An urbanist elite is destroying the suburban dream

TA new movement wants to solve Britain’s housing problems by making people live in flats with no gardens and – most of all – no cars

To give today’s younger people the same opportunity as my generation, we need a new suburbia, something closer to what Prince Charles proposes in Faversham

he Duchy of Cornwall has proposed a new suburban development south east of Faversham in Kent. As you would expect from Prince Charles, the development features the language of sustainability, greenery and modern urbanism. The Duchy’s planning application talks of walkability, reducing carbon impact and connecting to public transport. And, you’ve guessed it, the local MP, councillors and assorted Nimby campaign groups have opposed the Prince’s admirable attempt to build a new, sustainable, low-carbon suburb that meets the need for family homes, provides a mix of social and market rent alongside owner occupation, and creates a new community. The sort of development that a Conservative government would support if it looked beyond a few negative local headlines.

But Tory short-sightedness is only half of the matter. What piques my curiosity is the lack of support for this new suburbia from the Yimby – “yes in my back yard” – movement. The new suburbia, a 21st century version of Ebenezer Howard’s garden cities, ought to catch Yimby attention – all the green buzzwords, high-quality development, even beauty. Yet support is muted because a three-letter word stands between urban Yimby ideas and Prince Charles’ new suburbia: car.

Urban Yimbys, eager to get endorsement from the planning and architecture elite, have decided that the answer to Britain’s housing problems lies in urban densification, abolishing the suburb and hinting to Nimbys that we won’t need to build on those fields near Faversham. Rather than using 5 per cent or so of London’s green belt to build brilliant new, open, spacious places for families to thrive in, we’ll make people live in flats. With no cars.

This anti-car vision is captured in proposals dubbed “Superbia” from architects HTA and the deputy mayor of London. Their idea is that, instead of building new family homes, the solution to the housing crisis lies in turning existing homes, in London’s glorious suburbia, into a world of dense, car-less, garden-less flats. The deputy mayor and his architects want to target Bexley borough – suburbs like Blackfen, Sidcup and Welling – to create their preferred mid-rise, car-free urban place. Writing in Housing Today, HTA boss Ben Derbyshire says London’s suburbs need to be saved from the “declining local services, congestion and environmental degradation caused by motor cars”. Derbyshire argues that street votes – where residents of a street are given the chance to vote on permitting more intensive development – are the way to realise his vision of happy peons renting flats and not owning cars.

Of course, if you are a Nimby in Old Bexley or Sevenoaks then these sorts of proposals are just what you want to hear. Especially when you can press all the environmentalist buttons while enjoying your detached house with its view across rolling downs (plus off-street parking for two cars). Having “street votes” and “Superbia” aren’t bad ideas, but they provide Nimbys with an escape from their selfishness by telling younger people that they might have a home one day, but it will be a small flat and they can’t have a car.

We can only sort out our housing crisis while supporting families and community if we regard this trendy idea of suburban densification as a tiny part of the solution. To give today’s younger people the same opportunity as my generation, we need a new suburbia, something closer to what Prince Charles proposes in Faversham: focused on fast links to jobs in London, or other cities, but with open space, good facilities and – sorry about this – cars. The motor car isn’t an evil, responsible for environmental degradation, it gives us freedom, choice and control of our lives.