GARDEN CITIES IN THE GREEN BELT

INTRODUCTION 2

GARDEN CITIES & NEW TOWNS 3

BUILDING IN THE GREEN BELT 4

A NEW CITY IN THE EAST OF THE LONDON GREEN BELT 6

CITY LAYOUT 8

THE RADBURN CONCEPT & PEDESTRIAN TUNNELS 11

CYCLE TRACKS 14

DRAINAGE & SERVICES UNDER PEDESTRIAN PATHS 15

TRAFFIC FLOW 16

THE HEIGHT OF UNDERPASSES 19

DRIVERLESS CARS 17

SHOPPING 18

BUILD BIG NOT SMALL HOUSES 19

INDUSTRIALISED HOUSING 20

INNOVATIVE HOMES & DELIVERY OPTIONS 21

CHOICE OF ARCHITECTURAL IDEAS & BEAUTY 21

LONDON’S SEVERE SHORTAGE OF HOUSES 22

HOUSING DENSITIES 23

CREATING CITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS 24

THE ECONOMICS OF A NEW CITY 25

RESEARCH INTO SALEABILITY 26

1

© OpenStreetMap contributors

THE LONDON METROPOLITAN GREEN BELT (M.G.B.) IS ROUGHLY THREE TIMES THE AREA OF

GREATER LONDON. THE WHITE AREAS WITHIN THE M.G.B. DENOTE EXISTING URBAN AREAS.

INTRODUCTIONIn 2015, the population of London surpassed 8.6 million,

its previous highest level in 1939, and a drastic increase from 6.6 million in the 1970’s. London accommodates 12.5% of England’s population, but it has 19% of the jobs and 22% of the income. The cost of houses in London is double the prices in most parts of England and Wales. The persistently high price of residential property in London compared to any other location in the United Kingdom clearly indicates that it is around the capital that new homes are needed. London is a world-class city that attracts ambitious companies and employees. The greatest economic benefits arise from providing housing to those who want to work there.

New Cities need to be built in the London Metropolitan Green Belt in order to keep commuting times to a minimum. A

2

New City would need its own identity, character, and sources of employment, so it could emulate London’s most successful areas.

An area of parkland with free public access should surround it. This will improve upon the current Green Belt surrounding London, of which the majority is inaccessible, privately owned land.

GARDEN CITIES & NEW TOWNSWelwyn Garden City was a great success, so after the war

three phases of New Towns were planned, including latterly Milton Keynes. It was not a desirable or popular place for successful people to live in. Large private houses were not permitted to be built; only small houses to be rented to the disadvantaged.

Many of the new inhabitants of Milton Keynes were from “disadvantaged” areas in London, according to the Development Corporation’s 1977 report. Under existing legislation, it was hard to evict London’s antisocial council tenants (those who had failed to pay their rent or annoyed their neighbours). Many London boroughs recommended these tenants for rehousing in Milton Keynes. It became a dumping ground for the impoverished and the antisocial. As a result, there were stories of people being attacked and robbed on the pedestrian paths, and the high street shops faltered. At the time, Milton Keynes received a lot of negative publicity. The separate pedestrian pathways were an innovative feature, but Milton Keynes was initially a failure, and few wanted to live there.

After the third wave of New Towns, large-scale developments have ceased to be built, and this in turn has adversely affected the concept of using the Green Belt for towns and cities.

BUILDING IN THE GREEN BELT3

Unbeknown to most citizens, the Green Belt was instigated to prevent roads and houses being built over it in a piecemeal manner, so that in the future large areas could be developed en masse as new well-designed cities with excellent transport links. Development was initially delayed by the debts incurred from two World Wars.

The Green Belt land around London is approximately three times the area of the Capital. It took until 2011 for a proper map delineating the extent of the Green Belt to be freely available. Until this time the exact dimensions and extent of the Green Belt have remained somewhat obscure, and also the fact that the Green Belt has increased in size since its conception. Most of the four million acres of Green Belt land is private property, not open to the public. A considerable number of post-war houses have been built in fits and starts on Green Belt land, but the creation of new Green Belt areas has more than countered this.

93% of Great Britain is undeveloped land, so 2% of this land could potentially house a 25% increase of population! Agricultural land in South East England is worth over £7,000 per acre, but with planning permission for housing it increases 300% in value.

