Design is currently a hot topic of debate, with the Government consulting on a national design guide and the use of design codes to deliver ‘beauty’.
The requirement for development to achieve a well-designed and safe built environment has long been a key principle of sustainable development, but the Government’s commitment to the concept of beauty and a new set of tools to deliver it signals a step-change in approach.
Beauty means different things to different people and so what opportunities and challenges do the changes being proposed present for different sectors? Or are the tools to achieve beautiful places already in place but by a different name?
In this webinar Richard Cooke and David Pendle, Associate Director's at Marrons Planning are in conversation with an expert guest panel regarding:
Our speakers
Richard Cooke
Associate Director
Marrons Planning
David Pendle
Associate Director
Marrons Planning
Our thoughts
All the latest views and insights.
Inheritance Tax Challenges and the Future of Family Farms
Agriculture
17th December 2024
read more >
Texas real estate company scoops up Bromsgrove-based Trebor Developments
Corporate
11th November 2024
read more >
Autumn 2024 Budget Update for Farmers
Agriculture
6th November 2024
read more >
Autumn Budget 2024 – Key takeaways for the social housing sector
Social Housing
5th November 2024
read more >
See More Articles >
SHMA® ON DEMAND
All the latest on-demand content.
Selling your business: reducing tax, maximising value and ensuring a smooth process
21 Jan
Julia Rosenbloom, Private Wealth Tax Partner | Jody Webb, Partner | Sarah Walker-Smith, Chief Executive Officer
Selling your business: reducing tax, maximising value and ensuring a smooth process
If you are considering a sale of your business, whether that is to trade, […]
Philanthropy in focus – the impact of the budget on charitable giving in 2025
28 Jan
Andrew Wilkinson, Head of Inheritance Disputes | Catherine Rustomji, Partner & Head of Charities
Philanthropy in focus – the impact of the budget on charitable giving in 2025
Our next Charities webinar will guide you through the latest proposed changes to inheritance […]
Webinar transcript
(Please note this is auto-generated and un-edited)
Good afternoon. My name is David Pendle, I'm an Associate Director at Marrons Planning, which is part of the Shakespeare Martineau Group. You've joined us today, which we're very grateful for, to talk about the Government's National Design Code consultation. I'm joined today by my fellow Associate Director, Richard Cooke, from the Stratford Office. Parsons, Associate, Design Director from the Cake the Estates. Group with an extensive experience of large and small residential and employment master planning. So, Hot topic for her Patrick Devlin partner from ... Thomas. Edwards, an award winning architect. who will also, no doubt, have an awful lot to say about this. This consultation just before we kick off with having a good to chew through the document to what we think it means. You'll see common with all the webinars that you all have been attending like The rest of us join this last year. On the right-hand side, there's a chat function.
1:05
Please feel able to drop questions into the chat function and we'll, we'll attempt to pick those up as we as we go through. We had a driver of this webinar a couple of days ago. We had a lot to talk about. So there is quite a lot of us, mister Chat through. So if we don't get your question or if we get sidetracked we will we will endeavor to come back to it after the after the webinars add. Without further ado, I'll hand over to Richard, who's going to give us some background on the on the consultation document.
1:34
Thank you day.
1:35
As we know, the National Funding Policy Framework already requires developers to achieve a high standard design, and that's sort of embedded into the concept of sustainable development familiar with, And the government is currently consulting on changes to the National Planning forms, the framework. And one of the key changes that's called the media's attention, at least, is the insertion, beautiful, into the document.
2:02
And so there's a track changes, version of the report as part of the consultation.
2:09
And as we can see, the social objective planning, sustainable development has been updated to reference well, designed, beautiful, and safe places.
2:19
We need to support and strong, vibrant, and healthy communities.
2:24
Later and document the section on the supply of the poems being updated to be updates, need to set clear expectations on prices to be created.
2:35
And to ensure the appropriate tools, such as ...
2:38
and design codes, used to secure a variety of well designed and beautiful homes.
2:44
And then, finally, the making effective use of London's section framework is proposed to include referencing that two area based cognitive assessments.
2:55
Codes must funds, which can use helpful tools in ensuring that one is used efficiently, whilst also creates and feasible and sustainable prices.
3:06
So that's inevitably led to some debate about what what is beautiful, and whether or not the insertion of work between the framework changes. Fundamentally, what I'm trying to achieve.
3:20
The government has helpfully showing us what things is to design a beautiful design and with the publication of National Design Code.
3:30
That's part of the conversation.
3:33
Now, this document already formed practice guidance, and it identifies 10 characteristics and well designed places, which I think sort of reflects the principles that many people will be well already.
3:47
So, if you can imagine, the, sort of, the circle we're walking into, if you like, of that good characteristics and well designed biases, they're 10 in.
3:58
The first one context is about enhancing the surroundings, particular location, and the second identity, making peices attractive and distinctive built form is the next one, coherent developments.
