As part of the seminar series hosted by LSE London and Progressing Planning, we invited Alan Mace and Joe Russell for a session under the title “When we build on the Green Belt”. LSE’s own Alan Mace, along with colleagues, produced an influential piece of work on “A 21st Century Metropolitan Green Belt” in 2016.  Joe Russell, a recent architecture graduate and winner of the AJ Student Prize 2022 at UCL’s Barrett School of Architecture, was inspired by the recommendations set out in the report and integrated them into a visual approach that challenges current architectural practice in imagining what acceptable Green Belt developments might look like going forward. Mace and Russell came together to ask important questions on how we might start to think about Green Belt developments in a more strategic manner.

Alan began by giving an overview of the Metropolitan Green Belt: a protected area where development is banned or strictly limited to prevent urban sprawl.  Designated in the 1930s, and expanded under Abercrombie’s 1944 Greater London Plan, it circles the Greater London Area and is around three times its size. Some of the Green Belt is located inside London and takes up 22% of its land mass. Moreover, much of the Green Belt was designated before London’s jurisdictions were reshaped in 1964, and rather than checking unrestricted urban sprawl, it now stops London from joining itself up along its edges internally. Local authorities have the capacity to authorise building through ad-hoc reviews under “exceptional circumstances”. However, the unprecedented housing crisis, the high demand for land supply and the piecemeal development already taking place on the Green Belt has prompted scholars such as Mace et al. (2016) to cautiously contemplate a coordinated, strategic approach to its future evolution.

Figure 1: The Metropolitan Greenbelt

The Green Belt as an institution has garnered strong support from local people, politicians and central government. Safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and preserving the setting and special character of historic towns, is firmly tied to Britain’s identity as a rural nation. Furthermore, defenders of the designated area, such as the Council for the Preservation of Rural England (CPRE), highlight the opportunity to reinforce urban regeneration within London itself by recycling brownfield land and increasing density within the city. Nevertheless, certain local authorities on the Green Belt have drafted plans to release land and many developers have obtained property options on land that has the potential to be de-designated. Alan therefore cautioned that any attempt to alter the current arrangement should be nuanced and supported by strong caveats that would address issues such as effectively capturing the uplift in land value to benefit the existing communities in Green Belt areas. An integrated approach that prioritises affordable housing, density optimisation, transport links, employment and the environment was recommended by Mace and his colleagues.

Once the scene was set, Joe Russell took the floor to present his architectural response to “A 21st Century Metropolitan Green Belt”, namely his final year project that set out to reformulate practice and question the status quo of house building in London. Primarily concerned with the delivery of affordable housing, he chose to centre his development on the Green Belt, at a site that matched the criteria laid out by Mace and his colleagues in their recommendations for potential builds in the protected area – most notably  that  “development should be around stations…within co-ordination corridors”. Joe therefore selected a site across from Oakwood station to guarantee transport links for his imagined community. The site is also ½ mile away from the newly built Trent Park executive housing development where properties are going for £750 000 to £2 500 000. He called his site Oakwood Mews, a new car-free housing scheme complete with an enormous community centre open to both new and existing residents.

Figure 2: Joe Russell’s rendering of Oakwood Mews

In order to promote the notion of circularity, Joe took advantage of the planned demolition of the Cockfosters depot located just 250 metres from his site to create a material catalogue that could be re-used to salvage 725 000 tonnes of embodied carbon. For example, reclaimed steel beams would form the basis of the development’s foundations. Meanwhile, the abundance of brick in the depot allowed him to incorporate brick footings, popular in the Victorian period. Moreover, he took a localised approach by sourcing the remainder of his material within a 3-400 metre radius: theoretically, timber could be gleaned from the woodland next door, while straw bail in nearby arable fields could be used to thatch roofs and insulate the housing scheme.

Figure 3: Joe Russell’s rendering of Oakwood Mews

The affordable housing scheme would contain 16-20 medium density 1-3 bedroom homes each with its own garden. Simple but smart in design, the interiors promoted the idea of living well within one’s means. For instance, a 3- bedroom two-storey home would cover 12 000 square feet. Joe highlighted that there is often a misconception that affordable housing should not be held to the same standards in terms of quality and design. He wished to provide truly liveable spaces for the new community. After all, a focus group led by Mace and colleagues revealed that people may be more willing to build on the Green Belt if it is for affordable housing.

Figure 4: Joe Russell’s rendering of household interiors at Oakwood Mews

When the floor was opened for questions, it was clear that the presentation had provoked important reflections on how we might build on the Green Belt. Several participants were concerned about how best to optimise densification, while others were curious about the deconstruction process and the operational factors to take into account in such a re-use scheme. Those with a planning background also highlighted the need to consider suitable  infrastructure in Green Belt developments. Finally, participants agreed that such conversations are indispensable if we are to move toward a coordinated strategy for building on the Green Belt.

References:

Mace, Alan, Blanc, Fanny, Gordon, Ian R. and Scanlon, Kath (2016) A 21st century metropolitan green belt. HEIF (5). The London School of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.