The House With The Flowery Carpet
A whole-house retrofit of our typical 1930s semi-detached home, designed around year-round comfort, lower carbon emissions and measurable performance.
We are two doctors with two young children and a dog. In October 2025, we moved from a modern 2013-built semi into a classic 1930s semi-detached house. During our first viewing, our then three-year-old daughter immediately fell in love with the bold flowery carpet running up the stairs, which is how the project acquired its name.
Behind that vintage charm was a cold, draughty and energy-inefficient home in need of serious modernisation. Rather than treating each problem in isolation, we decided to look at the house as a whole.
The plan
Our goal is to transform the house into a comfortable, healthy and low-carbon home designed around modern family life, while finding out what a comprehensive retrofit can realistically achieve in a house of this type. Comfort means more than keeping the house warm: we want indoor temperatures to remain comfortable throughout the year, warm in winter and cool in summer, with good air quality throughout.
Our priorities
Every decision we make is based on three key priorities, in this order:
Why an ordinary house matters
Our house has nothing special about it. It is ordinary, has no unusual architectural features and was never intended to be a demonstration project. We think that is precisely what makes Project 01 a useful case study.
A common housing type
There are millions of similar houses across the UK, facing many of the same challenges around comfort, energy efficiency and decarbonisation. By starting with an ordinary existing family home rather than an architect-designed or purpose-built demonstration project, we hope the findings will be relevant well beyond this house.
Transferable lessons
Many of the challenges, compromises and decisions will be familiar to other homeowners. By documenting what we chose, why we chose it and the detailed reasoning behind our decisions, we hope others can use what we learn to make better-informed choices about their own homes, even though the exact solutions will not be right for every property.
A longitudinal study
We are recording baseline data before the main retrofit begins and will continue measuring through construction, completion and occupation. Rather than stopping when the building work is finished, we intend to share performance data for years while we live in the house, showing how the home and its systems perform over time.
Fabric first, then systems, then performance
The order matters because each layer works better when the layer beneath it is already doing its job.
An efficient building envelope
The building envelope plays a major role in determining how much energy is needed to maintain comfortable indoor conditions. Our design combines insulation, high-performance glazing, airtightness and careful junction detailing to reduce heat loss in winter while helping the house remain comfortable throughout the year.
Comfort, generation and intelligent energy management
A low-demand home allows the ASHP and MVHR to maintain comfortable indoor conditions more efficiently. Solar PV, battery storage and vehicle-to-home capability allow electricity to be generated, stored and used when it is most useful, while smart controls coordinate the different systems across the house.
Measure the outcome
Objective measurements allow us to test whether the completed house performs as designed. We are collecting baseline data before the main retrofit, taking measurements during construction and at completion, and will continue monitoring the house for years during occupation. The results will allow us to compare predicted and measured performance and assess the project against our three priorities: year-round comfort and health, carbon and running costs.
Design targets we can test against reality
Rather than filling this section with every number in the design model, we have selected a small set of headline targets that describe the house, the fabric and the energy system. They are useful reference points now, but the more interesting question is how closely the finished house matches them once we are living in it.
Design U-values
U-values describe how readily heat passes through part of the building fabric. Lower numbers indicate less heat transfer. The values below are those currently used in the August 2026 SAP design model, so they give us another set of predictions to test once the retrofit is complete.
Measuring the impact of the changes we make
Below are the measurements we are currently planning to carry out and share. As we learn more, speak to like-minded people and experts, and collaborate with a wider range of organisations and industries, we expect this list to grow over time.
Building fabric
Energy and systems
Comfort and indoor environment
External conditions
Materials and carbon
Water
Research questions shaped by our three priorities
We want to focus our research questions around the three priorities we set for the project: year-round comfort and wellbeing, carbon footprint and financial impact. Those priorities will be different for different people, and may come in a different order, but we hope to capture a broad range of reasons why people consider retrofit so that our findings can help with their own decision-making.
How well does our house maintain comfortable indoor temperatures through both winter cold and summer heat?
Has improving insulation and airtightness increased the risk of summer overheating, and how effectively can that risk be managed?
What happens to indoor air quality after our deep fabric retrofit?
Does the real-world energy data support the projections made at the design stage?
Where does modelled performance differ from the reality of living in the house?
What seasonal efficiency does our heat pump achieve in real life?
How much grid independence do we realistically achieve with solar, battery storage and V2H?
How has our carbon footprint changed?
Which interventions deliver the greatest benefit relative to their cost and complexity?
How do the financial costs and savings of different interventions compare with their effects on comfort, energy use and carbon emissions?