Planning matters

The concept of 15-minute cities continues to dominate mainstream coverage of urban planning. Championed by Professor Carlos Moreno of Sorbonne University, the concept is regarded as a means of creating more sustainable and liveable urban environments. The intention is for all essential amenities and services, including housing, workplaces, shops, schools, healthcare, and parks to be located within a 15-minute walk or cycle from the home. Paris, London, Melbourne, Shanghai, and Houston and more have since formally employed its tenets in pursuit of the following benefits: Improved quality of life – less time commuting and sitting in traffic congestion frees up time to spend with family and pursuing leisure activities.  Sustainability and active lifestyles- a localised community can lower emissions by reducing personal reliance on car to access services and facilitate sustainable patterns of consumption.  Localised economic development- living locally means spending locally, supporting local businesses within our community.  Social inclusion- by reducing spatial inequalities, we will strengthen social inclusion and cohesion across more diverse, mixed-income neighbourhoods.   Why so divisive? There has been over a century of discourse on placing the individual at the heart of the city so why has the desire to create walkable cities been so polarising in the media?  As the concept of 15-minute cities continues to disseminate down the settlement hierarchy that it seeks to replace, opposition considers the theory to be a top-down enforcement on social change. Branded an ‘international socialist concept’ by Conservative Party MP Nick Fletcher in a UK parliamentary debate in February 2023 and a ‘deeply illiberal...un-British’ abstraction by GB News’ Mark Dolan, some have misconstrued Moreno’s concept as a dystopian segregation of the city into fortress-esque compounds following the Coronavirus pandemic. Although this critique is somewhat Orwellian, there are some valid points for consideration. Whilst the work from home era has left many professional service sector workers craving social integration, many people are still reliant on commuting and car usage to travel to work and may see the theory as compromising their needs. Though pedestrianisation is dystopian in the eyes of Alan Partridge’s “dead against it” in the wake of depriving traders access to Dixons, we must also not neglect those with accessible needs that may be reliant on cars to reach essential services in the attempt to create more ‘inclusive’ neighbourhoods. Manchester as an organic growth model? Living in Manchester and working across the North West, it is clear that local authorities are beginning to explore the potential of 15-minute cities. Its sister-theory of 20-minute neighbourhoods has even been identified by the Central Lancashire authorities and featured in its Preferred Options consultation as a model for growth. Although Manchester is yet to formally embrace the theory, the application of place-making principles is beginning to transform the city in the formation of one of the UK’s most up and coming cities.  Waves of infrastructural improvements and pedestrianisation continue to change Manchester’s cityscape. Fuelled by pavement licenses and outdoor dining in the gradual reassimilation of society during Covid, the catalyst in the pedestrianisation of key public places including Stevenson Square and Cutting Room Square has been maintained. The cityscape is also radically changing with high-density apartment blocks emerging across the city. Many of these developments are located more peripherally on the edge of the city centre, such as Deansgate Square and Greengate. Although, these areas are beginning to develop their own character, Ancoats has emerged as the jewel in the city’s crown as a major regeneration project.  Branded a ‘former industrial wasteland’ by Manchester City Council itself, Ancoats is a prime case study of how regeneration and the central tenets of 15-minute cities have been employed organically in the North West, with no formal adoption of the theory. Regeneration commenced in the 1990s and Ancoats is now home to artisanal bakeries, the Hip Hop Fish and Chip Shop, and Manchester’s first Michelin Star restaurant for over 40 years- Ancoats is a far cry from its former reputation on the metaphorical wrong side of the tracks north of the City’s ring road.  