天美影院

The event took place across two venues, with a breakfast session at Stoke Town Hall opening the day, and the main event happening at Staffordshire University鈥檚 Catalyst conference centre. With attendees from the public, private, and third sectors, we were delighted to see both events at capacity, with over 50 delegates at the Town Hall and over 180 at the Catalyst.

The day opened with a chance for the sector to quiz the us 鈥� the Office for Place 鈥� on how exactly we can support them. Following this, we were delighted to have both Chris Boardman MBE (National Active Travel Commissioner - Active Travel England) and Mary Parsons (Director of Regeneration & Partnerships at Lovell Partnerships Ltd, and former Building Better, Building Beautiful commissioner) discuss their breadth of knowledge on how we can deliver better places.

Across the remainder of the day, and through both plenary and breakout sessions, our speakers addressed important topics 鈥� how design codes can work at different spatial scales, how setting clear asks on quality can de-risk the development process, how placemakers can better understand what people like and value, and how digital can transform the planning and development sector 鈥� amongst many others. The day closed out with Lee Rowley MP, Minister for Housing, Planning and Building Safety, addressing delegates and reinforcing the core message of the conference 鈥� that we can deliver better places when government and industry work together.

The Office for Place would like to offer our thanks to both speakers and delegates who attended. We hope you found the day to be useful and interesting, and that you鈥檒l join us again next year.

Places at pace: how to fall back in love with the future聽聽

Some reflections from Nicholas Boys Smith, the chair of the Office for Place, on our inaugural conference in our home of Stoke-on-Trent聽

On 18 and 19 March 2024 the Office for Place hosted our inaugural conference in our home in Stoke-on-Trent. Hundreds of leaders and practitioners from the planning, surveying, development, architectural and landscape architect sectors joined my board, officials, and expert advisors for a day of discussions, walking tours, talks and panels. And what a day it was. Four layers of government: Ministers, Whitehall officials, arms鈥� length bodies and local government. And four agencies leading or participating in conversations: The Office for Place, Active Travel England, Homes England, and Historic England.聽

The feedback (so far) has been fantastic: 鈥榠nspiring,鈥� 鈥榠mpactful,鈥� 鈥榓 masterclass,鈥� 鈥榞reat,鈥� 鈥榠nsightful鈥� and 鈥榓 resounding success.鈥�

Our questions included:聽

• What will the evolving planning system mean for developers, councils, and their advisors?聽聽
• How do we de-risk all types of development whilst also raising standards?聽聽
• What does it mean for greenfield and regenerative development in our towns and neighbourhoods?聽聽
• How do we create new places with sufficient urgency and pace?聽

Here are my top take-aways. All normal caveats apply of course: unavoidably subjective and necessarily reflects the conversations I was in not those I wasn鈥檛. For those I have not cited: forgive me please, I could not be everywhere! Doubtless, not everyone present would agree with all of these points. Nor should they. But if there was no monotonal uniformity (thank heavens), there was a choir of pleasingly polyphonic variations upon the same symphony.

1. It鈥檚 harder to fix errors than to make them in the first place

Pretty much everyone now agrees that post-war planning did enormous harm to towns and cities, ripping them apart with dual carriageways, retail parks right besides town centres and the general loss of 鈥楲ego urbanism鈥� (finely hewn local streets and squares) for 鈥楧uplo urbanism鈥� (faceless lumpen blocks in ill-defined spaces). Sadly, in some places it still feels like we are living in the post-war era. As Jon Rouse, City Director of Stoke-on-Trent, reminded us in a superb opening presentation in the city鈥檚 glorious Edwardian town hall, 鈥榬epairing the tears in the urban fabric is much harder than making the tears in the first place.鈥�

2. The road to meeting our housing need runs through Stoke-on-Trent and Grimsby not just Sussex and Greater London

Though the path is a different and is (initially) more about increasing demand through regenerative place-improvement and jobs. New development in 鈥榣eft-behind鈥� places need to be centripetal not centrifugal, regenerative not parasitic, energising not dissipating.

