THE LAND FETISH A Suitable Case for Dr Freud? Professor Sir Peter Hall UCL LSE Debate 19 June 2006

Where Are We Now? The Barker Challenge Need for massive increase in housing completions Will need brownfield + greenfield “Political” attack by shires – “unholy alliance” with cities The architects’ crusade: “Barcelonise” our cities

A Continuing Issue? Brownfield, Greenfield and the Sequential Test Housing Completions: 1999, 2004 TotalBrownfieldGreenfield 1999 % s % s % change

A Continuing Issue? Brownfield, Greenfield and the Sequential Test Region Completions % change Brownfield % change Greenfield % change North North West Yorks Humber East Midlands West Midlands Eastern England London South East South West England

Housebuilding: Houses v Flats 1999, 2004 Dwellings: % of total HousesFlatsHousesFlats North East North West Yorks Humber East Midlands West Midlands*88* East of England*91* London South East South West England

What do people want? The 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%

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”)

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!

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 dw/ha with variations: higher close to transport services (Stockholm 1952!) But won’t 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

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 dw/ha Plus “pyramids” up to 60 dw/ha round rail stations Urban Task Force Traditional – Stockholm, 1952! Or Edwardian suburbs!

The Challenge Deliver the houses Defend a “balanced portfolio”: BF/GF 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 we can we!