Centre for Cities tomorrow (Thursday) publishes research
comparing the densities of UK cities with counterparts in two
other G7 countries, France and Japan, revealing the size of
Britain's urban density gap.
Key findings and recommendations:
- There would be 2.3m more homes in British cities if they were
built at density similar to cities in France or Japan
- Large cities outside of London are responsible for half of
the gap: Manchester has at least 236,000 fewer homes than Lyon,
and Birmingham 228,000 fewer homes than Fukuoka (see table below)
- London is responsible for a further quarter of the density
gap
- The gap is widening: British big cities added roughly half
the number of homes across their urban cores in the
2010s than French and Japanese big cities
- British cities' key missing component is mid-rise (4-9
storey) housing: mixed neighbourhoods of mid-rise flats and
houses are key to the higher overall urban densities in
France and Japan
Low density compared to large cities in France and Japan
means several large British cities have a density gap of over
200,000 homes in their urban core:
|
City
|
Density (dwellings per hectare) in urban
core
|
Japan/France peer city
|
Peer city density
|
Density gap (additional homes if built at peer
city density)
|
|
London
|
42
|
Paris
|
52
|
492,000
|
|
Manchester
|
24
|
Lyon
|
54
|
236,000
|
|
Birmingham
|
21
|
Fukuoka
|
51
|
228,000
|
|
Leeds
|
19
|
Marseille
|
52
|
250,000
|
|
Glasgow
|
26
|
Lille
|
34
|
67,000
|
|
Liverpool
|
27
|
Sendai
|
35
|
48,000
|
|
Sheffield
|
20
|
Kitakyushi
|
32
|
95,000
|
|
Newcastle
|
21
|
Toulouse
|
33
|
91,000
|
|
Bristol
|
26
|
Nantes
|
31
|
31,000
|
|
Nottingham
|
20
|
Takasaki
|
26
|
39,000
|
Sources: OECD; Centre for Cities international residential
densities dataset.
So, closing the national urban density gap means prioritising big
cities, and primarily Manchester, Birmingham, Leeds and London.
Moving to a flexible zoning system would best support
densification in big cities. Within the current planning system,
Government should target bold, pro-density versions of its
planned reforms of planning committees, Brownfield Passports and
site-threshold rules.
The report also recommends:
- More effective and widespread use of existing tools – e.g.
Local Development Orders, Mayoral Development Orders, design
guides
- Expanding public sector intervention to tackle larger sites
that require public sector land assembly, remediation and
coordination
- Higher rates of demolition and redevelopment in low-density
areas of cities' urban cores to increase the supply of mid-rise
housing and make efficient use of existing urban land
Notes
-
Methodology – Centre for Cities compares
density in cities in Britain, France and Japan using data on
floorspace, calculated using census, survey, administrative and
satellite data. Density estimates exclude non-residential areas
including large parks, golf courses, commercial and industrial
areas.
-
Geography – Analysis for ‘Flat Britain'
compares cities' urban cores – the parts of cities that are
mostly housing. Urban cores cover a much larger area than
the city centre, but exclude outer suburbs and commuter
towns.