Shaping sustainable and resilient communities through planning and development

In Episode 8 of the Climate Resilience Podcast, Phil is joined by JBA's Iain Armstrong, Principal Planning Consultant, and planning expert Bart Milburn. Together, they explore how planning and development can shape sustainable, resilient communities - places where people can live, work, and thrive. 

Thank you for listening to this episode. 

For any comments, questions or insights please contact phil.emonson@jbaconsulting.com.

Visit our website jbaconsulting.com
or follow us on LinkedIn JBA Consulting | LinkedIn

Transcript

Copy

SPEAKER_01 0:02

Hello and welcome to the Climate Resilience Podcast, brought to you by JBA Consulting. I'm Phil Emmonson, and in this podcast series we unpick some of the complexities, challenges and opportunities on the topic of climate resilience with some inspirational thought leaders. Now our theme for today's episode is planning and development, and we'll explore how we can create sustainable and resilient places, ones that we all want to live, work and play in. And to have that conversation, I'm pleased to be joined by two amazing guests. JBA is Ian Armstrong and planning expert Bart Milburn. So a very warm welcome to you both. And perhaps you'd like to start by introducing yourselves. Ian, over to you.

SPEAKER_00 0:41

Hi Phil, yeah, I'm Ian Armstrong. Um I'm principal planning consultant at uh at JBA Consulting. Um I've been in this role for three years now. Um prior to that, uh worked over 20 years in in local government as a um town planner in development management, so determining planning applications and um developing planning policies and local plans as well. Um and I'm a chat at town planner.

SPEAKER_01 1:06

Ah, fantastic. It's great to have you. And uh and Bart, introduction from you.

SPEAKER_02 1:10

Yeah, thank you very much, Phil. Um, two thank yous first. First of all, thank you for inviting me to the JBA podcast, and secondly, for describing me as a planning expert. Uh that that's that's very welcome. My background is also 25 years at local authority, but in the last year I've set up my own planning consultancy, uh dealing with all sorts of applications, everything across the whole breadth of what planning is from large renewable sites, housing to uh much smaller, uh minor schemes, listed buildings, that like I say, the whole gambit. Um, and yeah, I'm very, very pleased to be here today and to be part of this discussion.

SPEAKER_01 1:48

Fantastic. Great. Well, look, let's let's let's kick off, let's get going. So I think it's fair to say that in the planning and development context, there is some change at the moment um in that in that landscape in terms of of policy and and legislation. I think there's there's been some reforms as well. And I think that's probably a useful place to start, set the context for the discussion. Um maybe Ian, perhaps if you could perhaps kick us off with um a description of some of those changes and the reforms that we've seen.

SPEAKER_00 2:19

Yeah, thanks, Phil. Yeah, there's there's yeah, there's been a lot recently um following the change of government. So um there's been a new national planning policy framework issue, so um MPPF for for short, um, which was issued in in December um just gone. Um that that's had quite big changes in terms of um headlines about um sort of planning for greater housing numbers who are in a housing crisis and um trying to increase the number of homes that we deliver each year. Um the potential game changer is um this this new definition of of grey belt, which um is land in the green belt, which which is either previously developed land or doesn't make a great purpose um contribution to the green belt purposes. Um that I think has got the potential to deliver a lot more housing in sustainable locations, where accessible from from public transport, etc. Um, and there's other further changes in the pipeline as well with um um the new um planning and infrastructure bill, which is to come out in the coming weeks. Um again, that that that's that's full of changes in terms of um how planning committees work, things like that. So yeah, there's I think the only constant in planning is is that there is um change really.

SPEAKER_01 3:42

Bart, maybe if you want to come in there, any evolutions that you've seen over recent or um over recent years or or more recent time frames?

