This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/davehillblog/2016/mar/02/london-housing-news-theres-no-silver-bullet-answer-for-next-mayor

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
London housing news: there's no 'silver bullet' answer for next mayor London housing news: there's no 'silver bullet' answer for next mayor
(3 days later)
In a recent speech Lewisham’s very experienced Labour mayor Sir Steve Bullock described the numbers of homes all London mayor candidates are talking about getting built as “heroic.” I enjoyed that choice of word. A new report from housing charity Shelter and planning consultants Quod will help you work out why.In a recent speech Lewisham’s very experienced Labour mayor Sir Steve Bullock described the numbers of homes all London mayor candidates are talking about getting built as “heroic.” I enjoyed that choice of word. A new report from housing charity Shelter and planning consultants Quod will help you work out why.
It is entitled When Brownfield Isn’t Enough and looks at various ways touted for meeting London’s growing demand for homes. The numbers built over the past decade average less than 25,000 a year. The estimated annual need for the future is double that at least. That’s half a million over the next ten years. “Heroic” might be understating it.It is entitled When Brownfield Isn’t Enough and looks at various ways touted for meeting London’s growing demand for homes. The numbers built over the past decade average less than 25,000 a year. The estimated annual need for the future is double that at least. That’s half a million over the next ten years. “Heroic” might be understating it.
The report ends, pleasingly, by squashing the myth, popular with politicians, that everything would be OK if we stopped rich foreigners buying expensive flats as financial investments and leaving them empty. Estate agent Savills might be terribly posh, but their market knowledge is widely respected. They’ve estimated that non-resident overseas investors account for only about 7% of London’s housing market and that most of those were renting their flats out. “Buy to leave” happens in a few, small parts of town and means little in the wider scheme of things. Homes left empty long-term account for less than 0.6% of all the city’s housing stock. The real problems are different and much bigger.The report ends, pleasingly, by squashing the myth, popular with politicians, that everything would be OK if we stopped rich foreigners buying expensive flats as financial investments and leaving them empty. Estate agent Savills might be terribly posh, but their market knowledge is widely respected. They’ve estimated that non-resident overseas investors account for only about 7% of London’s housing market and that most of those were renting their flats out. “Buy to leave” happens in a few, small parts of town and means little in the wider scheme of things. Homes left empty long-term account for less than 0.6% of all the city’s housing stock. The real problems are different and much bigger.
The message of the report is that bumping housing supply in London up to anywhere near 50,000 a year will mean doing several things at once, most of them difficult and unpopular. There is no “silver bullet” solution. It reminds us that the term “brownfield” means any land that’s already been built on, which means that “to build something on this land means removing something else first.” About two-thirds of London’s brownfield land has housing on it already.The message of the report is that bumping housing supply in London up to anywhere near 50,000 a year will mean doing several things at once, most of them difficult and unpopular. There is no “silver bullet” solution. It reminds us that the term “brownfield” means any land that’s already been built on, which means that “to build something on this land means removing something else first.” About two-thirds of London’s brownfield land has housing on it already.
Most of the rest is occupied by schools, hospitals, transport infrastructure and town centres. Anyone for bulldozing those? Throw in the warehouses, sewage works and light industrial premises and not a great deal remains. A number of big brownfield sites are already being redeveloped for housing and other things - Nine Elms, King’s Cross, Stratford and so on - and, says the report, “there is practically no significant ‘derelict’ land in London” left.Most of the rest is occupied by schools, hospitals, transport infrastructure and town centres. Anyone for bulldozing those? Throw in the warehouses, sewage works and light industrial premises and not a great deal remains. A number of big brownfield sites are already being redeveloped for housing and other things - Nine Elms, King’s Cross, Stratford and so on - and, says the report, “there is practically no significant ‘derelict’ land in London” left.
So putting new housing on other brownfield sites means time, trouble, money and, says the report, “some very difficult choices need to be made,” if it is going to be even part of the answer. It adds: “Brownfield has long been the priority for London, and that must continue, including public sector land. But any attempt to rely on brownfield alone is doomed to fail.”So putting new housing on other brownfield sites means time, trouble, money and, says the report, “some very difficult choices need to be made,” if it is going to be even part of the answer. It adds: “Brownfield has long been the priority for London, and that must continue, including public sector land. But any attempt to rely on brownfield alone is doomed to fail.”
