Planning matters blog | Lichfields

Planning matters

Our award winning blog gives a fresh perspective on the latest trends in planning and development.

Trends in achieving good design

Trends in achieving good design

Charlotte Walker 25 Jan 2023
The importance of good design and the delivery of beautiful places continues to gain momentum in planning; equally, the ways in which good design is being achieved is through increasingly collaborative processes.
Looking back, the 2019 RTPI report and survey[1] highlighted how planners across the UK consider design quality to be important in planning and discussed how design quality can be improved. Then at a national level, 2021 saw a drive from UK Government to create high-quality places; the NPPF was revised to increase focus on design quality for delivering ‘beautiful’ and ‘sustainable’ places and the new National Model Design Code was published to provide detailed guidance on the production of design codes, guides and policies.
In London, good design has become integral to the planning process and ways to improve design quality through the development management process are increasing. The Design Council[2] state that design review is a well-established way of improving the quality of design outcomes in the built environment, and it is now recognised in the National Planning Policy Framework. In 2020, the GLA reported that 83% of Local Planning Authorities have either established or begun to develop Design Review Panels (DRPs), as well as ‘Quality Review ‘or ‘Place Review’ Panels[3]. These Panels comprise independent, multidisciplinary professionals and support local authorities in evaluating schemes (often large and strategic in nature) at the pre-application stage by providing advice to improve development proposals.
The question is how do we keep striving for good design? In a recent GLA survey of design review in London, 60% of respondents reported that DRPs often comprise of professionals who are not representative of the communities they serve. In addition, it is difficult to recruit suitably qualified professionals onto a DRP who are from the boroughs they serve, especially if a DRP is run by an external provider. Moreover, Place Alliance reported in 2021 that only a fifth of local planning authorities in England engage communities in the design process and that proactive community engagement in design is minimal[4].
This question brings Community Review Panels (CRPs) into the picture - another way good design is being achieved. Since 2020, five additional CRPs have been established in London from the first being Old Oak and Park Royal Development Corporation Community Review Group which began operating in November 2018[5]. CRPs are groups of ten or more local volunteers who do not need experience or knowledge in planning or architecture. They are appointed to reflect the demography of the areas and chaired by a professional engagement expert. CRPs review development proposals at pre-application stage and their detailed comments and understanding of the locality are given weight in the planning process and can influence outcomes. Frame Projects, a design focused project management consultancy, reports that CRPs are seen as innovative and that local planning authorities are expressing an interest in establishing one, with Ealing Council now having the first borough-wide community review panel in London[6]. Whilst this blog looks at London examples there are good examples across the UK, some of which include new community groups set up to guide the design of new developments in their local areas following funding from DLUHC’s 2022 The Design Code Pathfinder Programme[7].
Nevertheless, there are other initiatives focusing on getting young people interested and involved in development proposals in their communities. The November 2022 Inspire Future Generations Awards[8] in London showcased how young people are adding value to the design process. The awards celebrate and recognise initiatives that work with children and young people to engage in and advocate for a better built environment. The awards gave prominence to a wide range of projects including the My Place Finsbury Park Pilot in Harringay London and the Kingston Riverside Regeneration Project in London, which were shortlisted for best youth community engagement award. Both are examples of how to successfully regenerate neighbourhoods and estates by involving and empowering young people in the discussion of change where they live. Estate regeneration is a growing sector and as highlighted in our Lichfield’s Insight[9], such projects involve complex considerations and effective communication among landowners, decision takers and particularly residents. Therefore, what made these two initiatives stand out was their ability to capture what young people value in their local areas such as particular landmarks, public spaces, and perceptions of spaces, then to maintain and enhance those attributes in the design process. An example of how this was achieved was through the early initiation of co-design and placemaking research approaches where young people’s local knowledge and thoughts shaped the design process. The benefits are wide reaching from supporting community cohesion to promoting inclusive design and designing multigenerational spaces. Moreover, the projects present educational opportunities and raise the profile of property and construction as career option for young people.  
The award ceremony firstly showed that initiatives for young people to input into the design and planning process is increasing and gaining popularity and secondly, that these initiatives have tangible outcomes and influence development projects. Whilst initiatives to involve young people in urban regeneration and the design and planning process are not completely new (see The London Legacy Development Corporation’s Legacy Youth Voice established in 2008[10]), more opportunities exist for such initiatives as local planning authorities and public commissioning organisations are increasingly driving development. Public Practice explains that more local planning authorities are delivering housing schemes, regeneration projects, and are often acting as the master developers; with this change, there is a renewed interest and ambition within local planning authorities to foster or bolster their design culture. Redbridge Council are a prime example of this and in September 2022 partnered with the large UK developer Countryside to regenerate Ilford Western Gateway and deliver a new thriving and sustainable town centre for local communities. Part of the project will involve establishing a Youth Council and a Legacy Committee (Community Board), both with decision-making responsibilities to shape the design of the project. 
It's evident that the community review model is expanding. Input into the design and planning process through more formal platforms and collaborative initiatives for communities - and now more so for young people - is exciting and something to be encouraged. Lichfields have seen this from being part of the Teviot Estate project team, bringing forward housing association Poplar HARCA and Hill Group’s new mixed-use regeneration scheme in Tower Hamlets. Poplar HARCA have set up a Youth Empowerment Board (YEB) in the aim of 16 to 21 year olds influencing the regeneration and design process. For local planning authorities there also appears to be potential benefits from such design engagement and input with young people. The opportunity to discuss and contribute leads to design development influenced by local knowledge across all ages with a real experiential understanding of place as local people are often best placed to know what development is appropriate for their area.
The views of all generations, including future generation, are key to successful regeneration projects and therefore initiatives focusing on young people influencing the design of development proposals offers much to the question of how we keep striving for good design. The design of development proposals is an iterative process, and these examples show that forms of youth and community design input in the planning process could result in more successful development proposals. Ensuring that development proposals respond to local needs, challenges and opportunities is important and design input from both young people and communities seems to be increasingly explored to achieve this. Perhaps such input can support and feed into the DRP process? As built environment professionals, let’s hope 2023 continues to see more collaboration between organisations, companies and local planning authorities on creating platforms for communities and young people to input into the design and planning process.  