3. The need to rebuilt trust in regenerative development not parasitic development is paramount

Mary Parsons of Lovell Partnerships cited an articulate youngster on regeneration: 鈥榓t best it鈥檚 a necessary evil.鈥� Are we creating for the delight of the public or the plaudits of peers? She continued, 鈥業鈥檝e never met anyone who wanted to live in an icon. They want to live in a home.鈥� Christopher Wren (who was not at the conference) wrote that 鈥榓rchitecture aims at eternity and is therefore the only thing uncapable of modes and fashions in its labels.鈥� Let鈥檚 create places for the plaudit of the people not fellow professionals. Place matters more than decade.

4. Planning is categorically not the proverbial 鈥榖ad guy鈥� 鈥� but we do need to de-risk planning

As one delegate asked, 鈥榟ow easy is it to know what you can build where? The reality is that it鈥檚 not that easy.鈥� Amandeep Singh Kalra of Be First agreed; 鈥榦ur system鈥檚 greatest challenge is its discretionary nature鈥� let鈥檚 remove subjectivity to set land values.鈥� A modular house builder added from the floor; 鈥業 cannot stress enough the importance of predictability.鈥� When asked by Andrew Taylor from Vistry, 鈥榗an we ensure that design codes speed things up and don鈥檛 slow them down.鈥� It鈥檚 a fair challenge.

5. We do know what makes a good place

Don鈥檛 fall for the old canard that 鈥榙esign is subjective.鈥� It isn鈥檛. Where we live, where we walk has very measurable and in large part predictable consequence for our personal health and happiness. We are not automatons controlled by our environment, but we are humans influenced by them as many studies have shown and as Matthew Carmona outlined. Data scientist Chanuki Illushka Seresinhe continued that 鈥榩eople are happier in more beautiful places.鈥� Creating better places is therefore very much about improving health and happiness. 鈥榃e are giving freedom to children,鈥� as Chris Boardman put it. The interaction between place and movement ran through many of our conversations.

6. Design for children and the elderly and you鈥檒l probably create good places for everyone

Across the world, humans鈥� needs from their neighbourhoods are remarkably consistent across class and culture though with important 鈥榮lopes鈥� in the data due to climate and latitude. But it can be harder for the very young and the old to get about: it鈥檚 not that, for example, children are different species with completely different needs but, as Toby Lloyd put it, 鈥業 don鈥檛 know many children who drive.鈥� The same point about the old came up powerfully in one of my conversations. Places carefully considered with children and the elderly鈥檚 liberty to move about will probably work better for everyone.

7. Good places are green places

There is a virtuous circle between where we live and the weight with which we tread upon the planet. This is true from street trees鈥� effect on microclimates to how we move about to the longevity and resilience of beautiful buildings and places whose embodied carbons over time tumbles as they find new uses down the decades. Creating and stewarding good places is ultimately to build not just for our generation but for the future, in communion with the future as well as the present and becoming 鈥榞ood ancestors鈥� as Mary Parsons put it, citing (ultimately) Roman Krznaric.

8. Aiming high helps

The changes in the 鈥榖ar鈥� within the NPPF with the expanded aims of creating beautiful as well as sustainable places and the shift in the 鈥榖ar鈥� from schemes needing to be 鈥榥ot bad鈥� to needing to be 鈥榞ood鈥� has provably made it easier for councils to turn down bad design, as Matthew Carmona reminded us. It is an important statement of raised expectations for how we can live as neighbours.

9. You can and should trust the people

And you need to respect what people tell you, not manipulate it. 鈥榊ou have to give power away,鈥� as Stoke-on-Trent chief executive Jon Rouse put it. This includes respecting the important role that local councillors play. Technology is already changing the game here. Victoria Hills, chief executive of the RTPI, made the observation that soon, 鈥榯he public will be able to design their own places with AI.鈥� Robert Kwolek of Create Streets was unfazed; 鈥榠t鈥檚 an opportunity to be welcomed,鈥� he judged whilst outlining how working with neighbourhood preferences can boost support; 鈥榩eople can see in the design code what they said to us.鈥櫬犫�榊ou have to give power away,鈥� agreed Jon Rouse.

