How Does Paradise Look Like?

Or How Should It Look Like?

London has a walk score of 100 out of 100. Beautiful streets, benches everywhere, and a brilliant transit network. I’m positive there’s a tube station on the moon. They call it a ‘walker’s paradise’.

To understand what that means, I’ve talked with Mr. Michael Edwards (1) and Dr. Robin Hickman (2)from The Bartlett School of Planning, Faculty of the Built Environment. In Urban Design Group, I’ve interviewed Mr. Paul Reynolds (3). Also, I’ve met Dr. Michael E. Leary-Owhin, who has an international reputation in the fields of urban planning, urban theory, and regeneration.

It seems that paradise is not a bad place. Still, it has failures. In the case of London, there’s a mix of expensive dwelling and unnecessary car usage. Highly-priced housing in the center pushes low and middle-income people to the suburbs. Once there, an inefficient transit network forces them to own cars to move around. Of course, there are those who live in outer London and drive because they fancy that lifestyle.

Despite its high levels of walkability, the streets of London could be better. For example, there are not as many pedestrianized areas as there could be. Photo credit: Jennifer Micó

Why People Live in the Suburbs?

Either they like it or they have no choice.

What people like about living in the suburbs? They get bigger houses for a lower price, in less crowded areas. No air nor noise pollution. They feel safe and they share this nature enthusiasm. Some reasons might be acceptable. Some surbanites think that cities haven’t changed since the Industrial Revolution took place.

But things did change. Not only the streets don’t stink as they used to, but also cities are greener. Larger populations are cleaner and more energy-efficient. Urban households have fewer CO2 emissions than those in the suburbs.

Before 1858, the River Thames was the final destination of sewage and waste. One of the unfortunate witnesses was the English scientist, M. Faraday. He depicted the scenario quite vividly: ‘Near the bridges, the feculence rolled up in clouds so dense that they were visible at the surface even in water of this kind. The smell was very bad and common to the whole of the water (…) Having just returned from the country air, I was perhaps more affected by it than others (…) There is nothing figurative in the words I have employed or any approach to exaggeration. They are the simple truth’. ‘Faraday giving his card to Father Thames’, Cartoon from Punch Magazine, Volume 29 Page 26; 21 July 1855. Photo credit: Wikimedia Commons.

Not everybody minds the nature connectedness. Some people live in the suburbs because they can’t afford an apartment in the city. ‘The fundamental problems which make London such a big generator of poverty, as well as wealth, is about the ownership of land and housing and the stock of housing,’ explains Mr. Michael Edwards. ‘The growth of incomes among high-income people hugely increase housing demand. Rich people push up against the available stock and nice places. This drives the prices up and rents. What appears to be rather a rich city on average is actually a city of, if you like, low and middle-income people working really hard to enrich the other half of the population.’

What about the existing unoccupied housing in cities like London? ‘There’s a lot of argument about whether we have a lot of empty housing, in a way we can’t agree,’ start Mr. Edwards. ‘The official position is that the vacancy of housing is rather low: there’s only 2% or something empty. You need a little bit of empty housing so the market can work. It’s not a big problem. But also there are campaigners and activists arguing that there’s an enormous amount of empty housing, and this can solve a lot of problems. I tend to keep out of those arguments.’

‘The heart of the matter is the definition of ‘empty housing’, at least in London. You buy an apartment. Only if it’s completely unfurnished, meaning you can’t live in it really, you can apply to your municipality to have it classified as empty. In that case, Mr. Michael Edwards adds, ‘you don’t pay any property tax. That’s the source of some of the statistics. But actually, very few people do that. So I think that’s partly why the statistics suggest a low percentage. But if you furnish the flat and perhaps use it once a year, or occasionally when you visit London, or when you are in London on business, then it comes as occupied, legally but actually, it’s hardly used at all’. Photo credit: Icons8

Better integrated suburbs. According to Mr. Paul Reynolds, Urban Design Group Secretary, the situation in the suburbs could be different. ‘We don’t choose the best sites, we choose the least worst. The tendency is to develop sites next to the motorway rather than, ideally, next to town centers and facilities. The system is such that you ask people where they wanna build.’

