Grow Places

GP 28: Consensus Building: Planning Urban Development with David Morris of DP9

• Grow Places • Season 1 • Episode 28

Share episode

Discover the essence of strategic planning with insights from industry expert David Morris, board director at DP9, an independent planning consultancy in London. Journey with us as David shares his path from a geography student to an influential planner, highlighting the critical value of long-term relationships and collaboration in the planning sector. Learn how fostering teamwork and communication can transform the planning process into a forum for resolving conflicts and achieving consensus.

Uncover the delicate balance between commercial viability and community enrichment in development projects. David discusses how the planning industry has shifted from mere 'development control' to proactive 'development management,' emphasizing the importance of genuine dialogue between developers and local authorities. Experience how early engagement, trust, and open conversations can bridge differing opinions and drive successful projects that align both financial and community goals.

Stay tuned as we navigate the dynamic changes in the City of London's office market and the innovative repurposing of office buildings. David underscores the significance of strong leadership, sustained commitment, and effective feedback mechanisms in urban development. Reflecting on both rewarding completed projects and the lessons learned from unmaterialized schemes, David offers practical tips and inspiring stories from his extensive experience. Join us for a thought-provoking episode that sheds light on the practicalities and rewards of the planning profession.

Speaker 1:

Hello and welcome to the Grow Places podcast, where we explore the virtuous circle of people, growth and place Brought to you by Grow Places and hosted by our founder, tom Larson.

Speaker 2:

David. Hello, thanks for joining me, thanks, how are you doing?

Speaker 3:

I'm very well. How are you?

Speaker 2:

Good, yeah, really good. Thank you Really good, really good. I'm going to ask you a question to hold in your mind for the end of the podcast that we'll come back to. Okay, so is the planning system fit for purpose? So it's a pointed question. Let's circle around it and we'll come back to it. We've only got an hour. We've got an hour. No, no, exactly. But before we dive into it, David, why don't you just give a brief introduction to yourself and go from there?

Speaker 3:

So I'm David Morris, a board director here at DP9. As many people know, dp9 is an independent planning consultancy 20th year this year and we're pretty blessed in terms of being independent. We do one thing planning um on a good day, we're okay at it and um, and we largely do it in one geography, which is london and london in its sort of wider context, increasingly new geographies. But, um, the business is built out of, uh, relationships, um and sort of and repeat business, which I think some people look at it and say, oh, that's quite interesting, how's that come about? But when you actually look at the task of being a planning consultant, a lot of it is about relationships and about finding shared opportunities, shared solutions. So, and that doesn't come overnight. You know, that's it. That's born out of trust and things. So that's what we do.

Speaker 3:

I'm I guess I'm the product of Deep in Iron, I don't know when. I don't know what number I am. I'm not 10, 10, I'm a bit beyond that, but I, I, I, I naively left university and and, uh, I studied geography, which is what you do when you don't know what you want to do in life. Um, and then this was around the, the prescott era, when they were trying to get people into planning and I did did a master's at UCL and I was doing some work at the time, actually, for Andy Hunt and Tom Dobson.

Speaker 3:

We're not allowed to talk about them because they're they're competitors, and I said I'm not really up for this sort of socioeconomic number crunching thing. What do you recommend? And they said you should go and have a chat with a guy called malcolm. He's just set up this business. So I trotted along and, um, yeah, kept me waiting four hours, I think, for an interview. The interview was in a cab on the way to a meeting and I was kicked out the other end and told to come to work the next day, which I did, and I'm still here. So, um, and I sat on the board with um. There were 13 of us that co-own the business and, yeah, it's a fun place to be.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, definitely, definitely. And you know you mentioned relationships there and you know, I firsthand, know you know the value of the long-term relationships you know with yourselves and what that can bring to the process of, you know, building and developing buildings in the building environment. But so so what have you learned then since that cab journey about the planning system, the role of a planning consultant, your position in the whole environment industry and kind of what that entails?

