50 likes | 166 Vues
This paper assesses the implications of urban density on sustainable development, arguing that increased density is not a universal solution. It challenges the assumption that higher density is always beneficial by exploring its impact on service support, modal choice, and social equity. The discussion includes critical questions about how density affects land use, energy consumption, and biodiversity while emphasizing the need for larger living spaces and support for non-car travel. Recommendations for research on effective density measures and their conservation area implications are also presented.
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/