[1] RTPI | RTPI design quality

[2] ​Design Review: Principles and Practice - Design Council

[3] 2020 Placeshaping capacity and design review survey (london.gov.uk)

[4] The Design Deficit | Place Alliance

[5] Community Review - an overview | Frame Projects (frame-projects.co.uk)

[6] Community Review - an overview | Frame Projects (frame-projects.co.uk)

[7] Communities empowered to shape design of neighbourhoods - GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

[8] Inspire Future Generation Awards — Thornton Education Trust

[9] Great Estates: Planning for Estate Regeneration in London (lichfields.uk)

[10] Legacy Youth Voice | Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park

 

Image Credit: PTE Architects 

CONTINUE READING

Beautiful Development – In the eye of the beholder?
‘Say no to ugliness’, that is the message to councils in the Building Better, Building Beautiful Commission’s interim report ‘Creating space for beauty’, which looks at how England should address the poor-quality design of new buildings and places whilst ensuring a sufficient supply of new homes. In the eyes of the Commission, building beautifully comprises walkable, human-scale developments, and buildings with finely textured designs and materials, and it urges changes to the planning system to make the delivery of such developments a key objective.
The report argues that the political focus on building more homes cannot be just a numbers game and about houses alone; it must be about making vibrant, characterful places, which people enjoy living and working in. This reflects broader changes in government policy, with far greater emphasis being placed on design quality in the revised National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), published in February. In theory, well-designed development proposals should be more popular and readily supported by Councils; achieve higher returns for developers and provide better places to live and work. However, the Commission suggests that beyond our historic urban centres and conservation areas, development is driven by utility and convenience, resulting in a wasteland of mediocre developments filled with bland boxy buildings.  
The Commission urges a re-think and emphasises the need for higher standards of design and early community engagement in the design process. The report tasks planners, architects, developers and communities to decide together what constitutes beautiful development, but can a consensus really be reached if stakeholders have radically different tastes, or will popular preferences prevail every time? If not, who will ultimately decide what constitutes good design and will this be supported or provoke a public outcry and endless delays?
Three main recommendations are made in the report: one, that securing beautiful development should be a core aim of planning policy and practice; two, that ugly retail parks and supermarkets should be replaced with mixed-use developments; and three, that communities should be given an effective voice early in the design process. By drawing up higher-quality development proposals and engaging communities in the design process, the report suggests that development will be less risky, produce higher returns and secure more support. Simple!
The Commission argues that planners should be diverting their attention to place making and remodelling existing developments. Planners are expected to develop the skills to critically assess proposals in terms of landscape and urban design, place making, architecture and the associations between urban form, wellbeing, and health. The report also recommends giving planners the appropriate policy tools to help them secure higher standards of design from development proposals.
The Bourne Estate, London