SPEAKER_02 3:51

Yeah, well, I think as as Ian says, you know, there's there's never an opportunity to stop and sort of think in planning because there is constant change, evolution, and uh things that both local authority and uh consultancies need to look out for. I think the biggest change for me is just the the headline that planners are getting again. And I think there is a bit of planner bashing, but it's actually quite good to hear from this side of the fence I'm now on being uh being a consultant. But what's come out, and I think it was in Rachel Reeves's um uh keynote speech about a week or two ago where she talked about how surprised she was, how long planning takes. And I think that's something we can all relate to. Um, whenever anybody engages with planning, it does seem to take an enormous amount of time. And I think the government's broad ambition to try and speed planning up and it not to be be seen as a hurdle, probably, is uh is is really welcome. And I'm sure it's welcome by all both sides, both public um and private sector and third, third, um, that third sort of tier as well. I think for local authority that probably means more funding. It means uh much larger authorities as well. I think the days of district authorities and smaller authorities are probably numbered. There was a previous push by the Conservative government to bring larger authorities, unitary authorities into being, and the uh the current government's echoing that as well. And and I think there are some massive strengths in coming from um um decision making in unitary authorities. I've worked as both uh head of planning and uh district authority, which is challenges because of just the size and scale we are, but then secondly, I've worked in unitary authorities where actually you can do some amazing things because you've got so much resource and um uh staffing as well, so uh just far stronger in unitary authorities. But on the ground, what does it mean for uh I suppose consultants? Well, BNGs come in, the complexities of that, the it's that's probably delaying things, though. I think as a as a planner, I kind of believe in BNG, and I think it is probably a good thing, though it needs to be streamlined radically, absolutely radically. I think on on bigger schemes it it probably works very well. For smaller single houses and things, it's just astronomically expensive and prohibitive to making quick decisions. Flood risks under review, I think that's hugely welcomed. I think the the flood risk maps that we've been using for years are um you know probably not as accurate as they could be. And I think the review of that, which should be coming out in uh sort of springtime, may release a huge amount of land, may not release a huge amount of land, but may release a significant amount of land for future growth in in good places as well, which which is obviously welcomed. Um, but as Ian's touched on, it's this uh grey belt, the discussion about grey belt and appeal decisions are starting to come through now, and I think there's a bit of consistency in terms of some of local authority and inspectors' decision making around that, and again, um very welcomed and and just provides a little bit more of opportunity for for um for growth, primarily housing. But I think also some of the other changes I've noticed are um which are coming across my desk, and I've noticed in sort of the last uh sort of 24 months when I was head of planning in uh North Yorkshire, there's a lot more sort of slightly unusual schemes coming forward, like data centers, which need a huge amount of land, a lot more solar schemes. Um, you know, there's some different things happening, whereas during COVID, it was all about large logistics buildings on key strategic routes and things that sort of drop like a stone, and we've got a new sort of area. So it's really as well as no change in planning, it's also incredibly interesting. There's loads of opportunities for learning, and I think the importance of CP Day to get your head around this is is uh fascinating. Um so yeah, but I think broadly the discussions about what the government's saying about we need to grow. Well, planning is absolutely fundamental to that, and good planning is fundamental. I recently met our local MP, I'm not gonna name drop him, about a scheme, and it was really good to talk to him. He was well briefed and understood planning to a point. And what he talked about was, and it was really good to hear, what he talked about was yes, we're gonna build, we're gonna build a lot of housing, we're gonna grow, but what what they are determined, or he said he was determined about, he's a local guy, as well as being our MP, that the legacy, he was proud of the legacy, he wouldn't have to avoid a scheme that's been approved or come forward under this administration. He'd actually be proud to say, well, you know, we've we've delivered this, we've facilitated that through speeding up processes, resourcing local authorities, and we've actually delivered the affordable housing with the uh what is it, the the golden rules about 15% above if green belt release has been made. We've improved ecology, we've improved public open space um for people with improved accessibility. So that's really good to hear. But look, let's see, because often the proofs in the pudding, um and you know, we we all probably have schemes in uh you and I probably have a couple of things in Gate said from our days, uh dealing with uh pretty major infrastructure and um you know schemes down along the quyside, which we're incredibly proud of, but there's the odd one or two which have sort of snuck in, and you think that that could have been a little bit better. And I think that's that that's that's that's the the main thing. So growth resources, but that's coupled with the the balance of you know increased legislation and hoops to jump through. And I haven't even talked about the simple it simple things about getting the planning application valid and the delays in local authorities because I'm not I'm not here to kick local authorities, but a northeast authority who's desperate for housing and growth took six weeks to validate an application. You know, that that to me is and that is is something that really should be uh fundamentally addressed, you know, because it's just it's just dead time, it's just it's just flat time for an application. You know, what I don't want to say is sorry, sorry. Yeah, no, go well, all I was gonna say is I I'm trying to re uh um remember a quote which I heard that planning is the the first hurdle to cross for for excellent development, and I think it shouldn't be. I think it should be that development management, we should assist it and um you know helping the help in the journey of delivering really good development.

