It's not easy gaining support for pedestrian-only streets. Here in Toronto, Kensington Market is a neighbourhood that has been under consideration for pedestrianization for as long as I can remember. Yet it remains an aspiration, largely because of a number of common objections: it will hurt local businesses, lower foot traffic, and limit access for those with mobility issues.
Yonge Street in downtown Toronto went through a similar debate, and the end result is a plan that will prioritize pedestrians, while still allowing one vehicle lane in each direction. This will still be a nice improvement, and my understanding is that the option to fully pedestrianize has been or will be designed in. Construction is expected to start on this in 2030, once the Ontario Line Queen subway station is complete.
But there are cities that are going all the way. This week, it was announced that London has approved the pedestrianization of Oxford Street, specifically the stretch between Orchard Street in the west and Great Portland Street in the east.
It's not easy gaining support for pedestrian-only streets. Here in Toronto, Kensington Market is a neighbourhood that has been under consideration for pedestrianization for as long as I can remember. Yet it remains an aspiration, largely because of a number of common objections: it will hurt local businesses, lower foot traffic, and limit access for those with mobility issues.
Yonge Street in downtown Toronto went through a similar debate, and the end result is a plan that will prioritize pedestrians, while still allowing one vehicle lane in each direction. This will still be a nice improvement, and my understanding is that the option to fully pedestrianize has been or will be designed in. Construction is expected to start on this in 2030, once the Ontario Line Queen subway station is complete.
But there are cities that are going all the way. This week, it was announced that London has approved the pedestrianization of Oxford Street, specifically the stretch between Orchard Street in the west and Great Portland Street in the east.
Oxford Street is one of the most important thoroughfares in the world, and one of, if not the, busiest shopping streets in Europe. It is estimated that nearly 500,000 people visit it each day, meaning that most are not travelling there by car.
Pedestrianizing Oxford is an idea that arguably dates back to the 1960s, when a plan was put forward to create pedestrian-only walkways on top of podiums; although, this may have been more about getting people out of the way of cars. Pedestrianizing the street was also a prominent part of Mayor Sadiq Khan's platform when he was first elected in 2016, some 10 years ago. So, it too has had its opponents.
However, consultations done last year showed that nearly two-thirds (63%) of Londoners were in favour of pedestrianizing the street — a figure that increased to almost three-quarters (72%) when the question was asked to people who had specifically visited the area within the last 12 months.
Data from similar pedestrianization projects completed around the world indicates that both foot traffic and retail sales should increase once the project is built out. And I have little doubt that the same will prove true here in London. If you can't pedestrianize a pre-eminent, transit-rich street in one of the world's capital cities, then where can you?
Cover photo from the Mayor of London
Map from Transport for London
Oxford Street is one of the most important thoroughfares in the world, and one of, if not the, busiest shopping streets in Europe. It is estimated that nearly 500,000 people visit it each day, meaning that most are not travelling there by car.
Pedestrianizing Oxford is an idea that arguably dates back to the 1960s, when a plan was put forward to create pedestrian-only walkways on top of podiums; although, this may have been more about getting people out of the way of cars. Pedestrianizing the street was also a prominent part of Mayor Sadiq Khan's platform when he was first elected in 2016, some 10 years ago. So, it too has had its opponents.
However, consultations done last year showed that nearly two-thirds (63%) of Londoners were in favour of pedestrianizing the street — a figure that increased to almost three-quarters (72%) when the question was asked to people who had specifically visited the area within the last 12 months.
Data from similar pedestrianization projects completed around the world indicates that both foot traffic and retail sales should increase once the project is built out. And I have little doubt that the same will prove true here in London. If you can't pedestrianize a pre-eminent, transit-rich street in one of the world's capital cities, then where can you?
Cover photo from the Mayor of London
Map from Transport for London
London has an ambitious housing target of 88,000 new homes per year — yes, per year — over the next decade. This is part of a broader national goal to create upwards of 1.5 million homes in the UK. It's an admirable goal, but the city appears destined to fail. According to a recent FT article by John Burn-Murdoch (their chief data reporter), London saw just 5,891 housing starts last year, which is 94% below its annual target and which represents a 75% year-over-year decline. When compared to many other global cities, London now ranks at or near the bottom when it comes to new homes per 1,000 residents:
London has an ambitious housing target of 88,000 new homes per year — yes, per year — over the next decade. This is part of a broader national goal to create upwards of 1.5 million homes in the UK. It's an admirable goal, but the city appears destined to fail. According to a recent FT article by John Burn-Murdoch (their chief data reporter), London saw just 5,891 housing starts last year, which is 94% below its annual target and which represents a 75% year-over-year decline. When compared to many other global cities, London now ranks at or near the bottom when it comes to new homes per 1,000 residents:
As a general rule, building a new building is easier than trying to do surgery on an existing one, because you never know exactly what you're going to find when you start the latter. But there are instances where surgery is necessary.
According to Bloomberg, developers in London are becoming increasingly interested in the airspace above existing buildings, and it supposedly started because of some policy changes:
In 2020, then housing minister Robert Jenrick introduced reforms that relaxed rules to add airspace builds above existing buildings. Owners can now construct additional residential stories to either expand their own dwelling or to create new units altogether without going through full planning permissions, which are often a long and costly process. This was part of a broader set of reforms to boost housing supply, and the current Labour government has not shelved these changes.
Here's an example site listed for £150,000:
The site currently comprises the roof and airspace above a 3-storey mixed-use residential-led block (Block B) within The Glassworks Development.