Eco-friendly houses have solar panels and rainwater tanks. Owners of such places grow their own microgreens and they are proud to stay warm with no heating system. ‘They are trying their best to reduce the environmental impact but still, the majority of people are going to use their cars. For example, where’s the nearest school?’ — Urban Design Group Secretary, Mr. Paul Reynolds. Photo credit: The Independent

Is Affordable Housing Possible in the Center of London?

Yes, it is. ‘Part of any solution is got to be to stop the constant escalation of prices of housing,’ says Mr. Michael Edwards. He also explains how precise aspects could improve the current situation.

One of the factors is the pension system. If people know they are going to have a reasonably good income in retirement, they won’t need to speculate and invest in housing.

‘We also have to address a lot of tax arrangements’, continues Mr. Edwards. ‘Today, it privileges the ownership of land and buildings. It’s an incentive on people to own bigger houses, to have second houses. They can pass along their children and use it as an accumulation capital without paying taxes. So there are a lot of tax changes to be made.’

Finally, Mr. Michael Edwards talks about city planning. ‘I think the obvious way is to do more social housing, outside the market. We had great struggles to try to encourage the London Plans to be very demanding about social housing, not very successfully. And each urban regeneration project tends to reduce this stock of land and housing.’

Today, about 60% of Vienna’s population lives in affordable housing units. Photo credit: Official channel of the Vienna Tourist Board

There’s a lot to do. In the meantime, any project to enhance the walkability will help too. An appealing and safe center will lure enthusiast suburbanites into the city life.

Two Reasons Why People Own Cars

Lack of walkability

‘One of the reasons that the cities of the 19th century and part of the 20th century were very good places to live is that you could walk everywhere.’ Dr. Michael Leary-Owhin says the lack of walkability is a problem that came afterward. ‘When we were children, in the 1960s, we used to walk or cycle, as did our parents and grandparents, virtually everywhere. In the area where we lived, very few people had cars. So, we walked to school, we walked to the shops, we walked to the doctor, we walked to the hospital, we walked to the dentists, we walked to the library. And crucially, people walked to work or they got a bus to work.’

Lowry, Laurence Stephen. Waiting for the Shop to Open. 1943. The English artist said ‘A street is not a street without people’. In his paintings, each character is different. They belong to the working class and they are depicted going or leaving work. Photo credit: King & McGaw.

Marge books holidays to a bird sanctuary but the family finally goes to Scratchy & Itchy Land. No visitor, the Simpsons’ included, arrived at the theme park walking. In the parking lot, there’s even helicopter. Any similarity with fictitious events might not be purely coincidental. The Simpsons’, season 6, episode 107, 1994. Photo credit: Fandom

In his answer, Dr. Leary-Owhin mentioned various reasons why people used to walk. ‘Partly because they couldn’t afford a car or a motorbike, or even a bicycle; partly because the things they needed in life were close by, particularly work, shops, the school, the hospital, the police station, the pub’.

Afterward, the situation became just the opposite. ‘Once you can afford a car, even if it’s half a mile, you’ll drive.’ With vehicles, people can live further from work, school, shop. ‘It’s only 5 minutes in the car. 5 minutes in the car is half an hour of walking. It’s taken 70 years to get into this lack of walkability. So, switching our own to creating walkable cities is a long way project. People need to realize that it might take 50 years of sustained effort to create cities where people walk as much as they did 50 years ago.’

A Status Symbol

The use of cars is not only seen in terms of urban but also social mobility. In many societies, vehicles are still associated with a luxurious lifestyle. The paradigm shift to a walkable city will partly consist in modifying this perception.