4:13
Moving is important, so price being accessible and easy to move around.
4:19
Nature, speeches, which is about enhancing and optimizing natural resources, public spaces, making sure that there's a site, social, inclusive.
4:29
The use of land. So mixture and integration of different uses and how to interrelate with each other.
4:36
Homes and buildings, making sure that they're functional, healthy, and sustainable, resources, making sure that efficient resilience, and also consideration, the lifespan of developments and making sure that prices are made to last.
4:51
And those 10 characteristics, they all come together to basically shake the current, so that physical currency and the price, and have an impact on sense of community and other issues, such as environmental issues, such as some content. So fast, the design, guides, and I think it sort of site, contains stuff that we're all pretty familiar with.
5:16
Design encoding is, is the new aspects of it, really.
5:19
So the, the modified MTTF would include various references to design coding.
5:26
And there's an expectation that multiple parties would have a design code in place to inform development proposals, and provide maximum currency design expectations and Einstein.
5:39
So design coding these bonds, all this, vitamin, to debunk dupont and deliver design quantity.
5:46
The view is that if you adhere to the principles within the design prose, the product might be something that is, is beautiful.
5:55
And, this all ties into the government's wider explorations where you can find the system and finances in the white paper, which talk about the front loading, consultation more more than is currently encouraged in the framework.
6:08
Would it need to bring a lot of detail developments during the process?
6:13
Hopefully smoothing the passage in planning applications and more deeds of postage later.
6:19
Thanks for that. Richard. Really, really helpful, you know, sort of a memoir rizal on what it is that we're looking at to sort of ask the next question really because there's this sort of three really, the article 13. In my mind, there's obviously, you know, this concept of beauty and how different that is to where we've been before with the government's ambitions around design, on earth is beauty.
6:40
And, I guess then, than this the sort of process side, you know, how's it going to roll out?
6:45
And then the very, sort of pragmatic end result of what it will mean for the way that we all work, and whether or not we'll actually ever achieve any any different kinds of outputs. Will it be easy, would it be harder?
6:55
And, I suppose, ultimately, for people listening, whether or not this has got a, got to provide a better pathway to, arguably permissions.
7:04
And, you know, for those who are interested in place making, and the quality of product, whether or not it's going to result in. Something that's better. At the end of it. When we had our chat, there's a lot of opinions about that. So I, can, I, can, I hand over to you how to feel about it. You know, where are you asked, sort of, I know there's three questions there, and I'm sure in a second, whereby you sort of on this?
7:26
I think it's really good range of points that you've, you've raised, And I think initially the sort of concept of beauty, I think is very laudable, and something that we should all firing it to achieve in. Any proposals that we put forward. The question is, you've raised, is what is beauty, and I think that's that the burning hot topic at them, and there's no real clear definition given in the ..., or, Indeed, actually mention, within the design coding documentation.
7:58
The reference to quality has gone. And I think I've listened in on various presentations and Alison, to debunk Brad Ski, the government's chief architect. And his comment on that question was actually, and it's one that, Richard tonight, if you apply the 10 characteristics of a well designed place in his view, that will result in beauty. So I think there is the beginnings of definition around what this beauty might be. A, bit, how you then test it, and who is the ..., is a very, very wide ranging question. And so I think there's a lot of laudable points coming from this coding, Christ. Certainly, you know, there's nothing particularly new for a designer that's coming out of those documents. But it's definitely encouraging everyone to lift up to a site, is similar to Standard, and gives local authorities a real hook, to be able to ask people to improve the quality of what they're putting forward.
8:51
So I think there's a lot that says if I positive about it, and yeah, it's that question, UT perfect.
9:01
Patrick, what do you think it's not? And you find you feel the same way as it, the same it basically a guy towards beauty on known state, but if you follow this path, you will arrive at beauty. Is that, how you feel about it?
9:13
If you apply to your work of abuse is certainly one of the most exciting, passed the design. It easily spend an hour until until philosophers who spent lifetimes trying to define using.
9:27
And I generally agree with Andy Bowne brodsky that it's great that we have a chief architect, because we haven't for a long time, but I'm afraid of this occasion, and there is no checklist in the world that results in DC.
9:40
four of us will confronted by different building perceptions little bit.
9:46
Um, so what Anna was saying, the design code undergoing a full of really good, solid design practice, West coast, as far as to say.
9:56
You could take it into school and use it as a prime.
9:59
It took me about built. Really. Can't give enough price for that.
10:05
The issue with it is, and you've already touched, there's a conversation to be had about proteins.
10:12
If doing a certain number of things in a certain way, doesn't add up to beauty, how would people to understand the process that's being asked for the design guide?
10:20
And, also, it is, I think, it's taking a while to realize quite how ambitious. OK, so, I'm going to read that sentence right at the beginning of the design.
