Why Michael Gove supports street votes to densify our suburbs

COMMENT I’m tempted to believe that Michael Gove’s reputation for intellectually rigorous independent thinking augurs well for the future of planning reform. His predecessor might justifiably be accused of being seduced by siren voices of over-enthusiastic policy wonks with ideas, ultimately sinking out of sight on the rocks of realpolitik. But Gove seems to be his own man, taking his time to consider how to introduce radical proposals that, rather than losing by-elections, will instead go down well with the voters. The early signs are promising, as evidenced by his support for Policy Exchange’s “street votes” proposal. Debating upcoming reform, Gove said: “It is rare that we have legislation that combines greater democratic control with the potential for the beautification – for want of a better word – of our urban and suburban environment, and also unlocks the potential for the value of individuals’ homes to be enhanced by additional development. It is a triple whammy of good news.” Suburban supurbia If you don’t already know, street votes is an idea developed by Samuel Hughes and Ben Southwood of Policy Exchange influenced by HTA Design’s Supurbia project, which we have progressed for more than a decade at my practice. The essence of Supurbia is that suburban homeowners are given the opportunity to collaborate on the densification of their neighbourhoods by redeveloping semis, infilling gaps or building upwards on existing homes, particularly in locations with good public transport infrastructure. This will yield substantial suburban intensification, with the added benefit of development profits accruing to participating households. Street votes adopts this thinking, proposing democratic control for entire streets to decide on the potential densification of their homes. This way, Nimbys can be transformed into Yimbys and, by our calculations, existing suburban neighbourhoods can offer up substantial contributions to the additional homes needed to house the burgeoning growth in households. So why might street votes appeal to Gove? Remember, his department is not only responsible for finding a way of delivering the housing supply numbers in ways that do not infuriate the shires. He also has to see to it that the built environment makes an appropriate and proportionate contribution to meeting the climate crisis and, of course, the eponymous title of his ministry offers the final clue – how can he stimulate the levelling up of down-at-heel neighbourhoods without too much recourse to the Treasury? Pushing the problem away Urban and suburban intensification is an essential tool in addressing all of the above. All around the country, it’s not just town centres that are struggling; the peripheral neighbourhoods of tier-one cities are decaying too. I hope that Gove will have come to the conclusion that we cannot go on pushing the problem away by allowing housebuilders to buy agricultural land outside city limits to build cheap housing. All that will do is challenge the occupants of new housing estates to live remote from the services they need, forcing them more and more into their cars – assuming their disposable income after housing costs permits. Every low quality, car-cluttered urban extension we build is another challenge to the viability of existing towns and suburban neighbourhoods. We spend money on wasteful new road infrastructure, we force people into their cars and destroy town centres in order to provide enough parking for shoppers. One such I visited with Historic England recently had no less than 27 carparks eating into its town centre fabric like a canker. The dispersal of population density renders public transport uneconomic while unimproved homes within city limits and flats over shops remain vacant. So maybe Gove sees an alternative future that heads us back in the right direction, moving away from the legacy of 20th century planning around the motor car and towards a century that plans effectively to rely on cars much, much less. This would be a plan to live in denser neighbourhoods, closer to services that can be reached on foot or by bike, in homes that are far more energy efficient, preserving the green setting of suburbia, but greatly increasing population through the application of gentle densification. Street votes would allow that to happen because local populations actually want it, investing their own money. If that is the way Gove sees it, he has my backing. Ben Derbyshire is chair of HTA Design and Historic England Commissioner Photo: HTA Design