The existing development was constructed in 2017 and comprises 23 residential apartments plus ground floor commercial space, all of which are sold off on long leases.
I had an old boss who was very interested in this idea. For him, it was "free" land and a way to further extract value from an existing real estate portfolio. Of course, it's also a way to build new homes in already built-up cities.
As a general rule, building a new building is easier than trying to do surgery on an existing one, because you never know exactly what you're going to find when you start the latter. But there are instances where surgery is necessary.
According to Bloomberg, developers in London are becoming increasingly interested in the airspace above existing buildings, and it supposedly started because of some policy changes:
In 2020, then housing minister Robert Jenrick introduced reforms that relaxed rules to add airspace builds above existing buildings. Owners can now construct additional residential stories to either expand their own dwelling or to create new units altogether without going through full planning permissions, which are often a long and costly process. This was part of a broader set of reforms to boost housing supply, and the current Labour government has not shelved these changes.
Here's an example site listed for £150,000:
The site currently comprises the roof and airspace above a 3-storey mixed-use residential-led block (Block B) within The Glassworks Development.
The existing development was constructed in 2017 and comprises 23 residential apartments plus ground floor commercial space, all of which are sold off on long leases.
I had an old boss who was very interested in this idea. For him, it was "free" land and a way to further extract value from an existing real estate portfolio. Of course, it's also a way to build new homes in already built-up cities.
Burn-Murdoch cites a multitude of factors responsible for this suboptimal performance: onerous new safety standards following the horrific 2017 Grenfell Tower fire, more stringent environmental regulations (compared to other European countries), the disappearance of international buyers in the residential buy-to-let market, and increased demand for non-residential uses. What is obvious is that building safety is paramount and nothing like what happened with the Grenfell Tower should ever happen again. But with ~281,000 new homes approved but financially unviable, there does appear to be a desire to balance safety with supply.
His third point is an interesting one in that parallels have played out in Toronto's new condominium market. The pejorative narrative of "foreigners taking homes away from locals" is commonplace in cities all around the world, which is why Canada ultimately moved to temporarily ban foreign buyers. But what we start to see here is the impact on overall housing supply. Indeed, a 2017 study from LSE (cited in the above FT article) found that international capital and residential pre-sales are essential ingredients in de-risking high-density projects and promoting greater housing supply.
Tying this all together, what has happened is the creation of an interdependency: we have made new housing developments so complicated and onerous to construct that the only financially feasible way to build them is to amortize all of the required time and money across bigger projects. Then, given the scale and cost of these projects, they have become dependent on investors and international capital to provide financing. Raise interest rates, remove the capital source, and then all of a sudden you have far less housing than 88,000 new homes per year.
It is for reasons like these that I get frustrated when critics simply blame developers or investors for shortcomings in a housing market. Finding villains is a lot easier than doing the difficult work of unpacking what's really going on and coming up with solutions.
Burn-Murdoch cites a multitude of factors responsible for this suboptimal performance: onerous new safety standards following the horrific 2017 Grenfell Tower fire, more stringent environmental regulations (compared to other European countries), the disappearance of international buyers in the residential buy-to-let market, and increased demand for non-residential uses. What is obvious is that building safety is paramount and nothing like what happened with the Grenfell Tower should ever happen again. But with ~281,000 new homes approved but financially unviable, there does appear to be a desire to balance safety with supply.
His third point is an interesting one in that parallels have played out in Toronto's new condominium market. The pejorative narrative of "foreigners taking homes away from locals" is commonplace in cities all around the world, which is why Canada ultimately moved to temporarily ban foreign buyers. But what we start to see here is the impact on overall housing supply. Indeed, a 2017 study from LSE (cited in the above FT article) found that international capital and residential pre-sales are essential ingredients in de-risking high-density projects and promoting greater housing supply.
Tying this all together, what has happened is the creation of an interdependency: we have made new housing developments so complicated and onerous to construct that the only financially feasible way to build them is to amortize all of the required time and money across bigger projects. Then, given the scale and cost of these projects, they have become dependent on investors and international capital to provide financing. Raise interest rates, remove the capital source, and then all of a sudden you have far less housing than 88,000 new homes per year.
It is for reasons like these that I get frustrated when critics simply blame developers or investors for shortcomings in a housing market. Finding villains is a lot easier than doing the difficult work of unpacking what's really going on and coming up with solutions.
Cover photo by Gonzalo Sanchez on Unsplash
Chart from the Financial Times
But these are not simple builds. Can the existing structure and foundations support additional levels? How do you modify the existing elevator(s) while the building below remains occupied? How do you do the mechanical tie-ins without impacting the suite(s) below?
All of this makes me wonder how feasible it will be for London to build 180,000 new homes in this way. If it can, that would be a great accomplishment, and one that other cities should aim to emulate. But regardless, I'd love to get under the hood of one of these projects.
Cover photo by Travis Fish on Unsplash
Cover photo by Gonzalo Sanchez on Unsplash
Chart from the Financial Times
But these are not simple builds. Can the existing structure and foundations support additional levels? How do you modify the existing elevator(s) while the building below remains occupied? How do you do the mechanical tie-ins without impacting the suite(s) below?
All of this makes me wonder how feasible it will be for London to build 180,000 new homes in this way. If it can, that would be a great accomplishment, and one that other cities should aim to emulate. But regardless, I'd love to get under the hood of one of these projects.
Cover photo by Travis Fish on Unsplash
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Brandon Donnelly
Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.
Brandon Donnelly
Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly.