Speaker 3:

so I mean, I think, well, I think the first thing to say is planning is a very nebulous term, isn't it? And it actually encompasses lots of things. And I think it's important to say you know, we do a very, very specific piece of planning, um, which is effectively acting for private clients to go through the process of obtaining a planning permission. There's a whole bunch of work that comes before that, around policy and master planning and everything else, and whilst we've kind of assisted in that, that's less of our lead. And I think the kind of the thing that I've learned about it and, as I said, it's probably come from a very naive perspective, and, as I said, it's probably come from a very naive perspective is, you know, you can't, particularly on the type of projects we do. It's a bit corny, but you know it is a team. You can't. We're not magicians, you know, neither is an architect, neither is everybody, and actually it's as much about how you work with other people within your team as and how you work with the local authority, gla, et cetera.

Speaker 3:

So I think I think kind of having, and sometimes we're known, I think unfairly for being a bit too commercial and a bit I think that's something which, because we're in the day to day of what we do, we, we, we sort of we don't spend enough time educating people on how we are.

Speaker 3:

But if you're very aggressive in the world that we're in, you don't get very far because you have to achieve things through consensus and nine times out of ten actually, there's a lot of commonality between a commercial brief and what a public authority audience want, if it's really that you actually do fall out. But I think at the heart of it is sort of the way you operate with other people, and at the core of that is kind of is listening. That's a really important skill and it's something that we really try and embed in people from the very start when they come here, which is you've got to be able to listen and understand a different perspective, even if you don't agree with it, because from that will come some kind of consensus and a way forward. And and you know it's not a very nice phrase, but sometimes planning is a forum within which sort of conflict resolution occurs. Right, you know how many times have you sat with somebody and they fundamentally don't agree with what you're trying to do? And this concept of disagreeing agreeably, I think is really important.

Speaker 2:

Yeah.

Speaker 2:

So it's all really kind of the human things that you're mentioning there about consensus, about listening, and I think that's that's so vital, isn't it, to where we are as an industry and what we kind of we kind of need looking forwards as well, and because, because you are sat in your role particularly, you know between effectively, what, to a lay person, would look like a legal document in terms of planning policy sure, the language you know everything about it is really binary and and not very human in a lot of ways in terms of like policy, x, y and z, and then you've got developers, designers, and then the, the broader industry.

Speaker 2:

But but much beyond that, obviously, is the communities and the, the places in which we're, we're sort of operating, and your role is to sit within all of that, isn't it? And sort of you're not. So you're not just listening to the industry, you're, we're sort of operating and your role is to sit within all of that, isn't it and sort of you're not. So you're not just listening to the industry, you're, you're really listening to the public and to the people in the communities, in the places that you're operating yeah, yeah, and and our clients.

Speaker 3:

You know there's a kind of I think sometimes there isn't an honesty to why we're all in the room, which is that you know you have to, you have to drive commercial outcomes, but I think, as I say nine times out of ten, that the commercial outcomes are actually aligned with other priorities and, um, I think we've come a long way as an industry to recognizing other metrics to value development other than just profit and money. Right, but, but. But that is a core point. Um, and I think the kind of the policy environment is really important, but I think and I know we're going to talk about this later that one of the the I I think one of the lazy sort of statements that politicians put out is, you know, planning these, completely reforming. And I don't think it does, because actually it works very well on a good day and it works very unwell on a bad day, and it's about how it's applied.

Speaker 3:

So, you know, a lot of the policies are deliberately vague because it's kind of recognizing that any given location is going to need a different response and if it was one size fits all, we'd you know we'd live in a very different place. Um, you know the zonal system in new york, for example. That's that works because of what new york is. It wouldn't work here, um, and it allows people to because there are some vagaries, intentionally within the policy environment to shape strategies and outcomes accordingly. Um, but that's our job, because you know we wouldn't be doing our job if we just said there's a policy, you can read it yourself. That I mean they are, you know they're quite, they're quite chunky documents these days, but a layperson can sit down and read them and get a basic understanding how you apply it, how you take people on that journey through the planning process. That's really our job and that's about relationships. Yeah, yeah really interesting.

Speaker 2:

And you know you mentioned commerciality there a few times and you know we, as a developer, you know it's fundamental to what we do as well, and you know if you're of a mindset that you know it's fundamental to what we do as well, and you know if you're of a mindset that you know growth is a good thing. Places can change, places can grow. The only way that really happens is if they stack up commercially. And you know you've got to have some form of basis that allows these things to happen.

Speaker 2:

I don't think many people in our roles enjoy the projects that don't go off the drawing board.

