We intend to choose a site of about 0.5 hectares within easy walking distance of Lancaster City Centre. Whilst development land in this area is fairly limited we have identified four suitable sites which are either available now or on which development is likely to be able to start by the end of 2007. We are considering these sites following a comprehensive review of site availability and discussions with Lancaster City Council's planning department. We are also keeping our eye on several other sites that may also become available.

1. Blades Street

The elevated site to the rear of Blades Street (accessed from Wheatfield Street) is very conveniently located and has views across the city. It is shown here from the Meeting House Lane bridge.

The owners (a private pension fund) recently lost a planning appeal for 100 flats and 6 offices because the development would have added unduly to the over-supply of housing in the district. The site is bigger than we need so we are considering either making an offer for the southern end of the site (near Dallas Road Boys Club), which is particularly suitable for car-free development, or developing plans for the whole site.

The narrow north-south orientation will present design challenges; incorporating the south facing windows needed to help heat the homes will be difficult and care will be needed to achieve a layout that facilitates social interaction. Whilst the site is very visible from the railway and Fairfield, the immediate surroundings feel quite private.

Extensive investigations have been undertaken into the effect of noise and vibration from the railway line prior to the earlier planning application. By potentially including features such as triple glazing our proposals are particularly well suited to addressing this issue.

2. British Waterways yard

The former British Waterways yard, beyond the Waterwitch Pub off Aldcliffe Road is a particularly problematic site for mainstream developers. Vehicular access is extremely limited due to a narrow listed bridge and a difficult junction at Aldcliffe Place. The site also lacks access to mains sewerage and has a number of listed buildings for some of which it will be difficult to find a commercial use. However we would have the opportunity to develop alternative sewage systems and some very attractive (if energy inefficient) buildings for our shared facilities.

Whilst the constraints mean that competition to purchase this site will be very limited, there are a number of uncertainties which may not make this the best choice of site. These include the sale process and the unpredictable cost of restoring listed buildings.

The existence of the listed buildings and the canal make it easy to visualise an attractive development on this site, and this makes it harder to compare objectively with other sites.

3. Aqueduct

Along the upgraded canal towpath to the north east of the city lies another vacant site cut off from the road network by the canal. It is just before the aqueduct, behind the conifers in the first photo.

It has some, but not all of the challenges and opportunities presented by the Waterways yard. The aqueduct site has a more rural feel (it backs onto the Golf Course) but is further from city centre facilities. Built as a car park, it is now only in very occasional use.

It is currently undesignated in the City Council's local plan but it may be protected as 'countryside' by the time current restrictions on the building of general needs housing are relaxed. Lancaster Cohousing may therefore be uniquely placed to develop this site.

4. Luneside East

A further option open to us is to become part of the Luneside East redevelopment. Lancaster City Council is working with private developers to comprehensively redevelop the land between the railway, Long Marsh Lane and the River Lune. There is more information on the City Council's website.

The development brief will ensure that environmental standards on this site are higher than in typical new buildings. It is intended that the whole site will be prepared for development during 2007. We have had initial discussions with the City Council regarding becoming part of this development. At this stage it is not possible to say what part of the site would be most suitable for Lancaster Cohousing or what the surroundings would look like. Becoming part of the Luneside East development would be more straightforward than other options because the main developer would deal with many of the site and infrastructure issues. However our development would be less self-contained than on other sites, and initially we would be living next to a construction site. Because of the timescales we are currently considering this as a reserve option.