SPEAKER_01 10:23

Over to you and Phil. Well, no, I I think that's been a really great scene setting, actually, from you, Bart, Andy, in there. I it's great to reference things like biodiversity net gain and the new National Federal Risk Assessment AFA 2, which is coming in in the spring, and the and the the legislative context. What you were alluding to there, Bart, in terms of the time frames and some of the challenges, relate, I suppose, to where this conversation can go next, which is um in in other podcasts we've explored how we can engage the whole of society in in our work to build a more climate-resilient nation. And I suppose the same question applies here in the context of planning. Now, I would imagine that typically those people who engage in the planning process uh or or with you know local planning applications are those who have a degree of agency or interest, you know, be that they've got they've got time, uh, they might have a particular professional background or certain you know um educational background that allows them to understand some of those complexities. Um Bart, you were you were referring there to some of the the uh the durations of some of the you know the the applications that that are caught in the system. But what do you think then are the challenges and the opportunities in terms of how we engage society in the planning process?

SPEAKER_02 11:48

That's a really great question, and I'm not sure I've got the answer. I I think as well as that issue about engaging people, it's engaging I suppose positivity. Because often when we're very, very focused on planning applications, that's primarily what I do, as well as promotions and you know, working working sites through the the the um plan process as well. But what what I worry about with planning applications and that that fundamental engagement, because the majority of people that their engagement with a planning application is when your neighbour puts in a conservatory or something like that. But when you think about bigger schemes and what the government's trying to deliver, I think the majority of people who engage are probably anti-development and they they have a loud voice generally, they are very quick to uh sort of generate groups, and the often often objectors are um you know, they have time, they have resources, they're generally reasonably well educated, um, and able to engage politically to bring pressure on on um sort of decision makers, and that that's something that we we've you know, we haven't touched on, but this government's talking about maybe removing um planning committee from making decisions on certain types of sites, potentially allocated sites, etc. So I I think the engagement of people who are objecting is important, it's absolutely important, and if they bring material um issues forward, then yes, they should be considered. But I think what what's often silent is the people who want development or maybe don't want that particular development because it's not on their doorstep. But actually, the the things we thought about before I mentioned before about affordable housing. Well, where are people going to live? Where are younger people gonna be able to buy properties? Where are potentially families whose kids have luckily gone on to uh to move out uh are able to sort of downsize into places they want to live rather than say in a four or five-bed house, um, sort of blocking bed, bed blocking almost. You know, there needs to be options, and I think people like that need to be engaged as well and heard. So, yeah, in terms of plan making, I think that's even harder to get people engaging in. Um, development management side, the planning applications, you know, people do that. They read notices and they get get pretty heightened about it, and people talk about it. But it it, you know, planning is a plan-led system, it's a it's a plan-led process, and rightly so. I think it's it fun it fundamentally works, it's better planning. Um, I think the hardest thing to do is is engage in in plan making and in local plans coming forward. And I know there's sort of regional plans being talked about again. Uh I'm not sure how how people can engage in that. But in terms of the plan making, I think a really good example, when I was at GateSed, they did a thing called King for the Day, right? And that was to try and engage people at in uh schools um to sort of say, well, if if you had the if you were king for a day, what what would you develop for Gate said? And you know, they talk about leisure opportunities and better access to you know community facilities and football and all sorts of things. It was excellent, really good. But whether or not it's truly engaged, I don't know, because you can engage at quite a superficial level, and I think sometimes planning might do that. It's how do you truly engage so people really understand it and understand the implications of of their decision making? Um, but that that's that's a that's a broad challenge, I think, for local government. Um for government, you know how many people engage full stop. I think people often don't really get into the sort of weeds of things until it's uh it's it matters to them, which is maybe not absolutely true.

SPEAKER_01 15:40

There's there's something here I think on storytelling. So um we've done a lot of work in JBA to consider how we can um uh convey what is often quite you know technical work that we do as as engineers and scientists, using data and scientific evidence, and how we can relate that to um you know the the the wider community, the wider society. And so we have done a uh quite a lot of work over the last couple of years with with artists and creatives thinking about creative communication so that it becomes more relatable um rather than just doing engagement for engagement's sake. Um and I think there's something in that. I think there's there's something here, listening to you, Bart there, actually in terms of telling the story of planning and and and local planning processes um so that people can really understand it um rather than just you know putting something out for consultation. Um Ian, I'd like to bring you in here as well on this question, if I if I may, um just around the same theme of engagement and how we can bring you know the whole of society into um the planning process and the planning application um piece, just so that you know society has a has a greater awareness of what's going on, what the pressures are in their local community. I don't know if you've got anything else to add that that um beyond what Ian, uh beyond what Bart's just been discussing.