A quarter of the London Metropolitan Green Belt should be used for New Cities. If sufficient land is bought for the creation of a city with a population of one million, the surplus profits on house sales would be enough to pay for new infrastructure such as hospitals, schools etc, and still make a gain on the initial phase of construction. This would allow further purchases of Green Belt land in future phases to increase the housing stock.

The Government must pass new laws concerning the development of the Green Belt. The current policy is to give occasional permission to build at a local level, and offset it by incorporating more Green Belt land. Instead the Government

4

should centralise the planning process, and allow provision for the creation of large-scale cities and towns. The public should be informed many years in advance of changes in the Green Belt’s status, so people will know where and when developments are going to take place.

Green corridors are needed, stretching into urban areas (especially London), so people can go for walks and cycle rides, never having to cross a road. Views of open countryside from the cities’ arterial roads should not be marred by development. Wedge-shaped areas between the green corridors should be developed for housing.

If you demolish buildings to erect new developments, you have to pay for the demolition, plus the cost of construction. If you build a New City on agricultural land to the highest possible standards, because this is land of comparatively low value, it should prove profitable as well as aiding the housing crisis.

The density of a New Garden City is likely to be higher than neighbouring rural towns and villages, so using Green Belt land to build New Cities would preserve British agricultural land, as the population would be more concentrated. With the development of genetically modified crops, less of the countryside would need to be used for farmland, and crops could be grown on smaller areas, with equal yield.

New motorways between London and New Cities must be built. Land alongside the M11 and M25 and other major roads must be reserved in the event of future road widening. Since the cars of the future will be driverless, it is important that the views should be beautiful, with occasional large statues in the landscape - this might make one’s journey more memorable.

5

A NEW CITY IN THE EAST OF THE LONDON METROPOLITAN GREEN BELT

© OpenStreetMap contributors

THE LOCATION OF THE FIRST NEW GARDEN CITY, 20 MILES EAST OF

CENTRAL LONDON, LINKED BY THE HS2 TRAIN LINE, A12, A127, A13 & M25

ROADS

A sensible choice for the first New City of one million people would be situated near Brentwood, Essex, which is 20 miles from Central London, in the Eastern Metropolitan Green Belt. It lies two miles from the M25 motorway, and one mile from the A12, which connects it rather slowly to Central London. The new Crossrail line runs through Brentwood, its penultimate stop, and on to nearby Shenfield. The Elisabeth Line will run 12 trains an hour at peak times, and it will take about 40 to 50 minutes to reach central London.

The surrounding countryside is mainly comprised of farms and golf courses, which are neither particularly beautiful, nor allow access to the public. Unlike areas in the North West

6

(The Chilterns), South West (Surrey Hills) and South East (Kent Downs) of the London Metropolitan Green Belt, the area between the Lee Valley to the north, and the Thames in the east contains no Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, so building a sizeable city here will not have a devastating impact on the character of the area.

The local District Councils are responsible for their specific pieces of Green Belt land, and Brentwood Council controls 13,700 hectares. I would potentially add Green Belt land from the surrounding districts of Barking & Dagenham, Basildon, Castle Point, Chelmsford, Harlow, Havering, Thurrock, Southend, Rochford and Uttlesford, totalling 72,340 hectares or 279.3 square miles. This would allow the creation of a New City with a population of one million, taking up 121 square miles.

The New Garden City would be built at similar proportions to London: -

36% Residential (including domestic gardens) 25% Green Space (sports fields, parks, agricultural land) 11% Employment (1% offices, 1% general industrial, 9%

retail/warehousing and public services) 28% Non-employment (transport – roads & railways,

waste disposal, electricity & gas substations, schools, hospitals and cemeteries)

The houses would mainly be large to encourage

professional people to live in them. My basic unit for families would be a spacious 30 feet square terraced house, sited on a 30 feet by 72 feet building plot. The plot could adapt as the household’s needs evolved, and be useful for several generations.

The average residence in London has 2.48 people per household, so I have concentrated on family homes with sizeable gardens, like the houses in existing Garden Cities, as they are extremely popular. In addition, I would create low-rise blocks of

7

flats for smaller households above neighbourhood shops.Metropolitan Green Belt land to the East of London

would be cheaper than the land in the North-West or South. It has easy access to the large container port at Tilbury docks, and the huge financial institutions at Canary Wharf. Further development would bring a welcome injection of investment, infrastructure, and employment opportunities to the area.