Speaker 2:

You know we all want to be involved in things that are realized and that have a kind of transformational impact on places and on people's lives, and the only way that that can really happen is if they they stack up. So I think it's it's right that we are all, um, first and foremost, very mindful of, you know, the commercial realities of a project, whether that's from the client's perspective, whether that's a local authority's perspective. But then, as you say, kind of this sort of broader notion of value and what does that kind of mean and how does that relate to people's lives, is really an interesting sort of aspect, I think, of what we do, and maybe you know, if we do sort of cast ourselves forward so you know projects that are maybe on the drawing board now and that are going to be realized over the next five, ten years, you know that that broader sense of value is really important, isn't it? And it's and it's factoring into the planning at the really early stage now, isn't it?

Speaker 3:

yeah, it is. Yeah, I, I think there's. As I said before, I think we as an industry have come quite a long way and I think it's fair to say that that narrative you've just given now is probably more commonplace across a fair spectrum of private clients, private developers. I think if you wound back 10 years, there wouldn't be many people talking in the way you are. And I say that because I think one of the problems opportunities is relationships between the public and private sector. I feel really strongly about this.

Speaker 3:

You know, I, I, I used to teach a course where it was. It's all about the history of planning and where it's come from. And it's really interesting If you actually look where planning started okay, I mean in its modern format, after 45, with the athlete government and you look at what it was trying to do and you compare it to where it's, what it's become, it's really interesting. And the fact that it's only very recently that planning departments stopped being called development control and started being called development management. I find that fascinating Because the inference is you want to control development, you know, and people have different views on that, but I think there's a kind of you know. I think they call it epistemology, don't they? That your thought process and natural psyche approaching an issue?

Speaker 3:

And I think, for too long, um, there's been a bit of this right which is, like you know, you're a big, big, bad, godly developer and all you want to do is make money and we're we're here to represent communities and deliver the best outcome for, for you know, our borough, for the people elect us whatever it might be, and and and the truth is nowhere, it's probably somewhere in the middle right, depending on the situation.

Speaker 3:

But neither of those two scenarios are fair and I think the whole, the whole Conversation, needs to be recast. But that's very difficult, very, very difficult, particularly in an age of populism, which is where we live. In right, without getting too political, there's a fundamental problem that says if you collaborate and talk to the private sector, somehow collaboration can become collusion. That's not the case, and the best outcomes I believe, having been in this business for 20 years, have been when there's been open, honest and frank conversations between local authorities, the greater London Authority and the development community, because nine times out of ten, I keep saying it, you can always shape a strategy as a developer to meet the objectives of the local authority if you know what they are yeah, yeah, yeah, absolutely.

Speaker 2:

And, um, you know it's finding common ground, isn't it within aspirations? And you know, you know there's always going to be difference of opinion and there will be different perspectives, and that's right, yeah, you know. But there will, as you say, there's also a lot of common ground there and and people want to see things happen. I think, fundamentally, you know a lot of people you know want want things to, to move on, to improve, to change, um, but, but there's aspects within that aren't there. That is is about how, as you've said, how do you listen, how do you build consensus, how do you communicate that and how do you create a process where it feels like there's an element of kind of trust, collaboration these words kind of get thrown around, but actually there's kind of consensus, as you're saying is probably a better word for that. That you know there's. There's an aspect of okay, we understand, yeah, that there's some drivers here. Um, we maybe don't agree with them all, but can we kind of join some consensus around some of these issues?

Speaker 3:

yeah, and I think I mean that.

Speaker 3:

You know a big, a big issue is that we're not perfect, right I mean people will say to us all the time yeah well, I'll point to a project where you know, I feel like you didn't listen and and I think I'm talking about the process, yeah, and, and you know, and you know what I mean local authorities are really good, and quite rightly, at pushing developers to say you should engage early, you should listen early because it's in your benefit, because if you bring these people with you, you will always find friends that will want to support what you're doing.

Speaker 3:

You'll always find people that aren't on board or don't like what you're doing. You know, and I think a kind of positive look back to inform where we might go is really important. You know, what did we do well historically? What did we not do well? I think many people would say the way we've consulted on what we might call the sort of more medium to smaller projects. You know your big King's Crosses of this world that you know there's traditionally might've been a bit of a different psyche, but more and more this kind of thoughtfulness and realization that actually to undertake this process properly is going to get you a better commercial outcome and linking those two things is quite a new phenomenon.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, definitely. And how much in what we do and in the built environment do you think is planned? Can we plan in that broader sense, and how much is serendipitous about whether that's in the process or whether that's in the outcomes, in terms of what is actually being drawn, consented and then built?