SPEAKER_00 17:06

Yes, thanks, Phil. Yeah, um I think yeah, storytelling, that's a good one because I think um the planning industry and development industry are have been really poor at um storytelling and um um explaining the bigger picture to to people about um potentially what why we need new development um sort of pressures uh of development and things and a lot of um concerns you hear from people is about infrastructure, about um new homes, um what what pressure does that have on things like doctor surgery, schools? Um, but actually um a lot of local authorities and developers are set up to to deal with that in terms of um schemes I've been involved with where the developers actually make contributions to the local school to enable that to be expanded, um, things like doctor surgeries as well. So um, but we don't tell that very often. It's it's not really well known about it about what they've done. So I think it's definitely um improving the communication on that to say, well, maybe that this development's actually gonna create um you know X number of places at a at a new school, for instance. Um that that's something that needs to be improved a lot. Um I guess I guess again, making it more relatable as well to a sort of cross-spectrum of people. So um again, planning it seems to be dominated by by by the same people, and it always asks the same questions, so you always get the same answers. So it's maybe taking it out of different demographics. So again, like uh younger people in in schools, because a lot of planning is is obviously um planning for the future. So um again, it's it's it's sort of younger people maybe asking them what they see the future as, um, what sort of things they want. Um, I know in JBA, um, you mentioned we've got a lot of um advanced technology actually, where um I was looking in the office and then we've actually got a virtual reality headset that you can put on and actually look around new proposals, which is is brilliant. Um rather than looking at two-dimensional plans again, which which the planning system has these plans and PDF documents which which people really struggle to understand. But if you put like a VR headset on and you can actually look around a new development and see see see what's proposed, um, I think things like that are become more common now, which is is a really good thing. Um, and again, um we ask uh new developments about about maybe people who live nearby, um, who already live there, who which is uh obviously a necessary thing to do, but not necessarily looking at who's going to live in these these homes who have have we heard from from their views, people who don't have a home who are maybe stuck living with uh with their parents. So yeah, it's um I think there's a lot a lot to do, but uh I am encouraged with with some of the steps that are being made.

SPEAKER_01 20:02

That's really good. And I I I think um well, I was listening to the radio actually this morning, and Steve, Steve Reed, the defra minister, was was on the radio. And and he was being challenged on um the potential conflict in the public's perception between the uh the the growth in and and you know, as you alluded to, Bart, speeding up the planning process, getting more developments through, and pressure to build on the floodplain, which is often what people perceive. And and clearly there is a bit of a conflict, a dilemma there. But he was right when he alluded to the fact that actually those are those are challenges that will be dealt with at a local level through local planning applications that people can engage with. So if there are local concerns about um you know building on floodplains, then um you know people have got the opportunity to to look at those proposals and and get involved. Um we are, as we often are on the podcast, um uh watching the the the time take away from us very quickly.

SPEAKER_02 21:07

And look, that's a shame, Phil, because I really wanted to come back and build on some of the really good points Ian made. But you know what, this could be part one. We could maybe do a sequel like uh yeah, planning sequel on this one. But really interesting stuff, Ian.

SPEAKER_01 21:23

It it is, and I and do you know, Bart, we've had this conversation with a couple of guests that actually we're gonna bring them back and we're gonna do a second or third follow-up. And I'm really keen to do this because it feels like we are just starting to scratch the surface. And so I suppose in the in the last couple of minutes that we've got available, quick sort of headline bullet points from you both, just in terms of what um what you think some of the um the aspirations are for wider stakeholders in that planning process. So we spoke about we spoke about the you know the wider society, but what are the sort of top headlines in terms of aspirations? In terms of landowners or developers or planning officers. And I suppose that's in the context that ultimately, I think, everybody involved in the planning process is trying to create developments that are sustainable and in which people want to live and work. But we've spoken a lot about what many of those challenges and hurdles are today. So I suppose, yeah, a final a final thought, a final bullet point headline from you from you both on what those aspirations are in the context of the current landscape. Maybe Bart, let's start with you.