10:32
So let's go ahead and set some clear design parameters, right. We kind of agreed to help local authorities on communities decide what good quality design looks like.
10:42
In there, All right, Based on local aspirations for how their area will develop, following appropriate local consultation. So I can hear somebody saying the council chamber.
10:54
I'm getting, good applause.
10:56
If we unpack it, work to get to decide what good design school it looks like in any specific matter, that isn't covered.
11:08
And there's an expectation that people will join in the conversation about something very abstract, the loss of a lifetime back and be able to have a meaningful conversation with an outcome that will then in full, but designed.
11:21
So that whole early consultation part of this process, which I think would be fantastic, has not been considered.
11:28
That's all, OK, and there are dangers in that that we can come onto of ways of short circuit, what is a very well intentioned reasons.
11:38
That's my my concern might say, Boom, based in a way, just to see in England used to be old buildings. That's what we will consider to be visible, OK?
11:50
And then it's a shortcut As Bill has told us, that all anybody with body is a brick building the Pittsburgh, and then Kevin McCarthy and low crime designs.
12:01
And it was a whole new world.
12:03
Now, I don't say any of those things, the right or wrong in themselves, but just by setting that something as simple as that career.
12:08
And you can see that please, in the title, Spoiler Alert Obesity really is in the eye of the beholder.
12:14
But qualitatively, policy can possibly be measured in the sense, but it's not simple. And it needs structures. The due process to really like the way you've described about measuring, measuring, success, and it.
12:30
I'll say this is kind of a sign of inflammatory. No pets.
12:33
Designing by numbers, you know, law turning into scientific process, where you make the point near, the four of us could go away, and, you know, react to a side door building. And we could follow the process around it, very different endpoints.
12:46
And, I have no doubt, you know, that, Patrick, you would come up with better designs and neo richer, because your designers and we're now, And, is there a danger that we are trying to object O Make it an objective exercise, rather than, you know, rather than subjective and taking away, Churchmen, said, that, you know, you would effectively, I mean, there is a danger that Julie, Beauty come to one side, will, will play with that again later means, Yeah. This, this responsiveness to the local air is what good designs do more than dressing things up and attractive.
13:24
Susan floods, that is the thing that takes analysis and review and informed discussion with the people who know about who are the people who live. There weren't necessarily designs.
13:36
Now, they will take part in that conversation. Absolutely.
13:39
That we know something about whether people, whoever, we're talking about whether we thought the same language.
13:44
So you've got to get to the starting point to have that conversation, which I would love to see happen across the country. That would be excellent.
13:53
Um, your question of objectivity is very well put.
13:58
That at the moment is being dealt with in the planning process through design funnels and policy, as well as plans.
14:08
Um, planning offices and all of the other associated offices, um, are under huge funding oppression, and so they have the time to spend on assessing the things that we'd like to do.
14:23
They have the capacity and skills and time training, dualists.
14:30
And then, what is the object of study?
14:33
It's the aspiration of this whole direction of legislations that local people design.
14:39
How do they get to design?
14:39
Is it better objectivity, and how how is involved OK, so the work needs to be done to get to that point if we have come such.
14:49
Yeah, so I mean, you know, you made the point about the planning system, You know, we've got theories at the moment about move, or consultations, about moving towards zoning. Very different to plan lead system, that's fairly open in the types of judgements that you make to two to the local plan, and then planning application world. So zoning, committee development, rice, design coating. You know, that, they will say it sort of comes to the overhead of the on, on, you know, ... phrase that you made the point, Patrick, about, people speak. But they speak the same language. And I think that's quite interesting because you could have people who are, you know, there's this targeting nothing wrong with anyone taken an interest in place, making gets there in the place they live in, and they should be engaged in Australia, we're all interested in absolutely right. Whether you're equipped to be engaged in the discussion from the point of view of a decision being made, this is is no consistent open to discussion.
15:48
And even if you are equipped to be involved in that debate, and this goes back to the point you made about the four of us might design very differently through this process if you have a certain bias toward vernacular. Rather than innovation.
16:00
For your argument's sake, you arrive at a very different end product and I'm going to drag us back towards beauty in a second. But you do arrive at a very different end products. And then, I suppose, you know, I don't want to sit here and say, this is a bad thing at all, because the debate in itself, really healthy, as you know, the debate around this stuff. And what we're trying to strive for is very healthy. They are going to contradict you. But I wanted to jump in a contradiction. You can have a bunch of people who start from a certain position if they get sufficiently involved and compensation, so we do quite a lot.
16:33
With groups of people. Go, OK, they might want to live together, but they may like completely different things.
16:37
We don't we don't aim to getting them all thinking the same, but what happens is that over discussion, working on something, people start thinking less about What do I want?
16:48
It's more What does the project lead, you would hope lit in an area.
16:53
People coming together would start to think about What does this area, really, you know, and all experience.
