impaC³t: Accelerating Circular Neighborhood Renovation Together

The VLAIO impaC³t living lab accelerates the renovation of homes in a circular and inclusive way. It focuses on entire neighborhoods rather than individual homes, making interventions such as district heating networks cost-effective and reaching residents who are currently less likely to initiate renovations on their own. Moreover, many circular economy themes only truly become apparent at the neighborhood level, for example in the context of densification, redevelopment, and shared use of space.

The living lab focuses on processes: policy, procedures, financing, and procurement. Concrete projects are co-designed within a consortium of experts from local governments, construction-related companies, civil society organizations focused on the circular economy and social financing, and knowledge centers. The lab is supporting five diverse case studies in Flemish neighborhoods undergoing transition, in collaboration with cities, housing authorities, and project developers.

Magdalenakwartier (Bruges): A historic downtown neighborhood. The City of Bruges aims to create a district heating network that connects various ongoing initiatives in the neighborhood. The living lab has therefore also focused on providing renovation advice to the city, including options for clustering technical systems, guidance on renovating in compliance with heritage regulations, suggestions for more efficient use of space, and circular renovation techniques.

Scandinaviëblokken (Ghent): A “vertical neighborhood” with 203 different co-owners in a single building. Since different owners have different financial capacities (70% of the residents belong to the lowest income bracket), a collective, coordinated renovation faces many challenges. The living lab has therefore focused on a multi-year plan to guide individual actions, combined with a financial decision tree offering alternatives for people with limited access to traditional loans.

Ruisbroek (Sint-Pieters-Leeuw): A brownfield site on the outskirts of Brussels. Project developer Revive is building new homes in the midst of a block of older, vacant, and underoccupied houses. The living lab focused on solutions to make better use of these properties and on potential spatial connections between the new development and the surrounding neighborhood.

Vogelhoekwijk (Ghent): A social housing neighborhood slated for renovation. The living lab focused on strategies for renovating and increasing density without having to demolish existing homes. Together with Thuispunt, it developed options for adding stories, selective infill, and the reuse of materials.

Steenbergwijk (Landen): A neighborhood originally built as social housing, but where ownership is now fragmented. The living lab focused on strategies that could work for both the 32 remaining homes owned by the housing association Kanvaz and for private owners, including options for making more efficient use of underutilized homes and changes to public spaces.

Organization: The living lab did not own the case studies, but rather supports and advises the actual decision-makers. This ensures that solutions are implemented directly in practice and can subsequently be scaled up more easily to other neighborhoods.
Timing: Urban projects span decades, whereas the living lab existed for only three years. For this reason, the living lab focused on the early phase of setting project goals, to help stakeholders establish the right priorities.

Circular hierarchy: Circular construction is often narrowly defined as a matter of reusing materials. Circular construction is still too often reduced to material reuse. While that remains important, there are measures that reduce environmental impact much more significantly. The living lab has established a hierarchy for circular renovation at the neighborhood level: intensification (making better use of existing buildings), densification (making better use of existing infrastructure and land in cities), avoid demolition (extend the lifespan of buildings), adaptability (future-oriented design), reversibility (design for disassembly), material reuse, and finally, if all else fails, recycling.

Under-occupancy: In most case studies, homes that were once designed for large families are now occupied by single people or couples. By making better use of existing homes (through sharing or subdividing), the need for new construction on greenfield sites can be significantly reduced. Public acceptance of smaller living arrangements remains limited, but local governments can play a more active role in promoting smart living.

Design guidelines and financing for social housing: The living lab found that social housing units are often demolished prematurely because they do not meet current design guidelines. New housing must be built on limited budgets, making it difficult to account for future adaptability in the design. Cycles of demolition and reconstruction lead to higher costs and, ultimately, fewer social housing units. There is therefore a strong need to review how existing buildings are assessed and how new buildings are financed.

The impaC³t Living Lab was coordinated by KU Leuven DUBO, in collaboration with 

• research institutionsOdisee DUBiT and KU Leuven CEDON, 
• local governments and housing authorities: the City of Ghent, the City of Bruges, Thuispunt Gent, and Kanvaz
• construction-related companiesCamino,Revive,Mobble, Circl,BuildUp, and Kamp C
• civil society organizations Rots vzw, Het Pandschap,Scrap vzw, Hefboom, and Labland