The FINANCIAL — There is a strong link between increasing gentrification and the designation of conservation areas (CAs), according to research from the London School of Economics and Political Science.
This recent study, Game of Zones: The Economics of Conservation Areas by Dr Gabriel Ahlfeldt (LSE) and Kristoffer Moeller (TU-Darmstadt, CMS Berlin), Sevrin Waights (LSE, CMS Berlin) and Nicolai Wendland (TU-Damstadt), provides a detailed analysis of restrictive conservation policies within the UK and the associated economic and social costs, and benefits, to local homeowners.
The study found that the presence of affluent residents, and residents who hold a degree, significantly increase the chances of an area being given conservation status. This type of resident is more likely to express a particular appreciation for heritage, and lobby for preservation.
Using property data from Nationwide Building society, the researchers also found that designation of conservation status had no immediate effect on properties prices inside conservation areas but that there was often a significant increase in property value just outside the areas.
As a result, the researchers found that most buyers inside and outside conservation areas collectively acknowledge the benefits of designation policy. They also value the stability heritage preservation brings to a neighbourhood, compensating buyers within conservation areas for the costs of strict regulation and maintenance obligations, as well as restricted rights to alter their properties, according to their own taste.
Around 70% of residents living in areas considered to be of relative “high-premium” value viewed their neighbourhood as distinctive and special in comparison to neighbouring districts considered to be low-premium. These residents, therefore, were more likely to value their local environments and acknowledge the need for planning control.
The research also showed that residents in high-premium areas were more likely to raise objections to planning proposals based on maintaining the character and heritage of the area, such as opposing the removal of a significant tree. Residents in low-premium areas, however, tended to be less articulate in their reasons for objecting to proposed planning.
Discussion about this post