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
1999 %
000s
2004 %
000s
1999-2004
% change
Total
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
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
Region
North
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
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 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
%
Total
Saving
Land needed to accommodate 400 dwellings
Area required, ha.
Gross
(with local facilities)
%
Cumulative
Land Saved
%
Total
Saving
%
Cumulative
10
40.0
46.3
20
20.0
20.0
50.0
50.0
25.3
21.0
45.4
45.4
30
13.3
6.7
16.7
66.7
17.9
7.4
15.9
61.3
40
10.0
3.3
8.3
75.0
14.3
3.6
7.8
69.1
50
8.0
2.0
5.0
80.0
12.1
2.2
4.8
73.9
60
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!
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!