The Planning Conundrum: The Battle of Hoosin Charge

This battle has been going on for over 50 years.  Different governments sought to bring an end to the battle.  As much as community engagement is required by Governments & Councils, there are only a small proportion of schemes that can testify to have genuinely and openly been influenced by those most affected the community.

Yet, after 20 years of working for Councils, consultancy and a developer, personal experience is that Jane Jacobs is right:  …….

Yet, we are all focussing on the wrong things:

• Councils often focus on the process of how to get from A to B, yet in plan making and decision making, often give little opportunity for communities to shape their towns and villages.

• Developers want to de-risk, but do so by getting a body of evidence to prove why their scheme is the right thing.

• As a result, communities focus on stopping something from happening, pulling up the drawbridge, seeking to stop change at all costs.

Even when a developer “wins” approval for a scheme, communities see it as a loss.  The battle lines are drawn and someone has to win, and someone lose.  This is nothing less than exhausting and often a battle of who can hold out the longest. Surely there has to be a better way, a less risky way, a way where we can work to a common objective?

Experience of numerous schemes shows that there is.  Ford, which remains as the largest allocation in any adopted Neighbourhood Plan, was founded on working closely with the community to create what is now coming forward for a new community of 1500 homes.  Blandford provides for a new community of 750 homes through the Neighbourhood Plan.  Knowle Village focussed on local democracy to regenerate and create a new village around a former listed Victorian hospital for 400 homes.  Southbourne proposes 1250 homes through the emerging Neighbourhood Plan.  All of these delivering significant social value and local facilities. All provide a far easier and quicker ride through the planning system as a consequence.  All schemes de-risked for everyone.  All focussed on outcomes not “winning”.

There are also lessons from partnerships – joint ventures between developers, Councils or Registered Providers – often focussed around estate regeneration or the delivery of affordable housing.  But the most successful ones working closely with communities to deliver positive outcomes for all. 

All of these examples can be labelled as “Co-creation”.  Where the pen is shared ….. open discussions are held and trust is built long before the first home.   Yes, of course it takes the will of everyone to make that happen, but it all starts with an honest conversation at an early stage.  Fail here and the battle lines are quickly drawn.  Succeed here and everyone wins.

So what prevents this from happening more? Why isn’t it the model approach?

With the recent discussions around the re-emergence of strategic planning – be that in the CaMkOx corridor or Oxfordshire, the calls for a London Mayor who engages with Londoners tell me something …… that communities want to be involved in the bigger planning decisions too – how their cities can address their problems of affordability and inequality, how they can grow, how we plan properly for infrastructure, how they can protect their natural environments. 

All of this relies on solutions that are far bigger than any single local authority area, let alone a town or village.  Yet, of all the solutions being considered, none talk of co-creation. It seems no one has learnt from 50 years of failure – where top-down solutions were caught against by communities. 

Why does regional planning have to be done excluding the communities they affect? My own experience of engaging with communities on these larger issues shows that communities can understand the issues – it just takes time and effort to do so.  But surely this is ultimately less time and effort that not doing so? No wonder communities hold on to the Green Belt as the last defence!

So what is the answer?  Is there not a way for everyone to work together?  Could “co-creation” be the answer at the local and city-region level?

What gets in the way?  Is it just trust? Or maybe a lack of willingness to make it happen?  Importantly, do we have the right skills and attitude as an industry to make it work?  Maybe we have forgotten the art of a difficult conversation? 

So in the battle of Hoosin Charge, what is needed to make the change?

Robin Shepherd