Why local voices and views are key to community development

COMMENT: I think it’s fair to say that the government’s planning reform proposals were dealt a right body blow at the Chesham and Amersham by-election last week. I don’t suppose many EG readers will be crying into their beer. As most of our leading commentators (and oiks like me) have been pointing out for some weeks, these so-called “reforms” weren’t very well thought through, to put it politely. And why bother? We still haven’t properly implemented the last lot, from the National Planning Policy Framework in 2011, in that half of England remains without any Local Plan. In a previous contribution to this esteemed journal, I wrote “changes in planning doctrine come and go, but they generally have minimal effect on the ground”. Blimey, I am such a clever dick! But we do need to pay attention to what happened last Thursday. Underlying all the brouhaha about planning reform is the crystallisation of a disturbing – and strengthening – trend that should thoroughly alarm our industry. Although, of course, we already knew. And that is a widespread acceptance of NIMBYism, rather than YIMBYism, as the perfectly normal – nay, advisable – default response to development (for which read “economic growth”). As well as the upsurge in anti-development independents and residents’ groups standing in local elections over the past couple of years, we now need to keep a careful eye on the activities of the “Love Bombers”, the WhatsApp Group for planning-reform-dissenting Tory MPs led by Theresa Villiers. Now the Labour Party has tabled a motion in the House of Commons which calls on government to “protect the right of communities to object to individual planning applications “. As urbane planning barrister Zack Simons commented pithily over the weekend, “not even a thought that communities would ever do anything other than object”. In a convoluted way, the voters of Chesham and Amersham may have greatly assisted the government’s “levelling up” agenda. Great swathes of the south east of England are now almost untouchable for housing growth. This may prove very short-sighted for some market towns, which have always traditionally relied on servicing a hinterland: with no work on the land, housing growth is the best route to town centre regeneration (or even survival) for many of these places. But we need to win the arguments, fair and square. This means thinking ourselves into the mindset of the people living in the place in which we are trying to build homes. It means selling a vision of clean, green, inclusive growth in a properly planned community. It means infrastructure provided up front. It means quality design. It means showing respect. The property industry used to think I was dead whimsical whenever I asserted that “the experts in any community are the people who live there”. One very eminent senior figure in the industry (I won’t name him, as I did love this bloke) once spluttered at me: “Oh don’t lecture me again with all your guff.”  I’ll never forget it! I just love the word “guff”. That was 25 years ago, but I have never wavered from my central belief. Polls show that the silent majority of people want to see new homes built in their areas in any case, particularly among the younger demographic (and their parents!), and it is these people to whom we should directly appeal. And as for Tory councils, well, politicians know that we have a housing crisis, and the only way to tackle it is to build more homes (oh, and homeowners are far more likely to vote Tory). We need to win that argument, too. The lesson from the Chesham and Amersham by-election is that the development industry must work hard to gain the support of local people in the delivery of new homes. It may be painstaking, but there are no shortcuts. Failure to do so will lead to more housing being consented by appeal and more communities feeling they are being “done unto”. This will lead to more disgruntlement and a hardening of NIMBYism as the default position. Any housing developer riding roughshod over their host community does a profound disservice to those of us who are trying to behave well. But I remain optimistic. Last week I tried out my line about residents being experts in their place at an august gathering of the BPF Development Committee, which I was honoured to address (albeit on wretched Zoom). Nobody laughed, or said it was “guff”. In fact, everyone took it very seriously. This grouping, led by Matthew Sampson of the Crown Estate, comprises cerebral property leaders who give a lot of thought as to how our industry should evolve for the better. All power to them. We now need to think very carefully about how to build alliances in favour of housing – and other – growth throughout the UK. And that means engaging with the concerns of existing residents. It means listening. And it means persuading. Jackie Sadek is chief operating officer of UK Regeneration and a former regeneration policy adviser to government