not necessarily homeownership but rather securing stability and affordability in housing. Co-operative housing pilot project in Križevci, Croatia Thus far, the co-operative housing in Croatia is in its infancy, limited to pilot projects aimed at understanding the necessary regulatory and financial frameworks needed for cooperative housing to gain popularity and credibility, particularly within niche markets. The pilot project in the city of Križevci started in 2021 and is a joint project organised by Open Architecture cooperative, cooperative for Ethical Financing, the European cooperative MOBA housing SCE (European Cooperative Society) and the city of Križevci. Over the past five years, these partner organisations have worked together to find a suitable model for cooperative housing in Croatia. The cooperative model in Križevci involves local governments providing land for long-term use through building rights agreements. The main objective of this initiative is to demonstrate the feasibility and necessity of housing cooperatives in the Croatian context, responding to high demand and growing interest from local governments and citizens alike. The housing is being developed on former military facilities. In 2003, the military vacated the site, and by 2007, the municipal administration had taken over management of the area. They transformed it into a high school, a retirement home, a municipal library, a technology park, and an observatory. The city plans to grant the housing cooperative the use of the former barracks for a period of 50-75 years, during which the cooperative will be responsible for investing in its reconstruction. The project aims to provide 36 apartments, 260 metres squared of common areas and 240 metres squared of coworking space. The project has two main objectives: first, to establish the necessary legal, financial and organisational conditions for housing co-operatives in Croatia; and second, to prepare a cooperative pilot project. Through these efforts, the project aimed to lay a foundation for sustainable and community-oriented housing solutions, rooted in co-operative principles and local development. Moreover, the project team developed a proposal for a general model of cooperative housing in Croatia, laying the groundwork for broader implementation across the country. Below is he list of the most important activities and most valuable outputs that were the result of this project. The most important activities undertaken during the project included: - Organising numerous educational events with guests from successful European housing co-operatives - Hosting public presentations and stands on cooperative housing with local and international speakers in cities such as Zagreb, Karlovac, Pula and Zabok - Analysing the current residential property market and the current legal frameworks - Preparing presentation materials outlining the cooperative housing model - Presenting the cooperative housing model to interested parties in various towns, including Koprivnica, Split, Rovinj, Pazin, Labin, Pula, Zagreb, Prelog and Zabok These efforts aimed to educate, engage and inspire stakeholders across Croatia about the benefits and feasibility of cooperative housing, promoting a sustainable and community-oriented approach to housing development. The most important outputs derived from the project were: - Conducting a feasibility study to explore funding options for the reconstruction of the building. - Organising educational and participatory events with interested citizens and future tenants, including six workshops on the following topics:  - Introduction to cooperative housing  - Establishment and operation of housing co-operatives  - Defining the statutes for the housing co-operative  - Participatory design in collaboration with the future tenants and the city in the development of a design and conceptual plan for the residential building These initiatives aim to ensure the successful establishment and sustainable operation of the housing co-operative and involve the future tenants in the planning and design process to create a community-oriented housing solution. In an interview with Goran Jeras, the managing director of the Ethical Finance Cooperative in March 2024, we discussed the primary obstacles to establishing a housing co-operative. He highlighted that one of the main challenges is the short-term nature of available loans, typically lasting two to three years, which are designed for financing projects focused on rapid construction and sale of housing units. To facilitate the development of cooperative housing, Jeras emphasized the importance of local governments providing land or buildings for refurbishment. He proposed that improving conditions for cooperative development could involve creating an institution or organization dedicated to managing and overseeing project financing and implementation. Additionally, Jeras suggested a potential solution from a top-down approach: delaying the payment of VAT (which is twenty-five percent) for construction, thereby reducing the initial project costs.