SPEAKER_02 22:37

No, thanks. Planning officers are excellent. The majority of local authority planning officers are absolutely fantastic, hardworking, and often the CPD and understanding of planning is superior to some of the uh consultants I suspect that they deal with. Really, really good people too. And they're they're the right people to make decisions. And I think it is really important that their resource, and I think it's really important that the engagement process um remains. And I think committee has a role in that. Maybe not for smaller schemes, but certainly for those major schemes and strategic developments, which are no doubt going to come forward. Landowners, all sorts of different things motivate landowners. Um, I have different landowners who have all sorts of aspirations. They talk about legacy, which I touched on a little bit of the MP, who's not a landowner, but he's still a stakeholder. Yes. I hear things that they want to, you know, see things they can be proud of, and you know, their family will drive past and see. Other landowners are probably looking for the best return they possibly can. And as I mentioned previously, you know, sometimes housing isn't always the best return. Renewables, data centers, battery storage, um, infrastructure works have value now, genuine value. And I think that's something that's starting to develop. Um, also, landowners need to understand that values which previously, you know, I had someone describe that they used to think they had a pot of gold, they've probably got a pot of silver, but they might actually just have a pot of pot of um brass because part of the new changes which are coming through, which talk about the golden rules in the 50% addition on affordable housing standards, means that some sites, unfortunately within the northeast and probably elsewhere, just are barely viable, and you're not going to get a willing out landowner to sell. So they're potentially going to hang on to their land and just carry on grazing cows. And that's a barrier. So all of the there's almost unintended consequences that the thought is right, because we get that 15% uplift in housing, uh affordable housing, but actually, it might make a site value so poor that the um landowner will hang on for the the next time there's a governmental change. Developers, it's just juggling everything we talked about, uncertainty, landowner's uncertainty, which I've touched on there, because they consider the site's got a value and it might not quite be there. Uh changes the flood risk, BNG, which is still probably slightly unquantifiable. You know, the credits for that vary in value or price, if we put it almost seen as a tax, but it varies massively. And then there's the vagaries and lack of resource within um planning, um planning um departments, which can mean huge delays, uh decisions which aren't necessarily robust. You know, there's a lot of great officers in there, but there's a lot, there's there's probably not enough really great officers, even though I think that they're fantastic and the right people to be making the decisions. And then you've just got the delays. You know, if you have to go to appeal, it can be six to twelve months or longer. Um, so there's a lot of uncertainty for for all three sort of parts I've mentioned there. But I think it's getting it it if there's general growth and aspiration for growth, and a few of the shackles are lifted, there are benefits, but it may not be absolutely um it may not necessarily lead to the the explosion in growth that country we need or is we're considered to need. So yeah, that probably wasn't very bullet pointful, but yeah, trying to focus on the three main parts.

SPEAKER_01 26:18

Thanks. It's because it's because it's it's such a complex um picture and story, and I and we will we will return to it. Ian, I think then the final closing words from you today, please.

SPEAKER_00 26:29

Yeah, I was just gonna say, yeah, that the the complexity um in planning is is is greatly increased over the years now, just I guess dealing with a more complex world. So obviously climate change and climate resilience are a big thing that that that sort of in decades past just weren't even considered, and it's so important now for planning as well as um related things, so so so biodiversity net gain, so the need to to actually improve um biodiversity as a result of development as well. So there's other things like um building safety and and fire risk as well, which sadly came out because of Grenfell. These are all things that have now been put on the planning system to deal with. Um at the same time that there's been a massive reduction in resourcing and planning, just a number of people in local government, especially, which is so it's it's sort of created this this this this perfect storm, but but but hopefully um there are positive signs of that that that'll improve and yeah, resourcing will be improved as well. So I think yeah, I think it is a um a very challenging future, but but but sort of one that that that that can be positively done.

SPEAKER_01 27:42

Yeah, yeah. Brilliant. And I and and I think um I think some of the topics that we've touched on today um that relate to climate resilience around biodiversity net gain, the National Flood Risk Assessment NAFA 2 that's coming out. Um also we touched on the engagement side of it as well. I'd like to come back to some of those topics. So um make space in your diaries, chaps, because we will we will be coming back to um episode two uh on this in due course. It's been a great conversation. Thanks, Bart. Thanks and really appreciated your expert insights and analysis. Um and so we have reached the end of our time today. As always, if you've enjoyed listening, then please hit the subscribe button so that you're ready for the next episode when it lands in a few weeks' time. Till then, thanks for joining us. I'm Phil Emingston, and you've been listening to the Climate Resilience podcast brought to you by JBA Consol.