The struggle to untangle the Gordian knot that is London’s housing crisis looks as far from resolution as ever. Rocketing interest rates make raising a mortgage far more expensive than any time for 15 years, while the closing of the Government’s Help to Buy scheme — it was shut to new applicants late last year — knocks away one helpful property step-ladder for young buyers.
Meanwhile figures from Nationwide yesterday suggested prices may soon actually be rising again, while private renters struggle with ever increasing living costs, insecure tenancy agreements and gruelling competition to secure flats when they do become available.
So it was no real surprise to see survey results this week from developer Pocket Living suggesting that two out of three young Londoners — it polled 1,000 25 to 45-year-olds — would support development on the green belt if it led to a greater supply of more genuinely affordable housing.
The findings suggest that opening up the ring of heavily protected open land surrounding the capital to housebuilders — an option that would have been considered political suicide for most of the past 70 years — may soon be climbing up the mainstream agenda. Sir Keir Starmer has made it clear that green belt rules will be up for review if Labour get the keys to Downing Street.
But is putting spades in the ground in land that makes up 22 per cent of the total area in the capital genuinely going to make a meaningful difference in alleviating the capital’s acute homes shortage? Is it worth disrupting views and nature on a swathe of land that has stopped London sprawling into the leafy home counties?
Private renters struggle with ever increasing living costs
One thing is for sure — we certainly need more homes, but there is a limit to how much more densification on existing built-up land outer London can take. Close to my parents’ home in north London, 23 council homes are coming very near to two existing tower blocks. While it is good that more council stock is being built, the scheme will soon see more people living in what is already a very busy area.
So is it time to think the unthinkable and let bulldozers loose on the hallowed land of the green belt? Some experts think it has to be part of the mix.
JLL’s head of living research Nick Whitten says: “Around 12.6 per cent of land in England is green belt, which equates to 16,000sq km. If just 10 per cent of that 16,000sq km of land was released for housing development it is the equivalent of creating an area the size of Greater London. This could very well be a solution to the housing crisis.”
According to Andrew Carter, who leads research organisation Centre for Cities, the housebuilding crisis is so big in Britain “it’s not credible to suggest plans to address the crisis that don’t involve building on some of the green belt”.
The think tank estimates that by building on less than two per cent of the green belt we can add between 1.7 and 2.1 million homes around railway stations that are a reasonable commute away from the five biggest cities in England. This includes 1.1 million homes for London alone.
Those are compelling numbers. But any watering down of green belt restrictions would inevitably trigger an impassioned and well organised campaign from existing residents and bodies such as the Campaign to Protect Rural England.
Politicians who do advocate more building on the green belt — an institution that ranks alongside the NHS in the public’s esteem — would also be mindful of the outcome of the 2021 Chesham and Amersham by-election when the Tories were cast out of a hitherto safe seat in rural Buckinghamshire in a “shires revolt” over proposed planning reforms.
It may well make more sense to examine other less contentious options first such as whether under-used car parks within the M25 could make room for homes.
Also it remains to be demonstrated that homes built on the green belt would be any more affordable than those going up within London.
But the fact that the G-word is even being mentioned as an option for solving the housing crisis, and the scale of the majority of young people who would be happy to see the green belt built on, shows how the political winds are changing.
Unfortunately many young workers are giving up on London with the high cost of housing being the number one factor. The green belt has served our crowded island well since the Second World War, preventing the beautiful countryside that surrounds the capital from being covered in concrete. But we have to find enough homes to house the next generation, and not all of that land is picturesque.
The battlelines are being drawn in what will become another generational divide between the young who crave the security enjoyed by their parents — and older homeowners who want to protect and preserve the way of life they enjoy.
