Arguments
Let’s get this straight. There is a housing crisis but high-rises are not the answer. You can see why people think they are: take a small plot of land and build really tall. Put in lots and lots of apartments. Problem solved? But actually, no, this is not the answer.
Why not?
Firstly, expense. Towers are significantly more expensive to build per unit. The structure has to be stronger, with lift shafts and sophisticated fire sprinklers. They’re also more expensive to maintain, which is one of the reasons social landlords no longer build them. To put it simply, tower blocks will not solve the housing crisis, because they cost too much.
Secondly, tower blocks are not great for you. Extensive research shows most people are less happy in high-rises. High-rise residents, in general, are more depressed than people of the same income and status living in mid-rise or low-rise buildings; they know their neighbours less, are less socially trusting, lonelier, and more likely to take their own lives. High-rises are especially bad for families, children make less friends, and mothers cannot let their young children out to play.
High-rises separate people from the street and from each other. They greatly reduce the number of chance encounters that are crucial to the liveliness of a city and to creating social capital. The base of a tower is often a dead space, lifeless and unhappy.
In contrast, mid-rises like Bristol’s Wapping Wharf give residents or passers-by a sense of warmth and community – the kind of human feeling often not found in towering skyscraper zones. We want Bristol to remain a warm, human, welcoming place.
Thirdly, they’re not the best way to increase density. Densification of city centres is the new buzzword, partly because it enables people to move away from cars to cycles, public transport and walking. But mid-rise Paris and Barcelona are actually denser than high-rise Manhattan. Admittedly it is a little harder to densify without building tower blocks, but look at the social and financial downside. You lose a more human, sociable and adaptable city.
Fourthly, Bristol is a beautiful city with a strong identity. Why mess up a historic city when you don’t need to? Why create a generic high-rise jungle, like so many cities in China, SE Asia and the developing world?
From whatever direction you drive into Bristol you always have a view. You cannot ignore Bristol’s skyline.
However in the late 1960s and early 1970s the skyline was punctured by a series of terrible towers including Castlemead, Clifton Heights and several others. The people of Bristol fought hard to stop the developers totally destroying Bristol’s skyline – and largely succeeded.
Half a century later the developers are back. The motive remains the same………profit. Castle Park View, at 26 stories and 325 feet is the first of many. The massive Premier Inn and Debenhams redevelopments have been approved and many more are in the pipeline.
Why not follow the example of the continental cities? Many are so beautiful and charming that we visit them on holidays, delighting in the intimate streets and cafes of Amsterdam or Vienna.
These are also the richest cities in Europe. Skilled workers are drawn to live and work in them. Their historic centres have not been destroyed by unsightly tower blocks. Why not learn from them?
Bristol’s charm is a huge economic asset. Why throw this away to become a grim high-rise city, ruined by rampant developer-imposed chaos? Other British cities went down this high rise route in the ‘60s and ‘70s and have ended up unattractive and impoverished. Let it not happen to us!
St Mary Redcliffe Church was the tallest building in Bristol until 2022
Bristol's skyline as it was in about 1870