17:01
Somebody living in lines is useful whatever language they speak, when they speak planning or advocates at all, it can only use So the challenge the app and one of the things I'm guessing that is in order to extract that really useful experience, you need a process which is going to be quite um intense mm and expensive, right?
17:25
And that's something, that, the code, and the guide and the white paper pretty much signal. Yeah, That's good. It's OK to start, if that's not record.
17:36
And a mechanism to produce in that price.
17:38
Isn't the right that we will be in trouble, we will have coding bundle, because she doesn't have to know at all.
17:47
Yeah. I think that's an interesting point in that you know that the INS at the moment is very much in the coding document towards local authorities implementing or creating their own codes. But I can see, you know, based on that commentary, about the resources and skill sets, and how, how much time and energy it's going to take to create these, these codes actually feel that the onus is really kind of stopping pulse back to the developer, again. And it further than that, really does slow down the process for the developer. It's, it's it's a bit of an open ended, so, you know, we don't know yet. This process hasn't really started, But you can see how developers get the weight of pressure is going to come back to the developer, particularly, authorities were very stretched, financially, and timelines.
18:34
And so I think, yes, it's that tension between what the code is trying to achieve, and actually what might happen, And that's a bit problematic Isn't good for the process, both in terms of time, so you're a developer.
18:48
You're being asked to invest if what you say comes to pass a lot of money many years, before you might say, OK, so that's going to affect what they're able to produce from your development, inevitably.
19:00
And also, you're not going to be seen to be a disinterested party rather than go wrong.
19:09
They are in the process that surely can't be the right way. To go back to the subcontracting for somebody to expense to benefit from a plan going in a certain way that that's not transparent.
19:23
I think, you know, that's true to a certain extent. There are very good examples of coding is being created by coming forward with some very, very good product. And, you know, even even my parent company, I've been in Civic, they have a very good track record with the creation of coding. And it's about stage and engagement that they use, But I think that's the biggest missing, perhaps, in the code at the moment, in that it doesn't recognize the stage at which it's most appropriate to get that coding practice. Sorry. I'm not saying that the developers that many of our clients have been produced sometimes without really excellent design. It's a question of exactly the state and the price.
20:02
So, with aim, a plan for an area sites allocation, then, I think, absolutely, it's a really well thought out design. It's possible to debunk it once and shouldn't be.
20:16
It's the idea that because local authorities don't have funds that have to get somebody else to do it at a completely different time, the process, it's that. It's that time of the issue that, I think, is not probably.
20:30
I was just gonna just gonna ask a question on that, actually, because, at the moment, if you are engaged in InDesign coding for a scheme and you're looking to produce that, do whatever engagement that you feel is necessary or appropriate, you know, to arrive at certain endpoint. And then you're engaging with the local authority. And very often, you're taking something to them. It seems to me, within, Within the, Within the consultation process. There's very much a hierarchy or hierarchical approach where there's the national, state. And local authorities will then be expected to do their own debt, then comes down to the local area. And then people like course might be coming in with with schemes. Where we're saying, actually, this is how we react within that funnel, to phrase it that way.
21:16
Do we think that will be very different depending on the point you've made passionate about resources within local authorities and many local authorities on aren't equipped. You know, they don't have in-house skillsets or people that are doing design, whether or not they need to buy and helpful resources, whether or not they're able to. Before we even get to get to Debase on a very local, you know, at a very local level to do with science or schemes. Do we see that as being an issue?
21:44
It's definitely that there is a basket of issues in what we just say, and maybe even more than the process.
21:53
There is a real tension. I think between centrally imposed targets and the ambition to have local democracy. It's a question. Where are you going to put my notes?
22:04
Is this the right place? Is this the right to our hair brown?
22:11
That's already going to be seeing correct position to then turn around and say, right, even democratic side, where it's been, it's been really rewarding, signed, It is a very mismatch sets of direct.
22:26
Original bid, more technically, equipment, comment on the implications of that.
22:31
I was just going to ask ask you, Richard.
22:32
And they decided about, I suppose I've got an idea of consensus float around in my mind, whether it wants to go through this process. You need some form of consensus to arrive at a view that, whatever has been proposed, or designed it arrives at beauty. You. You need a certain I would think groundswell of public opinion, but the specific shape public opinion. Because clearly local communities are engaged in this process to arrive at the notion that whatever it is that's being proposed is going to achieve duty. How do you think that'll affect your world? You know that, that we don't really do, do, do that specifically?
23:09
In the moment, we have judgements that are taken within local plan processes and planning application processes. That's, how do you think it'll affect affect your, your world? Well, I think, I think, in terms of conversation, I think at the moment, when the, sort of, the public and community get involved in planning, and it's very close to a specific decision.
