Sustainable Housing Development in the UK and Netherlands - Essay Example

EUROPEAN STUDY: A COMPARATIVE REPORT ON SUSTAINABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE UK AND NETHERLANDS Introduction Sustainability and sustainable housing development can be broadly defined as the integration of economic development, environmental protection and social cohesion over time (Turcu 2007). Both England and the Netherlands have a large social housing sector, that is more extensive than the private rented housing sector. The main forms of housing in Britain are “owner-occupation, local authority housing, and private rented housing” (Van der Graaf 2009: 137). Compared to England, the Dutch housing stock is younger, in better condition, is widely accessible to people aross the population groups, and is not exclusively for the poor as it is in England (Van der Graaf 2009). Both countries are in the process of meeting the demands for sustainable housing. Thesis Statement: The purpose of this report is to compare sustainability in housing development in Britain and the Netherlands. Urban Renewal and Regeneration in England and the Netherlands The housing markets of both England and the Netherlands show comparable developments in the second half of the 20th century, towards social, economic and physical renewal of deprived neighbourhoods. In the Netherlands, social-spatial interventions have been combined by the government to promote social cohesion and the social mobility of poor residents. In England, to fight poverty and social exclusion, social and economic targets take precedence over the quality of housing in deprived areas. In both England and the Netherlands large-scale urban renewal programmes are planned to eliminate deprivation (Van der Graaf 2009). Despite Netherlands’ efforts to combine spatial and physical interventions in urban renewal, the focus is on spatial redesigning. Particular social interventions in renewed areas are considered to be supportive measures and are aimed at socio-economic skills or social cohesion. In a smaller number of cases social interventions are significant while spatial measures are lacking. Thus, the Netherlands housing projects provide examples of the extreme ends of the scale, with dominant spatial or social interventions, and lacking in a combination of measures. On the other hand, the centralized position of social services in the United Kingdom has resulted in innovative housing projects integrating social and spatial interventions (Van der Graaf 2009). Contrastingly, in the Netherlands, social services is viewed as a separate sector to housing. Another difference between English and Dutch urban policy is where they start. Dutch policy makers look for help outside the neighbourhood and their goal is to attract middle classes to deprived areas. On the other hand, English policy makers and urban planners take the poorest residents as the starting point for their policies and implementation strategies. Changing the attitudes of the original middle-class residents is considered crucial in changing the behaviour of antisocial residents thereby changing the reputation of an area. Further, many urban renewal activities emphasize changing the identity and reputation of an area and its people with the help of a more culture-based approach. Cultural regeneration in numerous English cities such as Liverpool, Manchester, Bristol, Cardiff and others, incorporate production and consumption of culture. Newcastle and Gateshead have strengthened their attachment to the area and redressed the reputation of the deprived area by both physical and symbolic improvements of the area. A similar programme of urban renewal in the Netherlands was piloted in 10 Dutch neighbourhoods from 1998 to 2001. Van der Graaf (2009: 72) states that “the aim was to develop a social infrastructure at the neighbourhood level which facilitated the participation of citizens, increased social cohesion, contributed to the lifting of individual and collective deprivation”, and which correlated with improvements in the physical and economic infrastructure. This is supported by Bailey and Manzi (2010), who investigate the concept of community governance by which the social life of areas and neighbourhoods is improved by directly engaging local residents for achieving community development and cultural regeneration and identification with the place. The underlying theoretical framework consists of communitarianism, social capital and governmentality. These concepts help to directly achieve the goal of sustainable communites which optimize the residents’ quality of life through balance, stability, cohesiveness and harmony. Increasing Pressure on Green Belt: Stunted Growth of Cities in Britain The economic growth of cities such as Cardiff is being slowed down because of a non-availability of affordable housing. In a report published by the Centre for Cities (Aldred 2010), it is argued that brownfield-only development hinders a city’s prosperity, and places a majority of the residents at a disadvantage. This has led to British houses being smaller and more expensive than the European average, “and the quality of life of city residents is diluted by the in-fill development that greenfield development bans promote” (James 2010: 25). Policies such as using brownfield at the cost of greenfield development promote the destruction of the urban environment. Thus, by preserving the rural environment for a few, disadvantage is caused to many urban dwellers. According to Aldred (2010), the reason for new housing being small, expensive and often in the wrong places is that inadequate land is provided for development in the areas where it is required the most. Brownfield development is essential, to build homes in areas where people wish to live and work. “The latest statistics show that 80% of housing development was on