If we could be the first European country to allow driverless cars on our roads, and build the New City to fully utilise them, we could equip factories to make the associated technologies, and export them. This would create more jobs in England, and keep it ahead of its international competitors.

The Brentwood area is near Dagenham, where Ford cars were made for many years, so a new car manufacturing plant would be welcomed.

CITY LAYOUTThe New City should consist of a series of four high-

speed circular roads around the city. The inner city should contain the bulk of office spaces, shops, hotels and entertainment, as well as flats for young professionals. Midtown should accommodate larger businesses, factories and infrastructure. The outer sectors, particularly in the flatter South-West of the city (which would mainly be built on farmland), would suit the long narrow blocks of residential houses, schools and parkland I have devised. Obviously, there would be a fluidity of purpose between sectors, based on geographical features, as well as the need to incorporate existing villages.

The outer ring road would have three lanes in each direction, and no housing, offices, or factories built at its edge to allow future expansion. Speeds could be dramatically increased as conventional cars become less numerous.

In the centre of the city, eight fast arterial roads (four coming in and four going out) should meet at an inner circular

8

road around a beautiful central park, similar to the Inner Circle of Regents Park.

There would be another orbital road surrounding a circular twenty-storey building that borders the central park. Pedestrian paths and cycle ways (with ample bike stores), separated from road vehicles, would give access to two storeys of shops, while on the road there would be drop off zones and underground parking areas for cars and lorries.

Above the shops there should be another two storeys of offices, some of which could be the offices of financial institutions and Government departments, especially if the New Garden City could eventually become the new capital.

Above the offices there would be large balconies for two stories of hotels. Above the hotels, would be fourteen storeys of open plan flats with a large living room, a kitchen, a double bedroom, a single bedroom or study, and a bathroom. The upper floors would span the major roads.

It would be best to leave the Midtown land for sale undeveloped, as the buyers might need unusual shaped buildings for manufacture, shops, offices, and tall blocks of flats. The areas should be planned according to the buyers’ particular requirements.

Another orbital road would separate the outer area, to be used for residential housing, schools, playing fields and parks. The fields could be flanked by unusual shaped blocks of flats, designed so as not to block sunlight from the playing fields.

There should be at least three orbital roads between the central circle and the outer circular road. These roads should allow swift connection with the eight arterial roads. Arterial roads would run through tree-lined corridors, so any elevated roadways would not block daylight to any housing, and would be suitable for large vehicles.

The outer sectors should use thirty feet wide building plots. The houses should be laid out on broad, long streets where

9

each block is 125 plots long, built on the notion that driverless cars and lorries would be separated completely from cyclists and walkers, who will also have separate access to every home via the back garden. The back gardens would be face to face, bisected by pedestrian and cycle paths. The forecourt would allow easy access to the road.

The layout would incorporate many aspects of the Grid street plan, and take some inspiration from the Radburn pedestrian system (see next section). However, there would be a lot of deviation from a rigid grid system, as I would seek to incorporate existing streets, villages and towns into the layout.

The residential areas should be planned with schools, basic shops, open public gardens and medical facilities situated within easy walking distance. The drainage, cables and service pipes would run beneath the cycle and pedestrian paths.

The London County Council used to build two storey houses 72 feet apart, where windows looked straight across at each other. This has been jettisoned, and residences are considerable closer to each other now. However, my New City will preserve this distance and degree of privacy.

No vehicles would be allowed to park permanently on the road, permitting faster and safer transit. There would be four lanes of traffic on the road, the two outer lanes travelling slower to allow cars to join or leave the road, and allow quick deliveries.

A one-way system would be in effect on residential roads, reducing potential accidents. As a consequence of the anticipated prevalence of driverless cars (eliminating human error), speed limits could be increased over time. The streets in the New Garden City should be safer, greener, and have an uninterrupted flow of traffic.

Approximately every six blocks, a four block pedestrianized area should be apportioned to a primary and secondary school for local children. The schools would share playing fields with local sports clubs. Parkland, extra shops and

10

community facilities would all be available to local residents within walking distance.

The New City should have plenty of green space, more numerous parks and larger private gardens. This should create a pleasant environment to live in.