23:30
So, if you've got a patent application, that's Conan, the proposal, and a set number of homes, or if it's online or more detail, if it's reserved matters, or full application, I think people. and it's very much easier for them to get a handle on what it's going to mean for them in the area.
23:49
I think the, sort of the coding approaches it set out and I think is going to require consultation from a much earlier stage than that. And also, continuous consultation as well, because you're not gonna resolve all of the, or the issues, or get consensus at the early stages. You're going to have to come back and meet with people on an ongoing basis. And, and yeah, it's coming.
24:14
It's about, sort of, balance, isn't it, So it's about, sort of taking into, account the views of different, different groups against policies that use you're working with, and yeah, you may not know. achieve consensus. And it's difficult, because obviously more you console doesn't necessarily mean you're gonna get sort of the coalescence around a particular, Particularly for a location, so it's, yeah, it's gonna be challenging.
24:45
Fingers, I really bold, which is, the closer you are to a concrete proposal. See what, it's going to be easier ways to get people interested in the conversation.
24:55
And as you look at the design, buzzes, page 1 or 2 or 3 dot, remember, there's lots of diagrams. Arrows show you the different codes and just imagine taking that into a village or I want to talk about this. Like, I said before, it's not that people are not capable of doing, but why should know.
25:13
Where's the interest of, where is the engaging aspect of that, for people to say, quite rightly, what does that mean? because it's not the commedia. It's not, it's not a diagram, sunscreen.
25:26
Except especially where it's useful, it, It does just give the, it underlines the how difficult it's going to get disengaged with early on. If you're saying to people, who is going to be these buildings, looking like that.
25:40
And the euro, or across that field, it's extremely easy to get people to engage in, that it's not necessarily positive. But in the abstract, we need to address that, as a set of the government, is, to recognize that they have been completely silent.
25:56
Yeah, I mean, you know, that, that's been my experience, that, where you have a very high level discussion about design? Very often the question that comes back, is, you need to show me what you are talking about, Sort of. three questions. Isn't it derivative of how high is it, what does it look like? And how close is it to my house?
26:19
The tensions and the Tangibility of what we're putting forward, at that point, that you're asking people to actually have a vision for their entire area, very, very own, without any physical product. Feel like it's a very, very difficult concept. And also, maybe, you know, under the assumption that they will have an opportunity, since comment, again, at a later stage, whereas I think the design code in processes will will agree all of this sort of front front, if you, like. And, therefore, as I mentioned, sort of smooth, the transition is more detailed proposals lights on, and there's a mismatch there. I think that's the right.
26:56
Mussel culture Shock People, however, mm task gets introduced and, however, much in consultation, the surrogate's taken on board.
27:04
Yeah. How often, to view, any of us stood in, funny, people who've come instead of students has already gone. He said it, It's a common response. The assumption that development is done to people.
27:18
And they've gotten, I think, you're absolutely right, Patrick, and it's quite often the question of what we can say. I've never, I've never known it was going to be developed site. Yes, yeah, it's been through.
27:28
So, that's, that's been evolving for, you know, 5, 10 years, the site has been coming forward, say, yeah, the shock and surprise of people, it was always quite staggering occurs, at my site consultations, So, I think that's similar level of engagement for the total committee, said that they actually understand that, the coating applies to all, and that's that's going to be a tricky tricky, one tip to grasp and to form.
27:58
Timeline, don't, do we, do we think that, I mean, I started off saying, you know, you sort of cutting by numbers or designing by numbers, national, you know, you end up an unusual. Obviously, there's the potential for it to be quite thought, wide ranging and, you know, and complete inability to gain any consensus. You can Patrick's point four of us go away and work through this process, arrive at different endpoints. So, now, I can remember being brought up as a public sector planner and being told, You might not design it this way, but that doesn't mean it's not appropriate. You know, some people really struggle with that difference, don't they? The idea that, That's what they put the And, that can be, the only happens. And, I suppose, I'm wondering whether it's possible. If this comes in in the way it's envisaged? Is it possible that you will end with different models and different places?
28:43
So in someplace, just the process will be king, and as long as you've followed it and you arrive and unresolved, no matter whether that's, you know, vernacular traditional, innovative, whatever it is, you know, modern, contemporary, no matter what, as long as you follow the process, that's OK. And then in other places, you'll you'll end up with, with local authority culture in some places, which will drive you towards a very specific end product. Is it possible that we'll see different plugins like that?
29:10
The code asks for that because it should be driven by the locality.
29:15
So, if you have time which is very green go button expect to see all the new abilities, they wouldn't have gotten grants the caricature. But that's what they've asked.
29:28
And I think that would be a good reason. They didn't get provided.
29:31
The analysis was done in the first place, that we knew those aspects of the local tradition, that law usable to the, to the lives of people now being used and not just window dressing, a particular color as Todd, technical break that's not really contributed to the quality of science. Is it for me?
