Futures Forum: Building on the green belt: the case for
Futures Forum: A solution to our housing problems: free up the market for truly affordable housing
This is based on some pretty logical conclusions:
Futures Forum: Adam Smith and rationing housing supply
Although much of the thinking might be deliberately provocative:
Futures Forum: A solution to our housing problems: we need more slums
This is a recent message from the Institute - with its latest proposals:
I wanted to let you know about our new paper, A Garden of One’s Own: Suggestions for development in the Metropolitan Green Belt. Housing costs in London are high and rising fast because supply just isn’t rising as fast as demand. Forget about ‘land banking’ or clamping down on foreign buyers – these are symptoms of the problem, and not very large parts of the story anyway. No, the problem is that we just aren’t building enough.
We’ve proposed building on the green belt before, in our well-regarded The Green Noose, but today’s paper puts some more meat on those bones. We’ve identified parts of London’s green belt that are close to existing infrastructure, that aren’t providing the amenity or environmental benefits that people want from green space, and that are ripe for building on. And we’ve tested the claims that people make about the green belt against what’s really happening.
The best part? All this land adds up to less than 4% of London’s green belt, but would provide enough space for one million new homes. And, as supply rises and costs fall, the price of other uses of land, like gardens and parks, falls too. That means more green space that people can actually use.
The report has been released as an exclusive in today’s Evening Standard and picked up by Bloomberg and others. I’ll be on LBC tonight discussing it, and we’ll be making the case for liberalizing planning throughout the Mayoral election campaign and beyond. Here at the Adam Smith Institute we believe that the private sector can provide high-quality homes and gardens that are affordable for everyone – all we need to do is let it.
www.adamsmith.org
A Garden of One’s Own: Suggestions for development in the Metropolitan Green BeltNew ASI paper explores some of the best areas to build on low quality Green Belt around London
Our new paper on where to build on London’s Green Belt is out now. Below is part of the press release we sent to the media; for the full press release, . To read the whole paper, .
London must build on low quality Green Belt spaces around existing commuter infrastructure to solve its housing crisis, according to a new paper from the Adam Smith Institute.
Building on 20,000 acres of the Metropolitan Green Belt (roughly 3.7%) would create room for the 1m new homes needed, estimating 50 houses per acre; nearly all of which could be built within 10 minutes walk of a station.
The paper, , identifies specific areas where tens of thousands of dwellings can be built, and points out how providing the housing Londoners need does not require ‘concreting over’ the countryside, destroying amenity, or overcrowding.
The author of the paper, Tom Papworth, considers the five main justifications given for the green belt: to check sprawl; to prevent towns merging; to safeguard the countryside; to preserve historic towns; and to force land recycling; and notes that many pieces of land currently designated that way do not meet any of these.
For example, there is an area of land between Hainault, Barkingside, Chadwell Heath and Colliers Row, totalling about 1,200 ha—or 60,000 dwellings at standard densities outside of London—where none of these purposes apply. It is already swallowed by Redbridge, it would have no impact on merging with London, there are no historic towns, and land recycling is irrelevant.
The table below lays out the total land available of different types that could be used to fill the 20,000 hectare demand, assuming standard densities. At inner London densities of 120 dwellings/ha it would take much less land, and at lower densities of 30-40/ha it would take more.
A Garden of One’s Own: Suggestions for development in the Metropolitan Green Belt «
.
.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment