HOUSEBUILDING A LOST ENGLISH ART Professor Sir Peter

HOUSEBUILDING: A LOST ENGLISH ART? Professor Sir Peter Hall Happold Memorial Lecture London 27 November 2007

The Barker Challenge: Build More Homes Source: Kate Barker Review 2004 • Need for massive increase: 200 k/yr > 240 k/yr > ? 400 k/yr? • Will need brownfield + greenfield • “Political” attack by shires – “unholy alliance” with cities • The architects’ crusade: “Barcelonise” our cities

240, 000 homes a year: not enough? • UK population: sharp increase: 60. 6 m (2006) > 71. 1 m (2031): +10. 5 m (+19. 1%) • Huge increase on last projection (+6. 1 m, +10. 2%) • 5. 6 m (53. 3% total) natural increase • 4. 9 m (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 Total 1999 % 000 s 2004 % 000 s 1999 -2004 % change Brownfield Greenfield 100 56 44 140. 0 78. 4 61. 6 100 68 32 152. 9 104. 0 48. 9 +9. 2 +32. 7 -20. 6

A Continuing Issue? Brownfield, Greenfield and the Sequential Test 1999 -2004 Region North Completions % change Brownfield % change Greenfield % change -8. 3 +37. 9 -39. 5 0. 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. 5 0. 0 South East +10. 0 +25. 9 -16. 1 South West +1. 9 +50. 0 -28. 6 England +9. 2 +32. 7 -20. 6 North West

Housebuilding: Houses v Flats 1999, 2004 Dwellings: % of total 1999 Houses 2004 Flats Houses Flats North East 88 12 83 17 North West 85 15 73 27 Yorks Humber 93 7 71 29 East Midlands 93 7 86 14 West Midlands *88 *13 71 29 East of England *91 *10 78 22 London 41 59 20 80 South East 83 17 62 38 South West 90 10 74 26 England 84 16 66 34

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

Future of the typical English town?

House prices/earnings 1999, 2006

What do people want? Earlier survey evidence • Home Alone (Hooper et al 1998): only 10% want a flat; 33% won’t 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 won’t achieve same person densities as before!

Densification: Effects Density Dws. /ha. Net Land Saved Land needed to accommodate 400 dwellings Area required, ha. Gross (with local facilities) % % Land Saved Total Cumu. Saving lative 10 20 30 40 50 60 40. 0 % % Total Cumu. Saving lative 46. 3 20. 0 50. 0 25. 3 21. 0 45. 4 13. 3 6. 7 16. 7 66. 7 17. 9 7. 4 15. 9 61. 3 10. 0 3. 3 8. 3 75. 0 14. 3 3. 6 7. 8 69. 1 8. 0 2. 0 5. 0 80. 0 12. 1 2. 2 4. 8 73. 9 6. 6 1. 4 3. 5 83. 5 10. 6 1. 5 3. 2 77. 1

Density Gradient (Rudlin+Falk)

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? Gilg’s Verdict • Middle-class bias • Not always democratic • Balances economic growth, conservation: a dilemma • Increasingly market-driven • No obvious alternative

Where Are We Now? Gilg’s 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

South East England: Global Mega-City-Region

Urban Clusters (Hall+Ward 1998)

Sustainable Communities Corridors: Growing the SE into the Midlands…

Green Belt – or Green Blanket?

The Infrastructure Gap: Roger Tym Report

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: A 2, £ 92 million)

The North: Managed Decline? • The great Pathfinder row • How much to keep? How much to demolish? • Are incentives perverse? • YES: SAVE Britain’s 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 1950 s, 1960 s They did it – so can we!