29:52
Say my experience is as of when you when you talk about a fine fine grained community. You know the lowest level people surround assign very often. The bombastic, when I say this, I'm looking for reaction very often people are conservative with a little, see, they have a very explicit view of what should happen there. And it tends to be in keeping vernacular.
30:14
So we tend to see local authority design guides that talk about, you know, the very often have chocolate box images of the best in their area, which tends to be, as you said earlier, you know, historic buildings, know, that that tends to be their identity dash of design, you know, DNA and they want to replicate.
30:34
So, so, you know, you say that the talks about understanding what your, your local areas like? Well, we just think we'll see people, local authorities swing towards the end of the design spectrum and, therefore, be requiring. In other words, this could this could prevent contemporary design to a greater extent than we already see at the moment.
30:55
Now, I do, I just feel a bit. I'm talking too much, not the first time.
31:02
I actually, my experience is not bots, Fusible places beautiful.
31:08
historic architecture demand replicates.
31:12
OK, so, schemes that we've been involved in recently, plateaus and dependencies is genuine equality and they understand those of the local architectural language. That's not binocular.
31:29
That's actually the 18th century architecture design stuff.
31:32
It's quite unusual for libraries, but they understand those elements, which can be useful in making a new settlement, whatever.
31:41
You have this conversation, wasn't really a public consumption, did applications with public who were relieved to see both started being used, but kind of expected?
31:54
Were very receptive to what we're contemporary interpretation would be like roof benches and maps and glazing forms good, straight way.
32:05
So, I think those conversations to be had, but I don't think, less there is some local political drive in that direction, that the design code is constituted pushing towards the traditional or content or the other.
32:21
But I do think it's not resourced to get the best outcome yet.
32:25
Hmm. OK, I mean, I think that the payment in the coding is that, communities are asked to vision. And that vision doesn't have to be about what exists now, and certainly, I think there's strong leaning towards sort of more language in the coding at the moment. They do recognize the village of ... with mainly villages are going to have to adapt and change the coding depending on their locality. And certainly there's an emphasis around this subject to the city so that you are increasing the density of an area versus what historically in the mid 20th century has been built.
33:03
So I think that's the idea that actually people are going to be asked and challenged to, to actually envision something slightly different than what they have now. And that will start to open that conversation. I failed to boards different vernacular types than perhaps the historic because I think Scott trick is saying historic binoculars, beautiful, Let me all recognize that we like it. I've used the ..., But it's not always fit for purpose in today's culture and how we live, and operate and work at home, know, that sort of thing.
33:35
So I think there's, there's definitely movies, coding, documents, towards this idea of efficient thing, Bigger, better, you know, that sort of look outside the box of where you are now, and think about, well, what could work in it, but not have to replicate it for it to work people, intellectual authority has to have to ask why about everything, and they're not used to doing that, where people just aren't, so the culture shift is huge.
34:00
Why would we encourage this, kind of like, this kind of tree, this kind of town, grain, These kind of it?
34:07
It's quite, it's quite an intense conversation. Fascinating. I would love it.
34:12
I'm sure there will be areas where you get such tighten up and you get a genuine lively conversation.
34:20
And there'll be others where it's much more difficult.
34:23
And those would be the challenges, I think, quite interesting to see how the culture of local areas will present itself. In terms of the discussion. And the coding That comes out of that, because I think sometimes it's a very sort of a typical approach to coding, But I think there's more to coding with depths and then perhaps people are used to in the planning system, and so, OK, let's show. Hopefully, to our feature environments.
34:52
Yeah, I suppose I'm gonna just give an opportunity. Doesn't it, for people to an early stage visioning exercise?
34:57
Because the thing no reaction to an appalling application often come sort of later on in processes is sort of quite well, it can be defensive in terms of what does it mean for me. And it's seen as a risk. And I think, you know, if it, if it can begin to maybe change the attitude towards development, and sort of see where a woman.
35:21
If we, we've got vision for our area, The only way we're going to achieve it is through change. Which is development, which is, you, know, stuff that can be a good thing. And, you know, perhaps, if you can change the sort of, I suppose, attitude towards development. You know, Germany within, within some communities, that would be a good thing.
35:40
I'm hopeful of that Richard TTHE think people know if it's a beautiful thing, isn't it? Because people, some people aren't interested. Or the people are. And, you know, if you, if you can bring people literally to the table, I talk about this stuff, then, do you think it does have the ability to, you know, people get engaged, therefore they get there, They start to understand, they stopped going to the decision making process with, you know, and eventually, when you end up sort of mutual and point O.
36:11
And again, I'll play devil's advocate or will this be a vehicle for people to have an audience, but to object, you know, and to cope, and to cause that kind of barrier. And delaying the wetlands, you sort of say on that?
