What is a ‘competitive return’ to a landowner? Parkhurst Road and the new UK planning policy environment

Crosby, Neil; Wyatt, Peter

doi:10.1080/09599916.2019.1690028

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Due to the lack of affordable housing across London, it has become common practice for certain local authorities to accept the delivery of additional affordable units by developers as part of their contribution paid back to planning. Contributions from landowners in terms of affordable units are the result of a process of negotiation based on several rounds of financial viability appraisals undertaken by the developer (Crosby & Wyatt 2019). Viability appraisal particularly reflects a predominantly finance-driven approach with landowners and developers, rather than positioning communities as the primary beneficiary of densification processes (Sayce et al 2017).…”

Section: Creating Financial Value: Developers Investors and Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning for residential ‘value’? London’s densification policies and impacts

Livingstone

Fiorentino

Short

2021

Buildings and Cities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Section: Creating Financial Value: Developers Investors and Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning for residential ‘value’? London’s densification policies and impacts

Livingstone

Fiorentino

Short

2021

Buildings and Cities

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, attempts to include less affluent households into home-ownership instead often result in higher property prices (Aalbers 2008). Policy targets for affordable housing in new developments are fought with accounting, political, and judicial strategies, as is now a well-documented occurrence around London (Crosby & Wyatt, 2019;Wainwright, 2015). Such practical hinderances to policy ideas and implementation indicate how economic, legal, and political power influence the materialization of inclusive urban policies.…”

Section: Academic Discourse Regarding Inclusivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Inclusivity insights: two urban development projects in Johannesburg

Hofer

Musakwa

Lanen

et al. 2021

J Hous and the Built Environ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Johannesburg, which is South Africa’s largest city and economic center, is still influenced by patterns of inequality of the past. Although spatial transformation has been rapid since 1994, spatial divisions along class lines are still prevalent long after the apartheid era. This is despite the fact that societal values such as inclusivity, spatial justice and equal access to resources have become the core goals of Johannesburg’s spatial and urban development. This is particularly true when addressing housing, public open spaces, transport and social infrastructure embedded in a suitable land-use mix. However, despite the adoption of numerous policies by government, this research indicates that even recent urban development projects such as Fleurhof and Waterfall are falling short in delivering those objectives. Based on a case study analysis, we show that significant dysfunctionalities become evident when evaluating these two projects, despite their meeting relevant indicators of spatial inclusion on paper. Tensions are identified between theoretical approaches and the implementation of societally relevant policy goals. These include inclusivity and spatial justice by mostly privatized provision of housing and services, and deficiencies in public maintenance of infrastructure. The research reveals, that ‘ticking-the-boxes’ behavior on policy and project level does not produce equitable, inclusive neighborhoods and urban spatial patterns, but rather reproduces spatial inequalities of the past. If these policies are to result in real spatial change and improvement in the lives of Johannesburg residents, a more proactive approach by the public sector at different levels will be necessary.

show abstract

“…For local authorities this is usually the result of a discretionary planning process where authorities extract negotiated contributions through the mechanism of planning obligations -Section Typically, through these mechanisms developers indirectly contribute towards local amenities, infrastructure and affordable housing units. However, contributions are the result of a process of negotiation based on several rounds of financial viability appraisals undertaken by the developer (Crosby & Wyatt, 2019).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Financialisation and urban densification: London and Manchester’s niche student housing markets

Fiorentino¹,

Livingstone²,

Short³

2021

Regions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In global cities, densification processes have frequently emerged as a rapid response to housing provision and longer-term urban sustainability. This Spotlight article discusses the wider implications of financialisation through densification processes, and specifically considers developments providing student accommodation, as an under-researched element of the UK's housing market. We focus on 'Purpose Built Student Accommodation' (PBSA), drawing on evidence from London and Manchester. PBSA is framed as an alternative dimension of densification, one which is increasingly providing avenues for financialisation, and we use this piece as a provocation for further research on the topic.'Densification' can be challenging to define due to subjective and myriad perspectives on how 'density' is understood. Adopted approaches in urban areas are frequently the cause of controversy. Densifying urban land can be construed as a sustainable approach to perpetuating the 'compact city', which encourages efficiency in managing resources such as land, energy and materials (Breheny, 1996) and can lead to the 'creation of successful places' (Tiesdell & Adams, 2012: 60). However, on the more negative flip side of this perspective, densification can be seen to split local communities, encourage gentrification and housing unaffordability (Immergluck & Balan, 2018), as a means of profit extraction for the developers and investors. So, does increasing density lead to increasing trends of so-called financialisation? Processes of financialisation -as a product of neoliberalism -reflect the dynamics of finance in contemporary capitalism, and can be defined as 'the increasing dominance of financial actors, markets, practices, measurements and narratives at various scales, resulting in a structural transformation of economies, states and households' (Aalbers, 2017: 544).Literature on financialisation has highlighted the way the phenomenon has led to an inflation of housing prices, an oversupply of buildings and the deregulation of planning from the public to the private sector (Weber, 2015). Ultimately, such processes have undermined the essential right of providing houses and shelter to the wider population, that are intended as affordable places to live in relation to average wages and costs of living.Notably less explored is the growth of private student housing facilities in the last decade, which actively contribute to densifying our city spaces, as land has been developed to provide for the burgeoning growth of student numbers in England across its largest cities: London and Manchester. Is densification through PBSA supporting processes of finanicialisation in the UK? Although PBSA serves a key purpose in providing temporary accommodation for students, as an asset it is an alternative type of housing, and a niche investment sector, which has become increasingly attractive to institutional investors in the last decade. It reflects a type of densification in cities which has received little scrutiny in terms of impact on investors, o...

show abstract

What is a ‘competitive return’ to a landowner? Parkhurst Road and the new UK planning policy environment

Cited by 6 publications

References 21 publications

Planning for residential ‘value’? London’s densification policies and impacts

Planning for residential ‘value’? London’s densification policies and impacts

Inclusivity insights: two urban development projects in Johannesburg

Financialisation and urban densification: London and Manchester’s niche student housing markets

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About