‘In London, they’ve been talking about pedestrianizing Oxford Street for about 30 years. That’s the main shopping street in London. There’s hundreds of buses. It’s like just a bus traffic jam. Why you need so many buses going down Oxford Street?’ — Dr. Michael Leary-Owhin. Oxford Street, London 2019. Photo credit: Jennifer Micó

Getting Rid of Cars

Dr. Robin Hickman explains different approaches to decrease vehicle use.

A better transit network in the suburban areas would replace the car commutes. Some people drive to the nearest transit station in another suburban area. ‘There’s not so much public transport. So, it’s a matter of forcing people. If they want to work, which everybody has to — or most people have to -, they have to use the car because public transport is not great.’

Cycling is key to shorter trips. ‘Cycling should be massively developed in the next 2 or 3 years. But on current progress, that will take 20 or 30 years to get a good network. It’s much too slow. We know that every great city has a good cycling network. It has many advantages for individuals and society as a whole. But that’s not in the transport strategy at the moment.’ Dr. Hickman agrees that the London Plan’s transport strategy is fabulous but he believes it could be a lot more progressive.

Monetary incentives might be less healthy than cycling but just as effective. ‘Congestion charging in London, it’s being a great success. Those schemes are critical in all big cities and they should be developed in all big cities. For sure, congestion charging is a good first step, but it’s also been there for years. All the cities are being more progressive now. In Madrid and Paris, for example, they are banning the cars from the center. We can do that. London’s got brilliant public transport so it should be possible to not have any car usage in the center. There’s no need for an individual to use a private car in central London.’

Car owners have to pay a daily charge for driving within the charging zone from 7 am to 6 pm, Monday to Friday. Photo credit: Transport for London.

Developing the transit’s infrastructure won’t be enough. To improve London’s walkability, a change in mentality is crucial. That might be one big challenge. In this sense, city vehicles are not different from cigarets. They are both bad for our health and potentially harmful to others. They are equally unnecessary and addictive. Depending on the brand, they’ll make us look wealthy. Also, we feel sexy with them (no matter how false that can be).

We need to modify what we think of cars. Perhaps, we need to copy the tobacco playbook to discourage the use of automobiles. A cocktail of health campaigns and prohibitive prices. No more movies with cars and Ryan Gosling would help as well.

Ryan Gosling playing an unnamed mechanic in Drive (2011). Photo credit: Complex, media platform

Finally, a better design would do wonders to reduce car usage. ‘There’s sort of a classic joke in America’, starts Dr. Robin Hickman, ‘when people say “You know what’s public transport? It’s ‘something that I drive to.” And that just sums up public transport in American cities. Not all, but mostly they are all like that. They have not thought the walking environment around the station or there’s not enough sufficient density.’

Suburbs Going Micr-urbs

There’s one final question. Should there be more workplaces in the suburbs?

Maybe not. The UN estimates the urban population will grow up to 68% by 2050. Rather than expanding the city center, planners may focus on the shrinking suburbs. With density in mind, more affordable housing seems a logical move. That’ll keep low and middle-income people near to their city-center jobs.

Endnotes

(1) Mr. Michael Edwards works on the relationship between property markets and planning. Active on London planning. Leverhulme Emeritus Fellowship focused on the land and housing crisis in the UK, working with Bob Colenutt (University of Northampton). This work led to a major report on the prospects for housing, land, and rents in UK cities, part of the Foresight Future of Cities program of the Government Office for Science.

(2) Dr. Robin Hickman is Director of the MSc in Transport and City Planning and coordinates/lectures on various courses. He has authored and contributed to a number of policy research studies concerning sustainable transport and urban structure and travel. He has also project managed and contributed to numerous transport planning projects and masterplanning projects.

(3) Mr. Paul Reynolds. Consultant — Urban design & landscape architecture. He is currently honorary secretary of the Urban Design Group having chaired the executive committee between 2012–2014.