36:24
Especially for minimum, open and public conversations before, where you sort of feel that it is going quite well, and then perhaps there's one individual that stands up and has an audience around them, So I suppose, yeah, whatever process you're using, there's always that risk that it will be derailed, but I think, you know, I see the parallels with neighborhood planning where the government is sort of encouraging people to get involved in the planning process and saying, Well, if you produce a neighborhood plan, and it will have white, and it will, you know, with the sort of commitment to find it. quite changes. that, you know, for the first three years, it will, you know, will make a difference.
37:06
And I can see, think they're trying to sort of engage people in the process and sort of trying to change that. And sort of default development is not good and sort of mindset, if you like.
37:19
I mean, yeah. What am I sort of best with planning is often the way that it sort of reported in the media, where it's, you know, very much a binary and good or bad outcome. Whereas, I think this kind of ..., and sort of get the debate going and seeing where there's, you know, there's win wins and where we can all benefit, rather than one group developers, perhaps, than winning community, losing and saying, yeah, I'm always hopeful. Thing the objectives of the issue that's not the danger. Because if people are engaged with compensation, compensation can involve people become entrenched.
37:57
Can always the goal of the better informed people in Dubai?
38:01
The more chance you have the result will actually improve situation. And so that's that's already a positive, I think, the danger.
38:09
I'm sorry you have to get the dangerous. Probably resourcing. If you're local authority of the resource. Is there a way to get somebody to design a 10 grand? Right.
38:18
Gave the process, Get it through.
38:22
Then that's your area plan. Says, the next five years, where it's going to be.
38:27
I don't think that in a, I'm not thinking of cynical local authorities and local authorities under an enormous amount of pressure, financially, everyone.
38:37
How easy is it for amendments that sit up, and I stand up the chamber inside or zuko? That's I want more money.
38:44
Understandably, doesn't matter, But this is what, this person's demands a company.
38:51
If there tends to do it, that will be dangerous rulings.
38:56
Really cool results? Yeah, just just to tile, the point you just made with where Richard was going, about neighborhood planning. People. In making that investment of time and understanding the local area and thinking about what they, what they want from, you know, visually what they want from, from, from development. Wasn't it will say, return to the days of the village design. Thinking about rural areas, finished design statements. Instead, when I started planning, finished design statements, would invoke them, we have perished plans, and our neighborhood plans in some neighborhood planning groups. Use enabled pump, surely is a tool to effectively deliver affiliates design, Steven, and I wonder whether or not this will provide a vehicle for communities like that to do that kind of exercise. And that's where, that's where they'll try to end up and whether or not that will actually help.
39:44
Some of the local planning authorities haven't got the resources to provide full coverage, whether or not we'll sort of see, you know, go from national statement that back down to the very local level, through your neighbor plans and things like that.
39:58
It's definitely a variance.
40:00
Sorry, That will happen. And it's starting to see in some neighborhood plans, those sorts of summations, about style and character that they'd like to see in future developments. Say, Yeah, absolutely. I think that that is one tool. Open part of the toolset that might not be bilateral authorities.
40:16
Yeah. Yeah.
40:17
It could be It can be really positive. I mean, you see lots of ordinary sounds at the moment, where we haven't been great.
40:26
Because you can see quite different influences coming to bear on policy ways. No direct evidence, local support.
40:35
Because they'd be something that I think that will be that will be really the positive end of the spectrum of possible.
40:42
I just visited the magazine.
40:47
It's good ways to go, but that would be really good to see.
40:50
I'm just thinking about just, you know, we copy our pasture a little bit more than we've been supportive and I'll ask the question a moment about how we, we sort of feel about, you know, what happened in the next sort of 2, 3, Maybe to five year period and what it might change? Before we do that? Can we just have a quick touch on anything we things missing? Anything that we think, you know, we obviously, we've looked at what it says we've thrust somewhere around two that, Are there any opportunities sort of lost hair? Or Think? I mean, you talked about Resources, Patrick, but is there anything in the, in the sort of the coding framework and the objectives? Is there anything else that we perhaps would have liked to have seen this symbol based?
41:24
I mean, anyone who's worked in London, London is the, you know, the biggest thing.
41:32
And, really, this, there are a couple of references, but it's not don't amenity refuse.
41:41
Other practical issues have a huge effect. Sometimes, I don't do this.
41:46
I'm sure provisions will happen, there will be other guidance elsewhere, but it doesn't need to, You can just ignore those things because they have a massive effect.
41:57
Dull, though, they may sound, they're important, will be being followed, as well.
42:03
You sort of expect to see, I mean, I, because, you know, no one designing is going to ignore the things that you've just talked about. They're part of the part of the product that people are going, to build. And people want to deliver.