THE RADBURN CONCEPT & PEDESTRIAN TUNNELS

(The Radburn concept for housing estates is based on a design originally used in Radburn, New Jersey, USA. In 1929, Clarence Stein designed the Radburn estate, a “garden city for the motor age”. The housing layout was the first to create a pedestrian circulation system that allowed people to walk to the local community park and the school without the need to cross a road. It achieved this by the simple expedient of blocks 300m by 600m, with a series of cul-de-sacs to provide car access to the back of each home, while a separate pedestrian network linked to the back gardens, via which residents could walk through a central area of open space to local facilities. The backyard of homes faced the street, and the fronts of homes with private gardens faced each other over shared pedestrian gardens)

A FUNCTIONAL JUNCTION IN OPERATION

In 2015, 1,780 people were killed on the UK roads, and

11

many more wounded. Separating pedestrians and cyclists from road traffic will dramatically reduce injuries, and a new city is a wonderful opportunity to implement this. Their paths could reach every house and building via back gardens, without crossing a road at the same level.

Air pollution on roads, particularly from diesel-powered buses, seriously affects many people, and it makes sense to shield the cyclists and pedestrians from this.

Pedestrian tunnels under roads are essential for the complete segregation from vehicular traffic. To achieve this, the pedestrian and cycle ways would have to descend 1.6 metres below ground level, while the car lanes crossing above would be raised 0.6 metres, in order to allow a 2.2 metre subterranean tunnel. I have designed this tunnel, and call it a Functional Junction (please see diagram above). Building 2.2 metre Functional Junctions costs much less than the 5 metre tunnels imposed by current regulations, as it uses much less surrounding land.

A gentle 1:18 gradient straight ramp leading down to the tunnel should not be too onerous for residents. The frequency and slight inconvenience of these ramps should be offset by the reduction in accidents, and cyclists being able to maintain their speed in the absence of traffic lights.

New cyclist and pedestrian pathways would be much cheaper to build than roads. They should be twenty feet wide and consist of four lanes. The two outer lanes would be reserved for pedestrians, and would allow easy access to houses’ back gardens. The two inner lanes would serve as bicycle and mobility scooter lanes. Cyclists should dismount to cross the pedestrian path to their back gate. The cycle lanes should be slightly wider than the pedestrian lanes to allow for safe overtaking.

12

13

Additionally, the pedestrian and cycle paths between private back gardens should be lowered 0.6 metres (two feet), so that a four foot high fence or hedge would block the view of passers-by, but permit the property owners to see over the top of their fence. Therefore, ramps should be built between the pavement and the back door, so that bicycles, push chairs, and mobility scooters could easily be pushed up the incline.

Because the pedestrian and cycle paths would have to be excavated to accommodate the sewers, drains, service pipes and cables running under them, lowering them by a couple of feet should not be expensive. The pedestrian paths should have regular street lighting and occasional communal gardens.

Additional access via the back garden could give criminals an easy entry point (burglary was initially rife in Radburn). However, fixed cameras could take pictures of trespassers, and alert the owners on their phones, so that the police could be alerted.

When approaching a Functional Junction tunnel, one would always be able to see all other users from a distance, whereas currently there is reduced visibility, as the ramps usually turn 90 degrees into tunnels. Many people are afraid of lurking criminals, and so avoid subterranean passages. The increased visibility through the Functional Junction tunnels would remove this fear, and children could go to school unaccompanied, safe from cars and crime.

The pedestrian tunnels should have seats to one side, so when the rain gets heavy, neighbours could stop and have a chat.

CYCLE TRACKSCycle and pedestrian paths would run the length of each

block, and would traverse roads via low bridges. They would intersect paths every 250 metres, which would cross underneath the roads via Functional Junctions. Cyclists particularly dislike long inclines. This means hilly land is unsuitable for new cities.

14

The area south of Brentwood, Essex is reasonably level. The 5% - 6% gradients experienced in tunnels would be acceptable, because the momentum of descending would help cyclists to go upwards again. Electric bicycles are available for those requiring assistance.

Many cyclists ride so fast that they endanger other pathway users. Therefore it is desirable that some blocks’ pathways would be dedicated to extra-wide cycle paths, and would be one-way, allowing bicycles to travel faster. Towards the centre of the New City, there will probably be a higher density of cyclists than on the outskirts, so there should be a higher proportion of wider, faster cycle lanes.

There should be traffic lights at junctions where cycle paths meet, which would be triggered by motion sensors, responding automatically to approaching cyclists and pedestrians. The lights would give priority to speedier cyclists, but would allow children to safely cross the cycle path.

