Presentation on theme: "HOUSEBUILDING: A LOST ENGLISH ART? Professor Sir Peter Hall Happold Memorial Lecture London 27 November 2007."— Presentation transcript:
HOUSEBUILDING: A LOST ENGLISH ART? Professor Sir Peter Hall Happold Memorial Lecture London 27 November 2007
The Barker Challenge: Build More Homes Need for massive increase: 200k/yr > 240k/yr > ?400k/yr? Will need brownfield + greenfield Political attack by shires – unholy alliance with cities The architects crusade: Barcelonise our cities Source: Kate Barker Review 2004
240,000 homes a year: not enough? UK population: sharp increase: 60.6m (2006) > 71.1m (2031): +10.5m (+19.1%) Huge increase on last projection (+6.1m, +10.2%) 5.6m (53.3% total) natural increase 4.9m (46.7% total) net migration England: +19.1%
Good and Bad Arguments Bad: we must save farmland Good: we should give people choice of access to public transport, shops, schools By public transport as well as car So: concentrate growth around transport interchanges And: raise densities there (pyramids of density)
UK: A barely developed countryside… UK: 14.3% developed; England: 19.1% These are overestimates: England: 10.6% 1991 1996-8: ca 8,000 hectares/year developed (=Runnymede)
Land Lying Idle… EU Set-Aside: June 2004, 476,000 hectares, almost 5.0% of England Greater SE: 100,270 hectares, 8.6% Essex 10.7% Hampshire 9.1% Oxfordshire 11.4% Bedfordshire 11.6% Far in excess of most generous estimates of land needed for housing!
A Continuing Issue? Brownfield, Greenfield and the Sequential Test Housing Completions: 1999, 2004 TotalBrownfieldGreenfield 1999 %1005644 000s140.078.461.6 2004 %1006832 000s152.9104.048.9 1999-2004 % change +9.2+32.7-20.6
A Continuing Issue? Brownfield, Greenfield and the Sequential Test 1999-2004 Region Completions % change Brownfield % change Greenfield % change North-8.3+37.9-39.5 North West0.0+27.5-43.1 Yorks Humber+5.9+52.9-41.2 East Midlands-6.8+31.7-28.4 West Midlands-9.3+18.3-42.0 Eastern England+5.4+8.4+1.3 London+92.8+104.50.0 South East+10.0+25.9-16.1 South West+1.9+50.0-28.6 England+9.2+32.7-20.6
Housebuilding: Houses v Flats 1999, 2004 Dwellings: % of total 19992004 HousesFlatsHousesFlats North East88128317 North West85157327 Yorks Humber9377129 East Midlands9378614 West Midlands*88*137129 East of England*91*107822 London41592080 South East83176238 South West90107426 England84166634
Empty Land, Empty Homes Land banks: Are volume builders hoarding? Buy-to-leave: 670,000 empty homes, 300,000 long-term Joey Gardiner (R&R, 31 August): Central Leeds: 20% empty Similar stories: Manchester, Salford, Birmingham, Hull, London Manchester: up to 40% (Ron Hack, Ecotec) London: 70% bought off-plan
What do people want? Earlier survey evidence Home Alone (Hooper et al 1998): only 10% want a flat; 33% wont consider a flat CPRE (Champion et al 1998): people want to live in/near country Hedges and Clemens (q. Breheny 1997): city dwellers least satisfied Conclusion: we hate cities!
What do people want? MORI for CABE, 2005 Over half the population want to live in a detached house 22% prefer a bungalow 14% a semi-detached house 7% a terraced house Detached house most popular choice, regardless of social status or ethnicity Period properties (Edwardian, Victorian, Georgian) most desirable overall: 37%
New Households, New Homes 80% one-person But only about one-third single never married Will demand more space per household: Separate kitchens/bathrooms/loos, Spare rooms, Work spaces Land saving reduces as densities increase: 30 dw/ha yields 60% of all potential gains, 40 dw/ha 70 per cent So biggest gains from minimising development below 20 dw/h, not increasing 40 dw/ha+ So: go for 30-40 dw/ha with variations: higher close to transport services (Stockholm 1952!) But wont achieve same person densities as before!
Densification: Effects Land needed to accommodate 400 dwellings DensityArea required, ha. Dws./ha. Net Gross (with local facilities) Land Saved% %Land Saved% % TotalCumu-TotalCumu- Saving lativeSaving lative 1040.046.3 2020.020.050.0 50.025.321.045.4 45.4 3013.3 6.716.7 66.717.9 7.415.9 61.3 4010.0 3.3 8.3 75.0 14.3 3.6 7.8 69.1 50 8.0 2.0 5.0 80.012.1 2.2 4.8 73.9 60 6.6 1.4 3.5 83.510.6 1.5 3.2 77.1
Lessons from Land Use Public Transport needs minimum density: Bus: 25 dw/ha LRT: 60 dw/ha Exceed recent densities Big gain from 30-35 dw/ha Plus pyramids up to 60 dw/ha round rail stations Urban Task Force Traditional – Stockholm, 1952! Or Edwardian suburbs!
Planning in Britain: A Verdict (1) Andrew Gilg: Planning in Britain: Understanding and Evaluating the Post- War System (London: Sage 2005)
Where Are We Now? Gilgs Verdict Middle-class bias Not always democratic Balances economic growth, conservation: a dilemma Increasingly market-driven No obvious alternative
Where Are We Now? Gilgs Verdict Big Achievement: urban containment; preservation of countryside Big Failure: development not sustainable: work, homes separate Another Failure: transport not integrated; transport system overloaded Need: integrated development; New Towns Compare: Containment of Urban England (1973)!
Making it happen: The 2004/2008 Acts Radical change – biggest for 35 years Working through at regional strategic level Planning Gain Supplement > Tariffs Can it solve the infrastructure deficit? The major issue in solving the housing crisis! But also: the NIMBY factor – will get worse? 2008: RSSs to RDAs
Where Are We Now? A 3-Pronged National Spatial Strategy 3 key needs: Grow SEE: Better connections on Sustainable Community Growth Corridors Shrinking the N-S Gap: Bring North, Midland Core Cities/City Regions closer to London Grow City Regions around Core Cities
Planning Gain Supplement v. Tariffs Planning Gain Supplement: a national development land tax) on development gains Tariffs: similar, but levied by LPAs/vary LPA/LPA Related to infrastructure costs of Local Development Plan Section 106 retained: MK, Bedford… Local versus regional investment: local gain for local pain But problem of regional infrastructure: New rail connections; national motorway junctions (Article 14: A2, £92 million)
The North: Managed Decline? The great Pathfinder row How much to keep? How much to demolish? Are incentives perverse? YES: SAVE Britains Heritage NO: ODPM Family-Friendly Housing in Cities How much Greenfield? Issues: VAT, Infrastructure (Manchester, Leeds, Liverpool)
The Challenge Deliver the houses Defend a balanced portfolio: Brown/Greenfield Build sustainable suburbs But: can be New Towns too (seldom just that) Sustainable urban places – linked along transport corridors Fund the infrastructure/ Coordinate development, transport Countryside – for people! A big challenge: equal to 1950s, 1960s They did it – so can we!