Abstract
This paper considers the agency and influence of planning processes and densification policies on urban landscapes in London. Urban transformation through residential densification can bring opportunities for real estate development, combined with longer term investment and financial gains for local authorities through planning gain. However, the measurements and indicators used to define density and its impacts could be better understood both objectively and subjectively through the lens of an extended notion of ‘value’. Such experiences of density can be viewed bluntly as positive or negative. This research investigates nuanced dimensions of density and adopts a primarily qualitative approach, reflecting on relevant literature and wider policy context through a discourse analysis relating to densification in London. The idea of elements of ‘value’ is explored and evaluated in ongoing developments through a detailed case study of Nine Elms, London. Quantitative data on the residential real estate market is used to illustrate investment flows. Conclusions consider best practice policy recommendations in relation to understandings of ‘value’. Policy relevance Lessons from London indicate how densification can be a viable option for both urban policy makers and practitioners when approaches adopt a flexible governance and planning approach, embedded in local context. Densification processes in planning and governance should be regularly reviewed and reconsidered in line with broader national and city-wide policies, optimising rather than maximising density. Both subjective and objective measurements should be accounted for, by reflecting on broad and informed indicators. The value created by densification processes should be the result of a weighted and broader assessment of variables: economic, social, and place-specific considerations. However, the often antagonistic, ambiguous nature of density and its application needs to be recognised by policy makers, regulators and actively involved parties (planners, developers, investors) to contribute to the creation of successful places.
Highlights
One contemporary similarity emerging from global cities such as New York, Toronto and London is the experience of housing crises under neoliberalism, where access to affordable housing is uneven, urban space is at a premium and residential property has undergone processes of financialisation (Aalbers 2016)
Considering the weight of capital invested in residential real estate globally and the drive towards greater efficiency in smarter, more compact cities (Breheny 1996), densification processes have emerged as an apparent solution to multilayered crises of space, housing and sustainability
This paper explores residential densification, assessing the ongoing transformation of the Vauxhall, Nine Elms and Battersea (VNEB) Opportunity Area (OA) in London, by evaluating policy and planning positions, and the impact of development so far on the local housing market, from the perspective of ‘value’ creation
Summary
Urban built environments are continually in flux as they transform in line with fluid demographic, social, cultural, economic, environmental and governmental influences. Urban transformation through residential densification can be viewed as an opportunity for property-led development and longer term investment through processes of financialisation, considered to be: the increasing dominance of financial actors, markets, practices, measurements and narratives at various scales, resulting in a structural transformation of economies, states and households. Such development in financialised markets is often seen as problematic as developers seeking to maximise profits may produce negative impacts relating to housing affordability, gentrification and inequality (Immergluck & Balan 2018), even if financial contributions towards affordable housing and amenities are captured through the planning system. A key question is if ‘value’ is created through planning policies leading to residential densification, who is the ‘value’ created for? Just as densification impacts can be viewed as subjective, so to can the idea of producing and extracting ‘value’
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