Speaker 3:

Well, I'm not unbiased in this, right, I mean, I think I think it's an incredibly tall order for a local authority to write a document which in itself takes probably three years to write. Go through the process that's going to set out a plan and a stall for the next 10 years, right? So if you were to rewind 10 years from now, every single plan that's been written is now redundant. Post-covid Brexit, you, you name it health of the high street, and um, and I think the unintended consequence sometimes of policy is that it becomes too much of a ring fence for practitioners like me, and, and, and you know, planning officers that would kind of say quite sensible things like well, we agree, really we should. You know, there isn't an office market here, but I've got a policy that was written seven years ago that says we shouldn't lose office. So, um, but I but, but, you know, in lieu of a better system and I don't think there is one, as I said earlier, I think it's about the way you use these policies and I think more, more discretion to planning authorities, planning officers, leaders of councils, to sort of say we've read our plan in the round and, and actually our priority here is x and we and we'll, we'll, we'll, consume with and treat with this policy, but we're not going to meet it because we're trying to achieve this is important and there have been some key decisions, like Master Brewer, which kind of dealt with this whole tool, buildings, d9 issue, where authorities have set out their strategic priorities. If you're going to adopt that approach, which is to say plans will never keep up with reality, because reality moves a lot quicker than plans do, you have to have a very clear, uh, set of objectives and a clear leadership team that are going to implement those objectives. And I think that's if I was going to offer some positive criticism to the, to the public sector. That's sometimes where this falls down and that is positive criticism in the sense of that's no one's fault.

Speaker 3:

And I think an inherent issue within planning and policy is the influence of politics. Quite rightly, we live in a democracy and these plans are led by political objectives. But if we've got a plan for 10 years, that doesn't always keep in touch with reality. We have an election every four years with new ideas and new people, so there's a lot going on at any given time. And that's the world that I live in.

Speaker 3:

When I'm sitting down with you saying, right, okay, what should we? What should we do on this site? What? What are the priorities? And um, and the wider thing in all of this is certainty, isn't it? I mean, you know, you buy a piece of land, you, you go through all the normal things. If it's a reasonable size scheme, it's probably 12 months, if not 18 months, of talking and pre-app before you lodge your application, so it's two years.

Speaker 3:

Well, a lot can happen in two years and you kind of want to know that on day one, what you're trying to achieve is going to still be there at the end. And I think that commitment from leaders to sort of say yes, what you're trying to do meets our objectives and we're with you. It doesn't mean we're not going to give you a hard time and we're going to push you and we're going to sort of get the best outcome for us. That's their job, that's what they should do, but we're not going to fundamentally pull the rug from beneath you. And I'm not saying that people wake up in the morning and do that. They don't, but. But the but, the world can change around you and then the circumstances can, and you know these decisions that developers make. You know, this is big money.

Speaker 1:

So I think, that.

Speaker 2:

I do firmly believe that it's how we are using the planning system, not the planning system itself. Yeah, really interesting. And you know, themes around kind of like leadership and vision are quite important in this, aren't they? Yeah, in terms of, as you say, taking that sort of slightly longer term perspective on things, and if you look at successful places, successful cities, they are flexible, they are able to adapt. You know, places that are one use 100 years ago can be some of the most valuable and relevant places today, even though they weren't designed for a certain use or a certain pattern. That they're now occupied as and that's a real strength, isn't it, of good places is that there is a set of principles maybe there. There's a set of kind of ideals there, but they're loose enough that they actually are able to kind of adapt and change to life and to people and to what happens in places. And taking that sort of slightly longer term view and longer term vision but then allowing things to actually happen, it's quite an interesting aspect of the process really.

Speaker 3:

Well, I'm reacting to the circumstances of the day, I mean, you know, just to frame that, a good example, I think, is you know, look at what the City of London are doing at the moment with office buildings. They're kind of saying we recognize that the office market, the way we use offices, the way we work, has fundamentally changed. We don't believe it's going to go back. And we're looking at our existing buildings and saying there's a lot of stock here which is never going to meet these new requirements. And then they've made a very sensible decision which says well, the only way we're going to get better offices on those sites is to knock them down. And actually, if we think about our strategic priorities, there's a big carbon debate going on. Can we not repurpose those buildings for something else? They haven't changed any policies, they've just approached things differently.