Source: Matthew Lloyds Architects

At present the NPPF only sets out general aspirations to create attractive places, it does not define how to achieve it, nor does it effectively require those aspirations to be met. Instead of high-quality design being a ‘nice-to-have’, the report recommends that it be embedded alongside sustainability as a core aim of the NPPF. Could high-quality design be considered a material benefit that could outweigh harm when determining the planning balance in future?
Interestingly, the recommendation that underused and failing retail parks should be redeveloped for high-quality, mixed-use communities has received considerable attention. The report derides retail parks as ‘boxland’ developments, a by-product of a planning system that undervalued place making. The Commission wants planners to be at the forefront of the process of wiping retail parks off the map, but the quest to remodel existing development also extends to the high street. The report urges planners to tackle gaudy signage, street clutter, and poor-quality shop fronts and rigorously enforce higher standards of design. This would likely require more stringent design codes to help instruct future development proposals and make clear what is expected from new developments.
The Malings, Ouseburn

Source: Ash Sakula Architects

The Commission acknowledges that public trust in experts is at an all time low and that too many neighbourhoods feel themselves to be the victim of development. The report argues that the public want new buildings to reflect the history, character, and identity of their surroundings. It recommends that communities play a bigger role in plan-making and design process so that they can define what beautiful development means to them. This would likely require planners to carry out public consultation exercises more frequently and mediate between competing subjective opinions on design.
Local authorities and national government are also urged to deliver more beautiful public buildings that demonstrate civic pride in architecture, ideally with the public being engaged in the selection of winning designs. If the public are given a more prominent role in the design process, will it stifle the development of innovative design as developers retreat to more conservative styles that are likely to gain public support? The report suggests that if greater public involvement results in more traditional bricks and mortar developments at the expense of modernist glass and steel boxes, then so be it.
The report offers several examples of well-conceived development, including Roussillon Park in Chichester; Nansledan in Cornwall; and the work of Matthew Lloyd Architects at the Bourne Estate in London. In Newcastle, The Malings in Ouseburn is praised for creating a dense walkable development. The Commission argues that the popularity and commercial success of these schemes demonstrates the payoff from a careful approach to design. With improving technology making it possible to create finely textured buildings without unsustainable labour and manufacturing costs, similar developments could be delivered more frequently in future.
Nansledan, near Newquay

Source: Adam Urbanism

If the Commission’s recommendations are implemented, the delivery of high quality ‘beautiful’ design will require planners to assess development proposals as much for their design quality as for their sustainability and with significantly more public engagement to inform the process. However, in our experience, design quality is very rarely the main reason for objections to planning applications, so could the quest for beautiful development and a boost to housing delivery be doomed to fail?  The role of planners could be about to become far more design-led and potentially more complicated. While it is good that planners are placed at the heart of the solution, how will they cope when planning departments are already under resourced and overworked? How will consensus be achieved amongst so many competing groups on such a subjective and contentious issue?
Crucially, if design is to become a more integral feature of the planning process will it become a more common reason for refusal and undermine the delivery of new homes, or as the report predicts, will it generate public support for attractive proposals and provide a boost to housing delivery?
The Commission’s final report is due to be submitted to the government at the end of 2019.

CONTINUE READING