How ‘Street votes’ can help us increase access to co-design and revitalise our suburbs

The current ‘Street Votes’ consultation from the Department of Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, which closes on 2 February, prompted me to look back through my files for the origins of the idea.

Sure enough, I found a paper I wrote in February 2009 to celebrate the 40^th year of our practice.

My paper proposed:

‘A project to explore the possibility that the owners of inter-war housing in the suburbs could pool their individual sites and undertake redevelopment at higher densities to produce better quality sustainable homes for themselves and additional homes which they could sell at a profit.’

The original premise was sustainable densification, also addressing poor conditions and low levels of service infrastructure in many suburban neighbourhoods.

The paper went on to say: ‘A large proportion of UK stock was built to low construction and energy standards and low densities but re-development to suit modern lifestyles has so far been prevented because of subdivision into millions of freeholds which are not capable of redevelopment individually. The project builds on HTA’s experience of community architecture and estate redevelopment.’

We had a hunch that some equity rich, cash poor populations might be able to exploit the inherent value of their under-developed assets, simultaneously tackling both climate and housing crises. We called our idea ‘Supurbia’.

Realising we would need to build a business case we enlisted the support of Yolande Barnes, then head of international research at Savills, now Professor of Real Estate at The Bartlett, to demonstrate that in certain conditions, especially close to rail infrastructure, there was potential gross development value to support the idea.

The concept of co-Housing, where groups of people collaborate to create housing conditions to suit their particular needs, has for too long been a niche activity exclusive to people who have the time and resource to find and acquire sites on which to pursue their aspirations. “

That Supurbia should have become part of planning legislation in 15 years since conception is the source of some satisfaction.

The journey is well documented and there has been tremendous support along the way, from among others, John Myers of YIMBY Alliance, Peter Murray of New London Architecture, John Penrose MP of Build Up Not Out and Nicholas Boys Smith of Create Streets - now acting chair of the Office for Place.

I should particularly credit Ben Southwood and Samuel Hughes of Policy Exchange who took the idea up, translating it into implementable policy recommendations and coining the title, Street Votes.

I hope that housing professionals will respond to the consultation positively.

The concept of Co-Housing, where groups of people collaborate to create housing conditions to suit their particular needs, has for too long been a niche activity exclusive to people who have the time and resource to find and acquire sites on which to pursue their aspirations.

Read the provisions of the proposed Street Votes legislation and you’ll find a framework that could allow a much wider access to the benefits of co-design, anticipating and structuring the necessary process comprehensively.

Street Vote legislation will enable:

‘A group of residents to come together with a proposal for permission to be granted for development on their street. The proposal can be put forward by the group of residents directly or with the assistance of an individual such as an architect. If the proposal passes the examination, it is then put to a referendum. Where, if the required threshold of votes is met, subject to any final checks, the Planning Inspectorate will make the Street Vote Development Order on behalf of the Secretary of State.’

That is not to underestimate the nature of the task, but there is no doubt that the expertise exists to make this work. 

Street Votes will start small, maybe with pilot schemes, but has the potential one day to play a significant role in urban intensification.

Practices like mine have for years been using resident ballots to determine the outcome of sometimes radical and complex regeneration schemes, often with choices ranging from doing nothing to complete redevelopment, each associated with a range of costs and benefits. Architects have the skills to enable the kind of collaboration required to deliver co-designed housing.

The task of creating a sufficiently flexible design code, as envisaged by the draft legislation, meeting the aspirations of participating and non-participating neighbours, which will at the same time satisfy the quality requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework, is one which many will relish. As Michael Gove himself has observed:

> Also read: The revised planning framework is not as bad as feared - but don’t thank Gove

“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.”

Street Votes will start small, maybe with pilot schemes, but has the potential one day to play a significant role in urban intensification.

I hope Building Design readers will respond positively to the consultation. We need more arrows to our quiver if we are ever to achieve net zero carbon, and this is surely one of them.

> Also read: Why do we struggle to densify suburbia?