previously developed land” (James 2010: 25). The government has supported local authorities and city councils to build more homes to fulfill local housing demands. To resolve the problem of increasing pressure on the green belt, the DCLG (2007) has proposed the construction of ecotowns or small new towns consisting of 5,000 to 20,000 homes. Five such new schemes are aimed at achieving zero carbon development and sustainable living. . Cozens (2002: 129) argues that “a safer and sustainable community must be characterised by the image of regulation” through control of real and imagined threats to personal or community health, as well as by prevention of crime and personal attack. With increasing implementation of sustainable development, urban designers realise the capability of the built environment to reduce the fear of crime as well as the potential for offending, to progress towards more liveable and sustainable urban communities. Urban Renewal in Bijlmer and Breda in the Netherlands In the Netherlands although there is an increase in owner-occupied housing, “the rental sector generally managed by housing associations continues to be the most important element of the local housing market in the major cities” (Kleinhans 2004: 371). Further, in the construction of sustainable housing, the accessibility-sustainablity dilemma was studied by Bertolini and Le Clercq (2002) in Amsterdam. They confronted the fundamental problem of making urban development less dependent upon mobility by car, due to the difficulty in matching the quality of accessibility provided by private motorized transport. The researchers stated that the solution lies in reducing long-range mobility by providing within the urban location all the required facilities. In Bijlmer, Amsterdam built in 1970 as the city of the future, the urban design is that of a new lobe of the once-concentric city. Bijlmer is designed according to the principles of the Congres International d’Architecture Moderne (Aalbers, Van Beckhoven, Van Kempen et al 2003). Here workspace is separated from the residential areas, similarly elevated ‘autostradas’ and subway lines for public transportation and car traffic are separate from the ground-level roads for cyclists and pedestrians. The Bijlmer (Fig.1) offered 23,000 mostly large, almost identical apartments in identical high-rise buildings in honeycomb-like spatial pattern. Compared to other social housing, these apartments were comparatively more expensive. However, cheap social housing was also available, attracting large numbers of immigrants and the unemployed. A combination of liveability problems such proximity to necessary facilities, unsuitable location, inadequate availability of public transport, a relatively high prevalence of poverty and crime, as well as unappealing housing units resulted in unpopularity of the housing development.. Fig. 1. Bijlmer: High-Density Social Housing in Amsterdam (Helleman & Wassenberg 2004: 12) The urban renewal of Bijlmer housing development is the largest Dutch restructuring project so far. Because of partial demolition of the 31 high-rise blocks, only 15 blocks or parts thereof remain. By changing to lowrise buildings, large sections of the public areas will be eliminated, thereby reducing the cost of maintenance. Greater variation between neighbourhoods will include urban landscapes with apartment buildings as well as suburban areas with dwellings on the waterfront. To solve the problems of Bijlmer, an integrated approach has been used. New facilities and educational institutions are also being created to meet the needs of the residents. Further, better maintenance to improve liveability has to be intensified, to ensure a safe and quiet environment. Residents have emotional ties with the place, hence it is important for urban renewal programmes “to protect and re-attract the original residents who feel alienated from their neighbouhood by the decay of the area or the arrival of large numbers of immigrants” (Van der Graaf 2009: 156) to the same location. The new dwellings in Bijlmer have been popular with previous inhabitants. Thus, offering alternatives is one of the most essential elements for success in renewal, since it helps to preserve social networks and strengthen bonds to the neighbourhood (Hesselman & Wassenberg 2004). In Fig 2. is seen an example of high density social housing in Breda, Netherlands. The polynuclear municipal policy plan for urban development of Breda is the result of the demands for water management based on ecological development principles, which restricts new development options. The city is expected to grow both east and westwards, annexing a number of smaller settlements during lateral growth (EC 1996). Fig.2. High-Density Social Housing in Breda (VBulletin 2011) In Breda, urban renewal is focused on the separation of clean and polluted water courses and the separation of sewage and rainwater systems. Green corridors are being created by restoring nature areas, water courses and wild vegetation. The water management requirements rule out a compact city solution, hence large green areas will remain. However, a compact city form has been developed for the regional sub-centre of Etten-Leur where water management is not so crucial (EC 1996). The evidence indicates that mixed-use development is advocated by the governments of Both England and the Netherlands who promote urban living and working termed as ‘urban renaissance’ (Stead and Hoppenbrouwer 2004). The benefits of such an arrangement are efficient land use, improved urban vitality, and reduced need for travel. However, promoting urban living and working continues to be problematic. It is believed that, in Europe non-urban areas have a better environment, lower levels of crime, and a greater sense of community, and are therefore more attractive as dwelling places. Additionally, it is essential to