Speaker 3:

And the reality is that that has come from strong leadership that has said we've got we've got problem coming here. Let's kind of react and change the way we are, or consciously, no, we're going to ride it out, which is also fine. You know, we don't think it's a longterm thing. We we think it will come back, which is what some borrowers have done. But the point is there's a consistency of thoughts which is there for the longer term. That's the key thing, because, because people value long-term commitments, because, by its very nature, that's what we are, that's what we're doing. You, you buy a site and you're talking to the local community. You're talking about something which is what, five, six years away, it's a long time, isn't it?

Speaker 2:

yeah, definitely, and you mentioned earlier the difference between, you know, planning development management and planning development control. Yeah, and what you've kind of just given. There is that kind of yeah you know, example of where it's about management. This is sort of active rather than reactive, yeah, aspect, and and there's there's a lot of opportunity that can kind of come from that for for places, whether you're talking about public or private sector, it's just for places, you know, generally and the interesting.

Speaker 3:

And yeah, yeah, you're right, and the. But the interesting thing that I think if we're gonna, if we're gonna think about where we've gone and where we're going, I don't think we do enough to um set out this horrible phrase, but the kind of the KPIs of any given scheme, right, you know, if you're a local leader or if you're the head of planning somewhere, you know why do you get out of bed and support and fight for a scheme, yeah, and what do you get for it in terms of again, credit is probably the wrong phrase, but you know, you've got to think about it through that lens. And that's why I'm really interested in the way the development community has moved, because I think there's a lot of alignment around issues of place, inclusivity, investment in public realm, etc. Which are completely aligned with the kind of metrics that local authorities care about, the kind of metrics that local authorities care about.

Speaker 3:

But I don't think we're very good actually, at the end of a project, kind of playing that all back and saying, well, what did we achieve, what did we not achieve, what can we learn, et cetera. And I think that in itself would empower this process a bit more. I mean, if you're a planning officer and you're on the end of 500 objections because you've got something controversial, but you kind of believe that there's something good here that you should be supporting, it would be nice to know. Well, we did it two years ago and actually look at the benefits that have come. That's why we're doing it. That kind of circular feedback loop, I don't think is there enough.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, yeah, yeah, interesting, yeah, yeah, yeah, interesting. So for you personally then, david, you know, are you a sort of strategic long-term planner in all aspects of your life, or have you kind?

Speaker 3:

of. How do you? Me personally, yeah, yeah, how do you? How have?

Speaker 2:

you seen yourself sort of evolve through your career and from that sort of meeting with Malcolm in a taxi to where you are now personally?

Speaker 3:

Well, I think we're blessed, right. I mean, I believe we work in the greatest city in the country, one of the greatest cities in the world. Yeah, and if you look at, if you look at the way this city has changed in the last 20 years, the kinds of developments that have come forward, the opportunities that have been there, you know the people you work with. I mean I'm holding Malcolm's bag, but I'm sitting in a room with Norman Foster or Renzo, you know. I mean this is like and there are, and the vast majority of people in this business get up every day and that's what they want to do. Do I sit there and think I want to change the world? I don't think we do. I think it's more nuanced than that. But what we do and the people we work with is incredibly enjoyable. I don't know if it would be the same if I worked in a different city or whatever. I'm lucky that I don't have to think like that.

Speaker 3:

But I don't think inherently, because of the position we take in the wider planning process, we are kind of reactive. You know, you call me up or somebody calls me up and says I've got an opportunity. You know that in itself is incredibly exciting. You think, okay, what can we do? I've got an opportunity. You know that in itself is incredibly exciting. You think, okay, what can we do? Who would we want to work with? You know all of these things, but I think it's more I wouldn't say I'm about to say opportunity-led, but I think it's a kind of you know, it's almost a case-by-case, consciously or not. I think we've been very lucky in the last 20 years maybe you make your own luck to be involved in some of the biggest, most transformational schemes in london, and we're really proud of that yeah, yeah, absolutely, and so so for you personally, what?

Speaker 2:

what is it about being involved in those schemes? You know, there's the excitement, there's's the connections, there's the professional side of it, but what really kind of brings that back for you in terms of a personal level?

