Circularity and Design for Disassembly: Could London Construction Learn from the ‘Reusable Building’ Concept?

By London Urbanism Desk

A recent article in Common Edge, written by architect Rick Cook, asks how the construction industry can break free from the pattern of building “single-use” structures – homes and offices designed with cheap, disposable materials that end up in landfill after demolition. Cook’s answer is circularity: a framework that treats a building’s life cycle as a closed loop, where materials and cultural investment are renewed through each generation. The piece, summarised by Planetizen, has particular resonance for London, where the Mayor’s net-zero targets and the London Plan’s circular economy policies are pushing developers and architects to rethink how buildings are made, used, and eventually taken apart.

What is a ‘single-use’ building?

Cook argues that much of today’s construction relies on inexpensive, convenient materials that are not designed for reuse. When a building reaches the end of its useful life, these materials are typically demolished and sent to landfill, rather than being salvaged or repurposed. The result is a linear “take-make-dispose” model that generates significant waste and carbon emissions. In London, construction and demolition waste accounts for a large share of the city’s total waste stream, and the GLA’s circular economy guidance already encourages developers to reduce waste and plan for material reuse. The concept of single-use buildings directly challenges this goal.

Circularity and reversible architecture

Cook’s proposed solution is circularity, which he compares to the reusable Trader Joe’s tote bag – a simple, everyday alternative to the plastic bag. Applied to buildings, circularity means designing for adaptability, reuse, and eventual disassembly. A key technique is “design for disassembly”, also known as reversible architecture. Instead of using adhesives, sealants, or permanent fixings, architects can specify fasteners such as bolts, screws, and clips that allow components to be easily taken apart and reused in a different building or configuration.

The article notes that “the most adaptable building is only as sustainable as its parts.” Material specification becomes a strategic tool for advancing the circular economy. For London, this is particularly relevant for large-scale housing developments and commercial retrofits, where the choice of materials and construction methods can determine whether a building can be adapted to future needs or must be demolished.

Relevance to London’s planning and retrofit agenda

London’s planning framework already emphasises circular economy principles. The London Plan’s Policy SI 7 requires major developments to submit a circular economy statement, demonstrating how materials will be used efficiently and waste minimised. The Mayor’s Climate Action Plan also sets a target for all homes and workplaces to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, with a significant focus on retrofitting existing buildings rather than demolishing and rebuilding.

The concept of design for disassembly aligns with these goals. If new buildings in London are designed with reversible connections, they can be more easily adapted for changing uses – for example, converting office space to housing, or adding energy-efficient cladding without major structural work. Similarly, materials such as steel, timber, and concrete panels can be reclaimed and reused, reducing the embodied carbon of new construction.

However, the article does not address the practical challenges of implementing circularity at scale in a dense, historic city like London. Many existing buildings are not designed for disassembly, and retrofitting them to be more circular requires careful planning, investment, and coordination across the supply chain. The GLA’s recent guidance on circular economy in construction offers a starting point, but the industry is still far from making circular design the norm.

What this means for London’s built environment professionals

For planners, architects, and developers working in London, the Common Edge piece serves as a reminder that material choices have long-term consequences. The shift toward circularity is not just about waste reduction; it is about creating buildings that can adapt to future regulatory, economic, and climate pressures. The London Plan already requires circular economy statements, but these often focus on operational waste rather than the design for disassembly. The article suggests that a more ambitious approach is needed – one that treats the building itself as a material bank for future generations.

Unknowns and limitations

The article is a conceptual piece, not a case study. It does not provide examples of completed buildings using design for disassembly in London or elsewhere, nor does it address cost, regulatory barriers, or the skills gap in the construction workforce. These are significant unknowns that would need to be addressed before the concept can be widely adopted. The piece also does not mention the role of the UK’s Building Regulations or the Greater London Authority’s specific policies, so readers should treat the argument as a general architectural trend rather than a direct policy recommendation.

Next steps for London readers

Professionals in London’s built environment sector can use the article as a starting point for reviewing how circularity is applied in their own projects. The GLA’s circular economy statement guidance, published in 2022, offers a framework, but the concept of design for disassembly is not yet a standard requirement. Architects and contractors may wish to explore reversible detailing for new buildings and major retrofits, while planners can consider how to encourage circular design through supplementary planning guidance or development conditions.

Source: Common Edge, via Planetizen, “How to get away from ‘single-use buildings’”, 26 July 2026. https://www.planetizen.com/news/2026/07/138075-how-get-away-single-use-buildings