remove the obstacles to promoting a renaissance of urban living and working, such as high levels of crime in denser localities populated by low income groups, lack of affordable housing and increasing pollution due to travel. Consequently, recent national policies in both England and the Netherlands attempt to promote urban living and working, with an emphasis on mixed-use development. On the other hand, Kleinhans (2004) examined the effects of diversification and social mix, and obtained results that were not well defined. This necessitates modest expectations with regard to area reputation, cross-tenure social interaction and residential attitudes. The lack of clarity is due to vague policy goals, policy terms and relevant spatial level. Conclusion This report has highlighted and compared sustainable housing development in Britain and the Netherlands, with a focus on Bijlmer and Breda in the Netherlands. The increasing pressure on the Green Belt in Britain and the increasing costs of construction have resulted in stunted growth of cities and the construction of smaller houses. In both England and the Netherlands, there is an emphasis on demolition of buildings for reconstruction. An example is Bijlmer’s transition to a combination of urban and suburban dwellings. The emphasis of both countries is on safety regulations, and mixed use housing development which discourages anti-social activities while promoting a sustainable lifestyle through social and community activities among residents. It is evident from this report that both England and the Netherlands are taking appropriate steps for urban regeneration and sustainable development. The similarities in the urban renewal policies of Netherlands and Great Britain include a focus on safety regulations, housing diversification and mixed-use, and cultural regeneration through identifying with the place. Other similarities are the use of demolition followed by partial or no reconstruction, and the domination of the private sector in the housing market. Besides the different starting situations of Britain and the Netherlands, the only other difference is that British housing policy centralises the market and development of owner-occupied housing than Dutch policy that continues to include a large proportion of social housing sector for providing low cost housing for the poorer economic groups. Word Count: 2106 words Bibliography Aalbers, M., Van Beckhoven, E., Van Kempen, R., Musterd, S. & Ostendorf, W. (2003). Large housing estates in the Netherlands: Overview of developments and problems in Amsterdam and Utrecht. Restructuring Large-Scale Housing Estates in European Cities. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://www.restate.geog.uu.nl/results/Report4/4eIamsterdam.pdf Aldred, T. (2010). Arrested development: Are we building houses in the right places? CentreforCities. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://www.centreforcities.org/assets/files/10-03-16%20Arrested%20Development.pdf Bailey, N. & Manzi, T. (2010). Governing through community? A comparative study of changing management practices in mixed tenure housing development. Conference paper presented for Comparative Housing Research: Approaches and Challenges in a New International Era, at TU Delft, Netherlands, 23-25th March, 2010. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://westminsterresearch.wmin.ac.uk/7762/1/Bailey_Manzi_2010_final_author.pdf Bertolini, L. & Clercq, F. (2003). Urban development without more mobility by car? Lessons from Amsterdam, a multimodal urban region. Environment and Planning A, 35 (4): pp.575-589. Cozens, P.M. (2002). Sustainable urban development and crime prevention through environmental design for the British city. Towards an effective urban environmentalism for the 21st century. Cities, 19 (2): pp.129-137. DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government). (2007). Eco-towns prospectus. Communities and Local Government. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/housing/pdf/ecotowns.pdf EC (European Commission). (1996). European sustainable cities. Report. Expert Group on the Urban Environment. European Commission. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/urban/pdf/rport-en.pdf Helleman, G. & Wassenberg, F. (2004). The renewal of what was tomorrow’s idealistic city. Amsterdam’s Bijlmermeer’s highrise. Cities, 21 (1): pp.3-17. James, D. (2010). Pressure on green belt rises as cities’ growth is stunted; Britain’s new homes smaller than Europe’s and poorly sited. Western Mail, March 16, 2010. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5041974657 Kleinhans, R. (2004). Social implications of housing diversificaton in urban renewal: A review of recent literature. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 19: pp.367- 390. Meusen, H. & van Kempen, R. (1995). Towards residual housing? A comparison of Britain and the Netherlands. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 10 (3): pp.239-258. Stead, D. & Hoppenbrouwer, E. (2004). Promoting an urban renaissance in England and the Netherlands. Cities, 21 (2): pp.119-136. Turcu, C. (2007). Sustainable regeneration, sustainable communities or both? Assessing the impact of housing renewal on community sustainability – a theoretical model. W15, Housing and Urban Sustainability. Sustainable Urban Areas. European Network of Housing Researchers (ENHR), International Conference 25-28th June, 2007. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://www.enhr2007rotterdam.nl/documents/W15_paper_Turcu.pdf Van der Graaf, P. (2009). Out of place? Emotional ties to the neighbourhood in urban renewal in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. The Netherlands: Amsterdam University Press. VBulletin. (2011). Breda – Netherlands. Retrieved on 15th May, 2011 from: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=833884 Read More