We should make driverless mobility scooters for the infirm, and these vehicles should use the cycle lane and travel at no more than 20 mph.

Many cyclists travel at 20 mph, if not more. Thus, it would take approximately fifteen minutes to reach the city centre from the periphery. Bicycle stores will be available to stow them safely throughout the city. The vacant area next to tunnels would be particularly suitable for this purpose.

Walking and cycling are healthy exercise, which if encouraged, would help the National Health Service save money. More people would cycle if bicycles have their own dedicated path with clean air.

DRAINAGE & SERVICES UNDER PEDESTRIAN PATHS

If the sewer is no longer laid under the road, the foot tunnels will no longer have to go under the sewer pipes. This

15

saves going down an extra two metres on average, and means the tunnel ramps don’t need to be as long or as steep.

The Functional Junction tunnel sidewalls make good entrances for electrical sub-stations and drainage pumping stations. Having to dig up the road to make repairs is highly disruptive. The pedestrian and cycle paths would be less difficult to excavate than roads, as their structure and materials could be made to allow easy access to service companies. I recommend laying a pipe through which cables for electricity, cable television, broadband, telephone, etc. can be drawn, to avoid having to dig a continuous trench every time things go wrong. Water and sewage pipes would run parallel. The gas pipes should be on the other side of the pedestrian path for safety.

TRAFFIC FLOWThe Functional Junction system of bridges and

underpasses would allow traffic to move faster and more safely. Traffic flow is adversely affected by traffic lights at intersections. Their elimination would allow a smoother circulation of vehicles through the city.

20 mph speed limits have halved the fatalities on residential roads in London. However, the speed of traffic in central London has reduced to below 8 mph. A Transport For London report into vehicle delays on Greater London’s roads during 2014-15, estimated the financial cost of congestion to be an astonishing £5.5bn a year. Driverless cars could reduce road accidents by 90%, yet allow traffic to flow faster while saving countless lives. Their introduction on British roads should be expedited.

HEIGHT OF UNDERPASSESThe cost of underpasses is currently exorbitant due to the

requirement that large vehicles can use them. Vehicle height

16

restrictions would permit the use of low underpasses, and huge savings in construction costs and land use. High vehicles could be excluded from residential areas of the New City.

There is no need for vehicles more than 1.8 metres high in most areas. Most household doors are 2.03 metres high. All normal household furniture can be taken through them. Fire engines are currently high, bulky vehicles. They could be re-designed as low vehicles, and be used in conjunction with drones.

Some shops or factories would require delivery of high loads. There would still be areas accessible to high vehicles in the New City, though the road plan might mean the goods had to travel a few extra miles to be delivered.

DRIVERLESS CARSDriverless cars could be available within 3 years, pending

testing and delays. New cities should be planned around them. In the future, manually driven cars should pay higher tax and insurance premiums, due to the increased likelihood of them being involved in an accident compared to driverless cars.

No single sensor is responsible for making Google's self-driving car work. Global Positioning System data, for example, is not accurate enough to keep the car on the road, let alone in the correct lane. Instead, the driverless car uses data from all eight sensors, interpreted by Google's software, to keep one safe and get one from A to B. The data that Google's software receives is used to identify other road users and their behavior patterns, plus commonly used highway signals.

In addition, information could come from streetlights, which could have cameras installed capable of relaying information to the cars. New Cities are the ideal place for experiments with these systems. Car to car communication would also prevent accidents, especially at blind bends and corners.

The initial cost of a driverless car might be dearer than an

17

ordinary car, but when mass-produced, I estimate the difference could be reduced significantly. The day-to-day cost of running the car will be noticeably reduced by cheaper car insurance.

Eventually, authorities could increase speed limits on new roads in a New Garden City, which has separated its pedestrians and cyclists completely.

Passengers could disembark from a driverless car, and then the car would drive off and park. Seven storey underground garages could be built (with offices and trees on top), where the car can park itself, and then drive back to the owner when summoned. This would speed up short journeys, and prevent traffic jams.

The New City would be the ideal environment to showcase driverless cars, and the public would see the benefit. High-speed roads will be cheaper in New Cities than in existing towns. If Britain commits to manufacturing driverless car technology, it could profitably export these goods to the world.

SHOPPING5% of high street shops have already closed in Britain.

Increasing amounts of shopping will be done online, including home delivery. Every house will need to have delivery cupboards, which could be accessed from the roadside. One of the delivery cupboards would be refrigerated for food deliveries.