Ancoats is far and away the most desirable neighbourhood in proximity to Manchester City Centre, and as the most apt example of what placemaking principles can achieve. It has harnessed a reputation as a localised neighbourhood within the wider city but this does not come without a price... (approximately £50,000 more than the average price in the wider city centre for a residential property in fact). The successes are beginning to disseminate across the city as Salford City Council adopted its Development Framework for Chapel Wharf in May 2022 with the ambition of creating a ’15-minute neighbourhood’ in the heart of its city centre. If Greater Manchester authorities are inspired to formally adopt 15-minute cities as is the case in Salford, the following lessons from Ancoats’ experience of placemaking-led regeneration must inform the future direction to create truly inclusive and walkable communities for all:  Socioeconomic Disparities and Distribution 15-minute cities seek to facilitate social inclusion and participation and therefore development should seek to be integrated uniformly across the wider city. If only certain neighbourhoods are identified for growth, 15-minute cities could enhance further isolation and exclusion of lower income areas. As shown by Ancoats, neighbourhoods with accessible amenities and services are highly attractive and this is reflected by property prices. More even distribution of 15-minute city driven development and placemaking will improve the condition of the urban environment more broadly.    Gradual but progressive change Although 15-minute cities have been regarded by some as a paradigm shift, there must be an acceptance that change will be long term ambition. Placemaking and mixed use development are organically producing high-quality development, but further public and private sector cooperation is essential if 15-minute cities are to become a reality.   Public Consultation Increased public consultation will promote the conversation from communities, dispel misinformation, and address the top-down approach that has been highlighted by opposition. Active pursuit of an improved network of pedestrian and cycle infrastructure should facilitate more sustainable city life, but not excluded vulnerable people. 15-minute cities should not solely seek to improve the lives of the ‘WFH professional’, but should seek to enhance the lives of all, including those with accessible needs or those with maintained car reliance. If the purpose is to create liveable cities, it is critical that the public have a voice in shaping their communities. Given the ongoing examination of the Places for Everyone Plan seeking to create a joint development plan for GMCA, it will be interesting to see the role that neighbourhood level planning plays in shaping future communities. However, the question remains, will the media spotlight fade or will the 15-minute cities theory continue to build traction across the North West?

Our May blog [1] delved into the growth of co-living accommodation in London and its rise to become an important part of the city’s rental market. In this earlier post we summarised the benefits of co-living accommodation which includes flexible tenancies, fixed living costs, communal living, and on-site amenities such as gyms, workspaces and cinemas. The co-living sector in Manchester remains in its infancy when compared to the sector’s growth in the Capital. However, several prominent North West developers have tabled proposals for co-living schemes and there are already approximately 4,000 co-living units in the pipeline in Manchester. Downing’s First Street scheme comprises 1,780 units whilst Vita’s Union at Water Street comprises 1,676 units, both of which are coming out of the ground.   Image Credit: Simpson Haugh Architects Why is co-living accommodation beginning to gather pace in Manchester? The emergence of co-living schemes in London follows similar patterns in North American cities where there are increasing property prices, soaring rental costs, and a lack of quality rental choices, amongst other factors. Manchester is now experiencing a similar set of market conditions.  According to Rightmove, between Q3 2021 and Q3 2022, average rents in Manchester and Salford increased by 20.5% and 17.6% respectively.  This places both locations in the top ten nationally for rental growth. With wages struggling to keep up with inflation, and the interest rate pressure on mortgage costs, ‘generation rent’ continue to be squeezed towards the rental market. Co-living offers a new choice in this sphere, at often slightly lower all-inclusive prices than comparative Built-to-Rent schemes. There are a number of factors which are driving rental demand in Manchester. As touched on in my January blog[2], there is a shortage of Purpose Built Student Accommodation [PBSA] in Manchester which is pushing students into the private rental sector. Manchester is also good at retaining and attracting graduates. It is the only English city outside London that gains more graduates than it loses. Both Manchester and Salford have a much higher proportion of 18-35 year-olds than the regional and national averages. This demographic is more likely to live in rented accommodation, and is renting for much longer than previous generations. This demand for rental properties, coupled with increasing construction costs and additional requirements such as second stairs for tall buildings, has meant that developers in many major cities such as Manchester are re-imagining their market facing products. It is becoming recognised that co-living can make a meaningful contribution to addressing rental demand as schemes are well suited to graduates and transient young professionals – the demographic primarily driving rental demand. Flexible tenancies and communal living spaces in particular are seen as pull factors that give co-living an edge over more established rental products. This is particularly true for recent graduates – some of whom may be moving to a new city, or on a rotational graduate contract, for instance. How has planning policy responded to the growth of co-living in Manchester? Unlike in London, where the 2021 London Plan provides policy criteria for new co-living developments (in response to a small number of early Co-living developers like The Collective), the emerging Places for Everyone Joint Development Plan for Greater Manchester stays silent on co-living.  