What about building higher? The proliferation of tall buildings in London is another phenomenon that attracts protest, dismay and sympathetic media interest. But it seems there are already 28,000 homes in London on the 10th floor or higher, 12,000 of them in Outer London. They’re not an alien contagion. Such dwellings aren’t for everyone or everywhere, but more of them could be part of the solution. “The question for the new mayor will be how many [new] areas could support taller buildings and where to strike the balance between protecting the current skyline and allowing a change in heights,” says the report.What about building higher? The proliferation of tall buildings in London is another phenomenon that attracts protest, dismay and sympathetic media interest. But it seems there are already 28,000 homes in London on the 10th floor or higher, 12,000 of them in Outer London. They’re not an alien contagion. Such dwellings aren’t for everyone or everywhere, but more of them could be part of the solution. “The question for the new mayor will be how many [new] areas could support taller buildings and where to strike the balance between protecting the current skyline and allowing a change in heights,” says the report.
The Great Taboo, of course, is building on the green belt. A lot of us don’t really know quite what that is. The full London green belt is gigantic, extending far beyond Greater London itself. Yet 22% of the 600 square miles within its boundaries is designated green belt too. It’s not by any means all pleasant woodlands open to the public, either. Some of it is close to stations, other parts could also be used for housing if new transport infrastructure was provided. The report says that if the next mayor wanted to explore this option, he or she could enshrine it in planning policy and encourage boroughs to release some of the green belt land in its territory. But don’t hold your breath during the campaign - the politics of such a promise would be explosive.The Great Taboo, of course, is building on the green belt. A lot of us don’t really know quite what that is. The full London green belt is gigantic, extending far beyond Greater London itself. Yet 22% of the 600 square miles within its boundaries is designated green belt too. It’s not by any means all pleasant woodlands open to the public, either. Some of it is close to stations, other parts could also be used for housing if new transport infrastructure was provided. The report says that if the next mayor wanted to explore this option, he or she could enshrine it in planning policy and encourage boroughs to release some of the green belt land in its territory. But don’t hold your breath during the campaign - the politics of such a promise would be explosive.
More New Towns or garden villages outside London? These could help, but the mayor couldn’t make them happen and, like Rome, they wouldn’t be built in a day. The mayor could help and encourage the “regeneration” of housing estates by boroughs or their “intensification” by building on spare bits of space within them. Zac Goldsmith is keen on having them knocked down, even describing doing so as an “ethical obligation.” Sadiq Khan is dead against this except in “exceptional circumstances” but he is an avowed “in-fill” man. Perhaps some middle way would be the best.More New Towns or garden villages outside London? These could help, but the mayor couldn’t make them happen and, like Rome, they wouldn’t be built in a day. The mayor could help and encourage the “regeneration” of housing estates by boroughs or their “intensification” by building on spare bits of space within them. Zac Goldsmith is keen on having them knocked down, even describing doing so as an “ethical obligation.” Sadiq Khan is dead against this except in “exceptional circumstances” but he is an avowed “in-fill” man. Perhaps some middle way would be the best.
The problem with wholesale demolition, of course, is that a lot of estate residents don’t like it and too often don’t get the replacement homes they are promised. It is also another slow process. Public resistance of another kind is a feature of the leafier suburbs, where there is great scope for gradually increasing housing densities. A special term has been coined for this: “sprawl repair.” The challenge would lie in persuading leafy boroughs that such change could be beneficial. The problem with wholesale demolition, of course, is that a lot of estate residents don’t like it and too often don’t get the replacement homes they are promised. It is also another slow process. Public resistance of another kind is a feature of the suburbs, where there is great scope for gradually increasing housing densities. A special term has been coined for this: “sprawl repair.” The challenge would lie in persuading leafy boroughs that such change could be beneficial.
See what I mean about “heroic” promises and blaming everything on wealthy foreigners? But, though sobering, this clear and readable report does not reach a pessimistic conclusion. Rather: “None of these solutions can solve London’s housing problems on their own. The point is be realistic about the scale of the need and to recognise the difficulties we will face in meeting it if we start to rule out options and put too much faith in fewer of the easier solutions. Take a bit of each of these, however, and we can tackle the housing shortage without going to extremes.” Read When Brownfield Isn’t Enough for yourselves here.See what I mean about “heroic” promises and blaming everything on wealthy foreigners? But, though sobering, this clear and readable report does not reach a pessimistic conclusion. Rather: “None of these solutions can solve London’s housing problems on their own. The point is be realistic about the scale of the need and to recognise the difficulties we will face in meeting it if we start to rule out options and put too much faith in fewer of the easier solutions. Take a bit of each of these, however, and we can tackle the housing shortage without going to extremes.” Read When Brownfield Isn’t Enough for yourselves here.