How ambitious ‘forest city’ plan for England could become a reality | Green building

IIn the next few years, there may be digging in the ground for a timber-built city, with four-bedroom houses selling for £350,000, in the middle of the biggest new nature reserve created in Britain for decades.

It sounds too good to be true, but a cross-party coalition of campaigners is trying to make a “forest city” to house a million people a reality, with construction set to begin by the end of this parliament. This will be the first such project in England since the new purpose-built town of Milton Keynes in the 1960s.

Writer, investor and former Guardian journalist Shiv Malik has come up with an audacious plan. He spent his final years writing about millennials’ difficult dealings with housing and debt, and how incredibly difficult it is to build a life like previous generations. Now he is trying to turn his ideas into reality.

“Nobody’s done this before; building in a way that provides a huge net gain to nature. We’re trying to build natural infrastructure,” he said.

He has been in talks with the housing department, and shortly after the forest city proposal was made public the government announced its desire to establish a network of “forest cities” in a similar area.

The Labor government has been accused of pitting nature against housebuilding in its attempt to build 1.5 million homes across the country and solve the housing crisis. Ministers are in the process of passing controversial legislation that environmental groups say puts 5,000 nature sites at risk.

Malik’s nearly 800 supporters span the political spectrum, including Green party campaigners and leaders of right-wing think tanks. He also tapped nature advocate and lawyer Paul Powlesland to join the board of the Albion City Development Authority, which is overseeing the proposal.

The city will be located east of Cambridge, with new rail links, schools and hospitals. This would be under a community land trust managed by a community-led nonprofit organization for the benefit of those who live there rather than for corporate profits. This will help keep homes affordable.

The homes will be built from modular wood designs, to environmentally friendly standards, in communities that are “pedestrianized, human-scale, safe, walkable neighborhoods where children can run free because the world is designed with them in mind.” Instead of relying on cars, they hope to build trams throughout the town so people can use high-quality public transportation. It will feature 12,000 acres of native forest, much of which will be new planting to connect existing woodlands.

Giving developers powers like those given to development companies to build Milton Keynes, Canary Wharf and the Olympic infrastructure will help make homes cheaper because they will be built to scale and special legislation will save the costs associated with going through the usual planning system.

There are many other problems to overcome; especially since East Anglia is one of the most water-consuming regions in the country. Malik says that in addition to building the city, developers will also “fill the chalk streams” and “build water infrastructure” such as much-needed reservoirs. “There is enough money in this program to solve water problems not only for East Anglia but for people around the city,” he said.

They also plan to build on agricultural land. Malik said: “[Guardian columnist] George Monbiot turned me into this ages ago; “This is just a green industrial area, it’s terrible for nature.”

The proposal is to build on industrial farmland that is mostly sterile, devoid of nature after being routinely sprayed with fertilizers and pesticides, according to Malik.

Instead, these areas could be replaced by urgently needed homes and habitats for wildlife, allowing people to live closer to nature. Numerous studies have found that many people in urban areas live in “nature deserts” where green spaces are inaccessible, while the physical and mental health benefits of time spent in parks, forests or at the beach are well known.

Powlesland said: “I think the question is: Can we build what is necessary for people to have a healthy, happy society, while not destroying nature, or ideally restoring nature? That’s the question of the 21st century, and no one seems to be answering that question.”

There are already areas in the proposed area designated as places for rare wildlife or habitats (sites of special scientific interest), but Malik’s idea is to build around these and keep the existing ancient woodland as “corridors” within the city, while planting more trees to connect it all. “People think we want to cut down all these trees, but no, this is a forest city… We’ll say we prefer forests instead of having parks,” Malik said. “You can’t call yourself a forest city just because it sounds nice.”

Powlesland also wants to see if construction could be done differently; for example by bypassing rivers and preserving existing trees: “If this is going to be normal volume development, like the demolition of a concrete city surrounded by nature reserves, I wouldn’t support it.”

Another way is possible, he said: “I think there’s the capacity to do things differently, using technology, imagination, and intelligent design to have a city where there’s more nature and people, so not just more nature, but more beauty. I think that could be great… Imagine a city where people live in a nature reserve, which is actually a nature reserve.”

Some farmers will have to sell their land to build this city, but Malik said the increase in value will mean they will all get good compensation.

Some nature advocates have questioned why a nature advocate like Powlesland would get involved. He said it was important for someone to represent nature in such a scheme: “My job is to speak effectively on behalf of nature’s interests to the best of my ability. There is a great need for the voice of nature to be represented in the planning system. Because at the moment nature is not represented, and those who do are often just people who are classified as nimby. And sometimes they actually care about nature, sometimes they use concerns about nature to avoid any change.”

Some of these ambitious nature plans may be canceled when costs come into play. In such a case the lawyer will morph from one advocate to another: “I believe there is a way to build a city that enriches nature. And it will be difficult. I imagine it will require imagination, courage and some difficulty, but it is possible, and if they don’t do it, then I will oppose it.”

The Department of Housing, Communities and Local Government has been contacted for comment.