Sorry greenbelt: London has a housing crisis and needs to build out and up
IF YOU think London’s housing crisis is bad, house prices are too high, or rents are extortionate, you ain’t seen nothing yet. The capital’s population is forecast to increase by a further 1m by 2021, yet only 18,380 new homes were built in 2012-13.
This is not just a social problem, with increasing numbers struggling to find suitable and affordable places to live, it’s also an economic one. If we hit the mayor’s new targets for housebuilding in London – 42,000 new homes a year – it could sustain almost 130,000 jobs through direct and indirect construction employment, and add over £2bn to the economy. But we haven’t hit the mayor’s current annual housebuilding target of 32,000 new homes in a year since the 1970s.
Our latest report, Home Truths, offers 12 practical solutions to the capital’s housing crisis. Crucially, however, it calls for new suburbs rather than the oft-mooted New Towns. While that might sound like semantics, there are important reasons for the distinction.
First, this is how London has naturally evolved over centuries – all we are doing is trying to build upon this process. Second, these new communities will be easier to build if they are kept within London’s boundaries, meaning the mayor has the power to get on and do this now.
Third, a prerequisite for a new suburb is the need to invest in new transport infrastructure. We have pinpointed Brimsdown in the Upper Lea Valley, and Chessington, south of the Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames, as two areas which could thrive as new communities at either end of the proposed Crossrail 2 route. This would make for a double whammy for London – more homes and extra trains to make the city considerably easier to get around.
And while we advocate a policy of “brownfield first” – building on previously used land – it’s unlikely that this alone will provide enough land for the number of new homes London needs. Greenbelt land will have to be considered. This means it’s time we put a myth to bed: greenbelt is not all parkland where deer graze serenely, surrounded by wooded copses. Portions of the greenbelt are forgotten, unloved scrubland that would be considerably improved if thoughtfully developed. Although we don’t need to go so far, Paul Cheshire of the LSE has noted that taking a 1km ring inside the M25 would yield enough land for more than a generation of building at current London rates.
Another option is to look at how we can make the most of development opportunities within London. The capital is considerably less dense than many of its peers. This might be obvious of cities like Hong Kong and Singapore, but less so of Paris. This doesn’t necessarily mean skyscraper after skyscraper on London’s skyline – in some cases it might mean building five stories where previously there were three. And this also doesn’t mean a miserable life for Londoners as urban sardines. The densification of Woodberry Down in Hackney resulted in residents reporting “life satisfaction” at 90 per cent, compared to a UK average of 60 per cent.
These are just two options. But without tough decisions, London and its inhabitants face a tougher future. It is no longer enough for politicians and anti-development activists to say: “We need more houses, but just not in my back yard”.
Baroness Valentine is chief executive of London First.