It does, however, state that housing provision to accommodate specific groups will be addressed through the districts’ local plans.  Whether this will lead to the emergence of specific co-living policies in districts’ local plans remains to be seen. Nonetheless, in authorities where schemes are already coming out of the ground or are in the planning pipeline, we would expect to see future development plan policies ‘catch-up’ with the market. Up to now, co-living schemes in Manchester have been centred around two market locations – Manchester City Centre and Salford Quays.  Both of these locations are in authorities that have some level of guidance for co-living developments. Salford, which is the only Greater Manchester authority to adopt a Local Plan in the last five years, provides some limited policy guidance for co-living developments. The Salford Local Plan exempts co-living accommodation from space standards but requires that they provide 20% of the dwellings in the form of affordable private rent. Manchester City Council does not have any formal policies to direct development. It did, however, produce a report in Summer 2020 that provides a suggested policy approach for co-living developments.  The report recommends  an initial ceiling of 5,000 units restricted to key areas of employment growth in the city centre, in an effort to  test the market for co-living accommodation. This interim policy approach also sets out ten additional criteria for co-living accommodation, which includes a requirement to let units to working households and not students. Schemes in Manchester are also required to submit a conversion plan to demonstrate how the buildings could be repurposed in future, if required.  The remaining eight Greater Manchester authorities do not have policies or guidance on co-living.  Most of their individual plans remain on hold until the Places for Everyone plan is adopted (not expected to be until at least 2024). Stockport withdrew from the Joint Development Plan but also paused progress on its own plan, citing uncertainties with the direction of national planning policy. Beyond Greater Manchester, Liverpool City Council published a co-living advice note in March 2022.  The note clarifies that its development plan policies on residential size and mix will apply to co-living accommodation.  This means that schemes in Liverpool are required to offer a greater proportion of 2-bed+ units than 1-bed units, all of which are required to accord with space standards.  This is a marked difference from the policy approach in London, Salford, and to some extent Manchester. The variation across authorities’ policy approach will remain until there is clear national policy guidance or a specific use class for co-living developments. The latest DLUHC planning consultations in July 2023 offers no further guidance, so we await mooted consultation on the NPPF later this Autumn. Image Credit: Folk at The Palm House, Halcyon Development Partners Where there is a policy vacuum, or where there are conflicting policies across districts, it can be difficult for co-living developers, investors and operators to understand authorities’ criteria for consenting co-living. The real estate market, and in particular those needing forward funding, often prefer clarity and reassurance about the planning context before committing significant capital.  This will be particularly pertinent in districts where a local authority is yet to determine a co-living planning application and there are no precedents to draw upon.  In such instances we recommend presenting a compelling case for co-living at pre-application stage using clear evidence of the suitability of the location for co-living, including the market demand for such scheme, together with an explanation of the benefits that this type of accommodation can bring. Case studies and visits to operational co-living sites is something we have also advocated in London, for instance our recent walking tour of Sunday Mills in Earlsfield (delivered by our client Halycon Development Partners) for officers and members of another authority. Lichfields is developing a significant track record in co-living and can provide a robust evidence-based solution to demonstrate the need for co-living development in certain market locations. Please get in touch if you want to discuss co-living opportunities in the North West market.   [1] Co-living in London (lichfields.uk) [2] https://lichfields.uk/blog/2023/february/9/greater-manchester-s-student-squeeze/