10. Beware of fake consultation

鈥業鈥檝e seen plenty of codes that just code on what people were going to do anyway. What鈥檚 the point of it?鈥� said Amy Burbridge of Homes England. Asking simple and visual questions is important. Cathy Francis of DLUHC suggested, 鈥楲et鈥檚 start with the question: would I live here. I think that鈥檚 a very powerful question.鈥� So do I.

11. Pride and heritage matter

People care about home. Let鈥檚 work with that not against it. As Liam Gregson of the Northern Housing Consortium put it, 鈥榤ake the most of historic buildings 鈥� as emblems for people to gather around.鈥� Paul Williams, a Stoke-on-Trent-based member of our expert advisory panel was very powerful on this: 鈥榙on鈥檛 underestimate the concept of pride,鈥� he said, 鈥榟elp people realise that they can still love the places they call home.鈥�

12. This is something we can agree on

There are difficult challenges facing modern Britain where there are fissures in public opinion. This isn鈥檛 one of them. Anthony Downs, of the Gascoyne Cecil Estate summarised his experience, 鈥榩eople are often very clear about what they don鈥檛 like.鈥� I would agree with this based on all my experience the length and breadth of the country and abroad. It can be surprisingly easy to build consensus about what new places should be like if you ask simple and meaningful questions about character and place and actually respond to the answer.

13. Digital planning hasn鈥檛 really happened yet

As always, Euan Mills was very compelling on this, 鈥楶DFs are the very worst model for the web. The web is 30 years old now. But if you ask Chat GPT about planning, it won鈥檛 tell you anything because it doesn鈥檛 know anything because it is all lost in PDFs.鈥� Design codes done well will be clear online process of what can, and cannot, be built easily in certain places. They should de-risk development with a clear quality ask. As Amandeep Singh Kalra put it, 鈥榮ome local councils are scared of design codes. I would say the opposite is true. They empower councils.鈥�

14. Design codes need to clarify not complicate

A very good question from Andrew Taylor absolutely hit the nail on the head: how do we ensure that design codes clarity what can be built and don鈥檛 complicate the process? (I didn鈥檛 write the down the precise quote because I was on stage at the time.) This is our collective challenge and opportunity. Here, for now, is our answer by the way: 10 criteria for effective design coding

15. There is a new focus on place and a lot to be hopeful about

There was even a lot of hope about. Our conference chair, Toby Lloyd, judged that 鈥榠t really does feel as if things are moving in the right direction鈥� and Mary Parsons agreed that 鈥榳e can keep the faith.鈥� Paul Williams from the Staffordshire University Business School and a member of our expert advisory panel was keen to 鈥榟elp people realise that they can still love the place they call home.鈥� Liam Gregson of the Northern Housing Consortium detected 鈥榓 new placemaking鈥� in which people are empowered鈥� and 鈥榓 new direction from the Office for Place.鈥� Anthony Downs told the story of how popular pattern books of attractive brick buildings are quietly winning support for thousands of new homes in Hertfordshire: 鈥榚nthusiasm grows. passion swells.鈥�

16. And lots of priorities emerged for future research

Paul Williams, for example, suggested 鈥榳e have to find ways to measure pride in place to justify investment.鈥� Others suggested that 鈥榳hat we鈥檇 really welcome would be data standards for local plans and design codes.鈥� Much more on this to follow. Watch this space!

Finally, a warm and heartfelt thank you to all of my board and expert advisors who so kindly gave up their time to join the event to chair discussions and contribute their expertise and to the splendid, dedicated and hard-working team of officials who calmly and coolly made it all happen.聽聽

I鈥檒l end by citing Caroline Simpson, the brilliant Chief Executive of Stockport Council who also sits on our expert advisory board who concluded about the day, 鈥業 feel inspired actually.鈥�

Me too!聽聽

Nicholas Boys Smith
Chair, Office for Place, March 2024