There would be no high street shopping in the New City. Shops beside main roads would be forbidden, as pedestrians must not mix with traffic. Smaller Shopping clusters and pubs should be sited so that nobody was more than ten minutes away, with access to underground parking for cars.

There should also be a local shop near the tunnel on pedestrian and cycle routes that sold groceries, etc.

18

BUILD BIG NOT SMALL HOUSESBritain has small homes compared with the rest of

Europe, and the abolition of the minimum space standards through the 1980 Local Government, Planning and Land Act is to blame, according to the RIBA.

Camden Borough Council is pulling down excellent council homes that it built 45 years ago on the Agar Grove estate, and then rebuilding at double the density. Similar things are happening on estates all over Britain.

Through extension and conversion ordinary houses are transformed them into small flats. Pre-war semi-detached houses gave one an opportunity to extend. You cannot extend a flat.

I suggest two storey, three bedroom houses could be structurally designed so that a third floor could be easily added to provide more rooms.

Because gentlemen wanted well-designed spacious rooms, 300-year-old Georgian houses which have been modernised with electricity and plumbing, are popular and sell for high prices. These houses are lived in for centuries, and are cost effective due to their longevity. Factoring the building costs and alterations compared to the cost of 45-year old council homes being demolished then rebuilt, the Georgian houses are many times cheaper per square foot. The Georgian house exemplifies a financial saving and aesthetic superiority over social housing, as the soundness of its construction has meant it hasn’t needed to be rebuilt over the centuries.

Surely affordable and social housing will have to be pulled down much sooner than is desirable?

Homes in the New City should be designed so that they can be modified into larger properties. The wall between two small bedrooms should not be structural. Likewise the party wall between the living rooms of two terraced houses would be cheap to demolish, so two small houses could be combined and enlarged.

19

It would be ideal to build houses that would still be desirable and usable in centuries to come. We must design reasonably large houses, as people aspire to buy three or four bedroom homes.

INDUSTRIALISED HOUSINGThe first country to offer mass-produced prefabricated

houses on an industrial scale will be hugely prosperous. Housing represents half the total capital in the world. In the Sixties, many people spoke of industrialised housing, but it has not been produced on any notable scale.

In Holland they are using “pop up” housing, pre-assembled in factories, to make high spec modular homes, which could last for 60 years, as starter homes for people making their first steps on the property ladder. The pre-fabricated units cost half as much to build, and are much quicker to construct compared to traditional houses, and can be customised to the area they will occupy. They are currently being used in Mitcham, South West London, as affordable social housing, in response to overwhelming demand for reasonable rental accommodation in the capital.

A complete lightweight house, ready made in a factory, composed of expanded polystyrene (insulation), Laminate Veneer Lumber (structure), Oriented Strand Board also known as Flakeboard (wind bracing and airtightness), in the case of the French Pop Up House Company, might be an affordable option. The 60-year life span of these pre-assembled houses is a little underwhelming, and it is to be hoped that future generations of pre-assembled houses will last more than 100 years to make them a more viable proposition.

Prefabrication need not be a synonym for bad architecture, but one does have to promote the architect above the engineer and surveyor in the design team.

20

INNOVATIVE HOMES & DELIVERY OPTIONS

Today it is difficult to find a single site, particularly in London, on which to build one’s own home. A small part of the New City should be allocated to self-building projects.

Fully qualified architects should be allowed to build their own houses without requiring planning permission, providing they live in them for 20 years. People might want to copy an architect’s innovative and superior design, and reduce the cost of housing in the future. Self-build groups of workers should be encouraged, and lent money to construct homes too.

Pre-assembled houses might not be deliverable by road, as some roads are too narrow, and some bridges are too low. Airships currently in development could be piloted remotely, to carry 20-ton loads, and reach plots in the city with tricky access, as well as remote areas, so they could be utilised to transport houses to developing nations or disaster zones.

The ability to assemble thousands of ready-made houses provides an opportunity to be the first manufacturer in the world to deliver complete new houses by airship. Additionally, flat-pack houses could be delivered to other European countries. After all, airships no longer require inflammable gas, and they are now very safe.

CHOICE OF ARCHITECTURAL IDEAS & BEAUTY

There should be architectural competitions evaluated on aesthetic merits, and judged by fellow architects, to find the creators of New Cities. It is important that new buildings should be more beautiful. Aesthetics can also make money. If the New City is pleasing on the eye, there will be more visitors.

