50 likes | 156 Views
LSE June 20066. A case for density? well, maybe Michael Edwards m.edwards@ucl.ac.uk Bartlett School of Planning. but…. …NOT supporting every density increment …NOT for everyone (people vary) …NOT at the expense of quality. Arguments…. land saving: weak argument, cf Peter Hall
E N D
LSE June 20066 A case for density? well, maybe Michael Edwards m.edwards@ucl.ac.uk Bartlett School of Planning
but…. • …NOT supporting every density increment • …NOT for everyone (people vary) • …NOT at the expense of quality
Arguments… • land saving: weak argument, cf Peter Hall • supporting local services, (do we know?) • and what about dwellings empty on the night? • meeting need/demand for • larger rooms, apartments, houses • home-office • car pools • supporting non-car modes of travel (do we know?)
questions: • how do densities affect service support? • how do densities affect modal choice? • density and social class • density and building energy, water re-use, bio-diversity • sumarising: what is the desideratum? saving land, energy, local services • how to do it in conservation areas? • how to measure it: dwellings/persons / hr / m2
Sources Sustainable Urban Development how we could produce it how we could pay for it The key issues for research Michael Edwards, Nikos Karadimitriou, Claudio de Magalhães, Khalil Rehman Bartlett School of Planning, UCL March 2003 For the RICS Foundation www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk/research/planning/ricsf/