Speaker 3:

maybe, yeah, I mean, we don't. You know, we talk about this a lot, we don't actually make anything right. It's not like there's a sort of line. At the end of it something comes out and you can point to it. So actually the end result which we got, you know, you can't sit there and say I got planning permission. That's not. You know, it's the collective now we as a team.

Speaker 3:

But it is wonderful to walk through schemes that you've been involved in and go, wow. You know, I remember when we decided that actually it would be better to chop a floor there and change the color of that. You know, and of course, in my career, yeah, it's probably only been in the latter, sort of third, where some of these things have become realized. Like, I worked on Principal Place in Hackney, which is a foster scheme, and you know there was and actually several other partners in the business had as well, and we all, we've all got our connections to these developments. But when they're finished and you're walking through them, you think, yeah, that's quite, we did something good there. I think that that's the tangible outcome for us. I don't think, you know, look the pace of life in London, the kinds of schemes you work on. That's all super exciting but, as you said earlier, you know we've worked on a lot of schemes that have never been built and that's kind of feels like only half the job, right, yeah, yeah, yeah, that's how I feel about it as well.

Speaker 2:

It's, um, it's great to actually see these things kind of realized, and especially when you're invested in a place like you know you spent 20 years working in in london it's nice to just to see that on the streets and, yeah, um, did you? Did you grow up here, or were you?

Speaker 3:

no, I, I, um, uh, I. My wider story is um, my, my father was he's not not with us anymore he um was very good friends with david lock. Um, he was, was he's a sort of lead leader in our field and Town and Country Planning Association and all that and I'd go and do some photocopying in the summer and all the rest of it as a teenager. But we lived in a village that ultimately got consumed by Milton Keynes, so that kind of town planning mantra and all that sort of stuff came from there. And yeah, I hated it as a kid and I and I, when I, when I went to uni, I vowed I'd never, I'd never move back and london was where I was going to be. And, of course, 20 years later I find myself just outside milton keynes exactly. But, um, but no, I, so I lived in. So I, you know, I lived 20s and early 30s in in, but wouldn't say I'm a Londoner.

Speaker 2:

Yeah, yeah, no, I had a similar path, to be honest. I grew up in Norfolk, a village just outside Norwich, and then all my professional life's been down here. But we're, as a young family, we are slowly sort of gravitating slightly further out again to have that balance, and it's a really interesting thing, isn't it? You know, because we're consumed by London, we're both passionate about it as a place. We're working here, but you know some of the communities we're operating in. You know, people maybe are literally born in the same street and grow up and live there and maybe, you know, maybe even sort of live their whole life in the same neighbourhood, and so how do you feel you know us as an industry, but maybe you know, speaking personally, as an outsider, in that context, you know, to a local community, when we're coming in and we're sort of coming in with the best intentions, with vision, with excitement, with creativity, yeah, yeah, how do you see that?

Speaker 3:

I mean, honestly, I think historically we've got it wrong because there's been an assumption that what we're trying to do is a force for good. Yeah, and you know, often it's not perceived that way, sometimes fairly, sometimes unfairly, you know. I mean, the state regen is, the is the classic, isn't it? You know, actually, there are a lot of people that don't want to state regen because they're living in a, an apartment which was built in the 70s and doesn't you know, it, compared to today's standards, is oversized, and actually they're very happy, um, so I think the one thing that we've, we've we continue to learn and, as I say, I'm keen to stress throughout this, we're not perfect, nobody's perfect um is actually you've really got to try consciously to understand your audience better than you ever have done.

Speaker 3:

This concept of, of listening, is key, because we're all you know, we're all humans, we're all. You can look at things objectively and say that doesn't look great in there, but you know, it's very different when you live somewhere, and I think we're guilty of not really thinking about just the impact that we're delivering locally and that's everything from. Like, you know, crikey, I'm gonna be living next to a construction site for three years.

Speaker 3:

You know, I'll be saying the things that people say about that, those sort of issues it's completely fair through to. You know, how do I feel about being in a two-story house next to a 15-story building? You know, forget, forget the kind of planning jargon and eias and all that stuff. Actually this place is going to change in terms of character and what do I feel like that, and I think the you know that leads into a probably a week-long debate about how we've done right. You know, I can't think. I think you can find some really really good examples of delivering positive change locally, but I think you can find some really bad examples too, and that, and that is part of that. Look back, you know, I think we we're not, we're not and never will be as one as a development community, because everybody's different. But, um, I think that kind of fragmentation of experience hasn't helped the overall perception of the development community, because everybody can find a bad example and objectively look at it and go, yeah, that that that wasn't great yeah um.

