Urban Regeneration in London: Lessons from our Global Neighbours

For the first time in its history, over half of China’s 1.3 billion citizens are living in cities. With another 300-400 million expected to be added in the next 15-20 years, the need for regeneration in China’s major cities has never been so prevalent.

House prices are skyrocketing. In the ten years between 2000 and 2010, the national average for residential property in China rose by 250%. As an opportunity for urban regeneration, it’s never been a more exciting time. But, with so many opportunities also come a wealth of challenges for the government and local authorities.

And it’s not just China. Here in the UK, the steady flow of non-Londoners relocating to the capital, combined with newly forming households as a result of population growth means that London needs to generate more than 42,000 new homes every year for the next 25 years. Yet according to recent statistics, only around 20,000 are currently being built each year.

Supply is not meeting demand. And despite mortgage affordability improving across the UK, house prices in London and the South East of England remain comparatively high to the rest of the country, with new mortgages costing £2,000 more per year than they did five years ago.

Change is always prompted by the need to solve a problem, but all too often we’re seeing short term fixes creating long term problems. During the 1960s, 70s and 80s, the need for public housing in the capital was as prevalent as ever. The solution was to expand out from the centre, creating monolithic single-use residential blocks in many suburban areas such as Croydon, Tottenham, Peckham and Enfield.

Now, these districts – often labelled as “failing areas” – are either about to undergo or have recently undergone huge publicly funded regeneration projects. This, combined with London’s recent surge in skyscrapers, has led some people to suggest that the UK capital is seeing its most alarming transformation since the Great Fire of London.

But whilst London and major cities in China struggle to cope with the influx of respective new residents, other cities around the world remain under pressure to adapt to significant forces of a different nature.

For the majority of the twentieth century, Los Angeles was defined by its urban sprawl. Growth first took off shortly after World War II and expanded west through the 1960s. During the 70s and 80s, the city expanded outwards in every direction, as people flocked away from the city centre towards suburban districts.

The result was very little urban housing in the downtown area of the city, a lack of public space and hardly any local amenities or public transport. The area was in desperate need of regeneration, with the primary aim of bringing people back into downtown L.A.

Completed in 2000, the STAPLES Center acted as a powerful catalyst for the renewal of downtown L.A. But poor infrastructure and a lack of public transport meant the district was unable to cope during events, when up to 20,000 visitors would descend on the area.

Eager to continue the area’s revitalisation, the centre’s owner hired RTKL to develop a 33-acre urban site under the expectation that the district would attract six million visitors annually. RTKL envisioned L.A. LIVE, a mixed-use development which complements the arena and nearby convention centre.

With up to 165,000 visitors each day, the district is now more vibrant than ever, but it’s also better built to cope. Infrastructure was redeveloped to reduce traffic flow for events at the STAPLES Center, while a metro bus provided an alternative transport system to vastly reduce the amount of cars on the roads.

Reduced traffic and increased movement has proven to be an enormous catalyst for revitalisation of the area, adding everyday value to the lives of residents and visitors. Furthermore, the development’s two mixed-use anchor buildings made up of retail, restaurants, offices, a museum and a hotel, help underscore LA’s reputation as one of the world’s most dynamic entertainment hubs.

When regenerating a project of this nature, a key consideration has to be the site’s relationship with its neighbouring districts. As ever, a mixed range of uses is crucial, but it’s equally important that the development doesn’t become entirely self-sufficient, which can lead to siloing between districts and neighbourhoods.

When RTKL were tasked with creating a new district just over 15 miles from the centre of Beijing, a key focus was placed on the area’s connections with the city and its local neighbouring districts.

The Changping masterplan includes 420 hectares of development with a mixture of uses, combining residential and office units with shopping and leisure facilities to serve the new communities. A new metro line will help leverage the district’s close proximity to the airport. When complete, the development will reduce pressure on the city centre and act as a prime destination for new businesses and employment opportunities.

Waiting for my train into Central London each morning, I often notice a large number of carriages on the train opposite as it heads out of the city towards the suburbs. Meanwhile, my train is guaranteed to be overcrowded and usually behind schedule. This lopsided service places an enormous strain on the capital’s major terminals and is evident in many cities around the world with large areas of centralised employment.

By creating a mixed-use, sub-centre of employment – as outlined in the Changping masterplan – we can utilise the local infrastructure to its full capacity, relieving the city centre of congestion and completely avoiding this unnecessary imbalance.

Based on traditional Chinese planning grids, the masterplan neighbours resident housing with perspective workplaces and other mixed-use facilities. This creates high-density areas of critical mass that reduce the amount of traffic on the roads due to the close proximity of employee, employer and social needs. In this respect we take a holistic approach which sees housing as a building block, rather than the cornerstone, of regeneration.

As always, the longstanding issue over whether new housing should be the key driver of urban regeneration is as prominent as ever. The question is should it be?

I would challenge those who say that housing should be the foundation of all urban regeneration. When looking for social and economic value over a sustained period of time, then a mixed-use approach based on Performance-Driven Design and a comprehensive evaluation of local infrastructure should be at the heart of every regeneration development.

By drawing on ample evidence about the social, economic and environmental impact of design we can create uplifting places with measurable benefits to the community.

Of course, housing is an essential ingredient and indeed, will unlock value. But time and time again evidence has shown that longstanding sustainable communities are built on a well-considered mix of the fundamental needs of a community – retail, public spaces, offices, entertainment hubs, and so on. Not stand-alone residential enclaves in which the majority of residents simply come and go to work each day.