Often the outside beauty of a house and front garden is more important to the casual passer-by than the owner.

21

Even if the architect’s ideas are challenging, I do not think town planners should dictate to them. The judges should live in their judgement areas, and interact with fellow residents on aesthetic ideas.

LONDON’S SEVERE SHORTAGE OF HOUSES

London houses are twice as expensive as elsewhere in the UK, and the continued buoyancy of house prices firmly indicate that homes are most needed in the capital and its immediate surroundings.

As recently as 2015, London’s population surpassed the previous peak of 1939. The National House Building Council registered 25,994 new homes in London in 2015, indicating total planned construction of about 31,200 dwellings. London construction remains far below the 42,000 new homes a year set

out in the London Housing Strategy in 2014. The population is increasing by 400,000 a year, many of whom are migrants wanting to live in London. The population is projected to be over 71 million in 2035, increasing from 65.4 million currently.

More than 800,000 new homes need to be built in London by 2021 to keep up with housing demand, according to London Councils, the body that represents 33 London local authorities.

“The increasing demand for housing is putting pressure on our cities, the growth and prosperity which is strangled by urban containment policies that were introduced nearly 70 years ago.” Tom Papworth wrote in the Adam Smith Institute research group report. “Green belts also have significant negative effects in human welfare, pushing up accommodation costs, reducing private space, increasing house price volatility and increasing the cost of business.”

London’s future expansion need not impoverish the city, put undue pressure on the infrastructure, or cause chaotic sprawl,

22

if it is correctly planned. New Cities should be designed as closely linked sister cities for London.

People often desire to build on the edge of an existing town or village, thus adding to the sense of sprawl and encroaching into the surrounding countryside. This should be judged on a case-by-case basis, but is generally to be discouraged, as large-scale developments are clearly required.

The McKinsey Global Institute estimates the top 600 global cities will contain 20% of the global population, but contribute 60% to global GDP in 2025. Currently London generates 22% of the UK’s GDP, but accounts for only 12.5% of the UK population.

HOUSING DENSITIES London is desperately short of decently sized

accommodation and needs to build homes equal in size to European ones! Average number of rooms per person in 2011.

(Bathrooms and kitchens are not counted)

In 1911, one room per person was the average in the UK. In 2011, it was 2.25 rooms.

The floor space per capita for the UK is 33 sq. metres, 65 sq. metres in Germany, and 77 sq. metres in the USA, and we fair poorly in comparison with our European neighbours.

Terrace houses have very narrow gardens, which should not be the norm. New cities in the Green Belt can be built at lower densities to provide larger gardens that will give occupiers

23

London 1.88 East Midlands West Midlands

2.42.2.29

North East North West

2.30 2.35

East of England 2.33

Yorkshire & Humber

2.35 South East South West

2.33 2.44

space to enlarge their home, so many generations can keep making use of the property.

CREATING CITY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATIONS

It is important that the British Public is allowed to vote for or against building on Green Belt land. Local District Councils should not have control of their area of Green Belt, such that it is impossible to build new cities. A referendum will address whether the Green Belt concept should be fundamentally changed to allow strategic development of housing on protected sites. Localized plebiscites would specifically address developments of Green Belts areas within a thirty-mile radius of the voter. Garden Cities would be a popular solution to overcrowding in the South East. It would be cheaper to buy land for affordable housing schemes if it purchased on a large scale.

The Government should create a new department entirely devoted to overseeing the creation of new housing in the London Metropolitan Green Belt, as there is no forum for long-term strategic planning for large developments. The Government has been unsuccessful in tackling the shortfall in housing.

A new City Development Corporation must be set up for each proposed city, with fiscal power to manage its construction, and work with the Government as a part private, part public scheme. It should be spearheaded by a leading architectural practice that is successful, innovative and has imaginative staff. The City Development Corporation should have the right to acquire land either by agreement or compulsory purchase, and it could sell on land to private developers. It should also be able to grant and revoke planning permission, and develop infrastructure that will later pass into public ownership.

City Development Corporations should seek to recruit architects, planners, landscape designers, builders, technology

24

experts, financial experts and anyone with specialist knowledge who could contribute to the success of the projects.