Speaker 3:

So I think I think it's really and also, you know, it's really difficult to do all of that in a way that doesn't sound condescending. Right, try it with a tie and a suit and we're going to change your life and make you better. I mean, that's obviously completely wrong, um. So you know, we this concept about a team. You know we work a lot with um, you know consultation agencies and people, and I think their whole world has got a lot more thoughtful about how you can genuinely engage with people and understand their priorities and and and and talk to them about what really does matter. Um, and, and I keep saying it throughout this but so much of that is actually about the process and the way you engage, rather than kind of what you say and what you're trying to achieve.

Speaker 3:

M25 is a great example. Robert Peston did a great thing on the anniversary of the M25, and he found a series of sort of interviews of people objecting to the M25 when it was being built, and he went back to those villages on the anniversary and met those same people and they all said they loved it because they could get to blue water or ever quicker. You know the, the what, you, how you feel in any given moment, isn't? That's not a moment cast forever right, it's a moment in time. Um, so it's a moment in time. Um, so it's a. I think. I think it's incumbent on on that process to make sure that the impacts are as good, as good and as best as they can be, and you can genuinely look back at the end of it and say we did something good there yeah, yeah, no, absolutely, and that's, you know, it's a really fundamental but really difficult or tricky part of the process, isn't it?

Speaker 2:

and I think that goes through everything with the system and us as operators within the system, because the the planning system fundamentally is is operating at two levels, isn't it? It's operating at the, the collective kind of what's. What are those big moves that we think are right for places and society based on? You know, you mentioned, you study geography, everything from. You know, what are the socio-economic shifts? What's population doing? How much housing do we need? So some of these kind of like collective things. And then, as you say, what's the, what's the? What's the impact on the individual, what, what does the individual need and how does it kind of sit between those two things? And so maybe, like as a kind of you know, maybe a nice way to kind of come back to that question that I asked you at the start, which was, you know, kind of, is the system kind of fit for purpose in that? And maybe there's not one answer to that, because it's trying to do so many different things yeah.

Speaker 2:

I mean I like that.

Speaker 3:

I mean, there's a number of ways you can answer that right, you know, do. Do you think there's a housing crisis? Yes. Do you think we should build more homes? Yes. Do you think we should build more affordable homes? Yes, we'd like to build 500 homes. Thanks to where you are, actually, I'm not sure.

Speaker 3:

That, in essence, I think, sums up the problem that we're in, which is, I don't think many people disagree with what's trying to be achieved. It's how it's delivered and, um, and the influence of politics on that specific issue, I think is arguably unhelpful, because you make long-term commitments to places, to areas of growth, in a political environment where you are arguably seeing different people every four years Now, without getting sort of into all of that, because people have their own views. You know, there is a strong body of thought that says you know, housing delivery and infrastructure growth should be apolitical, it should be based on objective facts and there should be an independent body that sort of delivers that. And I'm not saying that's my view, but it's quite interesting. Um, you look at, say, the way the bank of england's run. There's no reason why that couldn't be applied to things like housing delivery.

Speaker 3:

It's pretty crazy that you know, we're sitting here today in london there's a housing crisis. Nobody today is delivering any residential because it's not viable and um, and there's specific reasons for that and it's no one given problem, but one of the largest issues that this city is facing isn't currently being tackled because of those dynamics. So I think I keep saying it I think that it doesn't need a huge overall sort of overhaul and transformation. I think it needs to be applied in a fair and pragmatic way. But maybe that's a romantic view, because maybe that's not possible because of the dynamics that you know, local authorities, public sector we all face. You know, local authorities, public sector, we all face, um, but I, I, I think it's uh, I wake up every day and think it's an opportunity, not a problem.

Speaker 2:

Put it like that yeah, absolutely david, really appreciate your time. Thank you. Fascinating conversation, good to chat, thank you.

Speaker 1:

Thanks a lot thank you for listening to the Grow Places podcast. For more information, visit growplacescom and follow us at. We Grow Places across all social channels. See you next time.