THE ECONOMICS OF A NEW CITY There are five key phases in a New City’s successful

implementation: -

1. The government to allow building on the Green Belt, thereby reducing its debts by building many more cities.

2. To persuade landowners to sell their land.3. The enablement of developers and builders to create

large-scale projects, which would reduce the number of unemployed and stimulate the economy.

4. Designers to be encouraged to build beautiful buildings to encourage a quick and active take up of the new properties.

5. The City Development Corporation to take responsibility for running the city, so that they can build better schools, roads and green spaces.

If slightly over 400,000 homes were built with the attendant infrastructure like schools, roads, parks etc. for one million inhabitants, and sold for average price of £500,000, the profit could be over £30 billion, if the builders and the City Development Corporation are permitted a moderate 15% profit on construction (which is slightly below current profit level attained by large construction firms). Some of the profits should be reserved for further development and infrastructure of cities, so they don’t stagnate like the botched handling of the later wave of New Towns in the Sixties.

House prices would be affordable for young professional buyers, as residences would be considerably cheaper than their London counterparts. The houses would be sufficiently big that the owners could convert some rooms into a flat to be let out to

25

tenants. When circumstances changed, e.g. having a family or looking after elderly relatives, the flat could be reincorporated with the house. Standard housing should give owners the ability to change the configuration or extend the property according to their needs. This flexibility would allow residents to stay in the same home for the whole of their lives. Social housing makes no such allowance for the owners’ changing needs.

If the Government seeks to economise, it should avoid choosing land with planning permission wherever possible, because it could add significant costs to a development. 92% of Britain is undeveloped. The Agricultural Land Market Survey conducted by Savills in 2017 valued the Britain’s 39.8 million acres of farmland at £185.7 – equivalent to just 3% of the total value of GB’s housing stock, which is worth £6.69 trillion.

RESEARCH INTO SALEABILITYA survey of two hundred square miles in the eastern part

of the London Metropolitan Green Belt is required, to discover what proportion of landlords would be interested in selling their land, in what time frame, and at what price.

The local City Development Corporation in partnership with the Government should send letters to every agricultural landowner, requiring them to fill in a form. The missive would show current local land prices, and would give them a choice of sale prices at 20%, 30%, 40% above the price of their undeveloped land, and offer 10% above the market price of their house, with a waiver of Stamp Duty on all sales. The letter will state that low asking prices will influence which area will be chosen for the New Garden City by developers, who will buy in one or two years time. This will affect the size, shape and position of the first New Garden City.

Theoretically, if the property had a large acreage, the owners could remain in their house with a reduced garden and sell off the bulk of their land, with a choice of three months or

26

one year’s delay, or total refusal (which could lead to compulsory purchase). The Government would not guarantee to buy.

All employees and individuals working in the area whose jobs are affected by the compulsory purchase of land should be offered an option of construction skills training so they could benefit from the building project.

Annual profits of 15% should be regarded as reasonable for the building firms, providing that the roads and footpaths etc. were completed on time, and the construction of the housing was good.

The Government should announce that it has the power to purchase by compulsion approximately one tenth of the London Metropolitan Green Belt land, at 10% above the present price. The area considered should be sufficient for over 1 million residents.

The City Development Corporation and The Government would explain to owners of land in the Eastern Green Belt that they are looking for an area in which the land is cheap, and that is the area they are most likely to buy. This might persuade some landowners to sell, especially if they are given rights to buy farmland elsewhere, and be given the right to build a new house etc. on land (including Green Belt land) elsewhere, without needing local planning permission. Nationally, an acre of farmland in 2013 cost £6,882, however in the South East it was £10,300.

In the first instance, the Government only needs to know quickly from everyone who owns more than half an acre if and when they will be willing to sell. Where possible, existing houses in streets should not be purchased. It is impossible to design the parts of the new city until it is known which areas will delay public availability. Because the developers will not be building on 25% of the land, as this will be used for green spaces within the city, it may not matter if one or two small areas are not utilised straight away.

27

I suggest at least three built up areas are started in the first three years all over the UK.

Those that have ordinary sized houses with small gardens will be allowed to remain, especially if they are bunched with other houses, which would be desirable to retain.

With separate footpaths and driverless cars, the New City could become more desirable than London, and more profitable.

By David Hyde Harrison, Architect

33 Murray Mews, Camden Square, London, NW1 9RH

0207 267 2179

07775865678

d.hydeharrison@blueyonder.co.uk

28