42:16
You know, they, they, they have to happen. So, that could be built into the design process somewhere, Arguably, you could say, you could ignore them, because they don't, then they're not, they're not, they're not in that process that you're supposed to go seek to arrive at beauty. That's not gonna happen. So, as to then a question, mark. When, you know, people that Richard and I are trying to, you know, work with, with people at the two of you, and sell the narrative around what product we're bringing to local authorities to try and get permission. Is there an argument to say that? Because some of the things you've just talked about on in that that will end with with differences of opinion or difficulties trying to get, for example, like, highways or authority on the same page as the community. And on the same page as the local planning authority to sort of face that kind of issue.
43:00
Well, there would be that danger if those stakeholders weren't involved in coding, but they would have to sit back.
43:09
So, it really all I'm saying is, that needs to be spread explicitly referenced in the guidance in any kind of process. They will of course, come on board you know. And, those things will have verified threads.
43:23
So, we might expect to see some changes. I mean, it is a consultation, after all, if we might expect to see some.
43:29
Yeah, As I say, that, the principal development of really good bots.
43:36
It needs a reality check, which would benefit. You can't. You can't trump reality minority enough to actually deal with it.
43:45
There were two elements that was wanted to do with a very strong emphasis towards straight tree planting. Oh, sorry. Yes. Tree planting with truth, which I fully agree with that. You know, I think streets should have trays. I think it really does the lift the quality of the environment. But again, it's not that cross reference to the other authorities and stakeholders in my opinion about how are those adopted integrated and all of those sort of things. It really is Aquarius to whether that connection is really thrashed out enough in the code.
44:18
And then the other part for me was that we find, and certainly with coding on a site that has an outline consent, you don't want to code necessary for the entire development. If it's a large strategic site, you want to have phases of development and you want to test and refine that coding and throughout the lifespan development. Again, there's not much of a reference to this sort of re testing and involving your coding for sites. So, just a little element that I think would be beneficial to be included in those documents. That's a really important point, and it comes back to what we say about something tangible, because if you do that kind of Hybrid application, until you might well have a big boss, that I designed the first date.
45:00
People can see, planners will say, we want you to set the time. That detailed things in the design code is busy, that wouldn't necessarily have, you know.
45:11
So, maybe it needs to evolve to include some more detail design, certain areas, set the scene, and so tense, how all of those different things come together. So, more street trees, less parking, quite tricky to get to incidences that they, you know, all these things, you take a little patch, which is effectively what we do that with.
45:35
Said, I want to find over the lifetime of the project. You're stuck in. one direction, economy changes the way changes. And I need your code to be adjustable and flexible so that you can do that. And that's, I think, that just needs to be that, perhaps in decoding towards that.
45:53
That's really the point.
45:55
Do we do anything then?
45:58
Is going to change things for the, better. Let us look forward to Quebec, you know, we've been, we've passed, but we've also been at it, positive. Do do, I mean, I'll come to you first thing.
46:07
You know, five years time, you think your job will be easier, you know, you'll be enjoying designing things and engaging with people and go through that process.
46:16
I would very much like to hope so, and I can see that the, the elements, and the theory behind coding is incorrect, I think, is correct.
46:29
I think, if implemented in the right way, and it's adapted to each local authority, I certainly see there being some scenario pulse tips in terms of the process and hopefully streamlining it. But I think, at this point, it's a very much a socket and say, you know, sort of see businesses, usual environment. And, you know, we're doing an awful lot of what's in that coding document anyway. It's just sort of evolving to reflect, you know, new government guidance, certain aspects. And, yeah, I'd like to hope it's going to make it a lot more streamlined.
47:07
Would be the ideal Patrick.
47:12
So I hope that that, I think there's a lot of good stuff, and I think there are some principles that future Business Illustrated, which makes it easier for people to communicate and talk about that.
47:27
There is a massive visit, missing LinkedIn tension, which is which is the trick.
47:31
Engaging the public.
47:34
I think there are pilot projects being suggested and I think that's what they think they'll find that they haven't kept doing that.
47:41
So, massive impacts.
47:44
I think it could be extremely positive.
47:47
In the future, coding is Design cody's quite subtle art.
47:52
Because it has already said you need to allow enough flexibility when it need to be, to find enough to maintain quality. So those are not things that a checklist, or just done the back of an envelope.
48:04
I would really like to see in relation to local areas, a lot of that knowledge doesn't exist.
48:08
Which would be fair for the analysis of the development is really punchy.
48:17
And, you know, when you go looking at air, you have words in before the research. We would research, or something, I've got several books about it.
48:25
And some really, things, unless it's buried in a little library, somewhere close then, you can't get any information.
48:32
So, we need to get the starting gate. That seems to be quite low.
48:37
So it might not be fair for me to sort of say, no, we're doing some of this already, we recognize some of the stuff in here, and there's some very good things in that where we're comfortable with the idea of having the debate. Might be a bit of a culture shift in how people need to react to engage in that process.
48:58
Pilot projects will actually be cave, expect see some change to the document. So, suppose this sort of series of steppingstones, moving forward, that have the potential to result in in beneficial change, and shift in the way that we, The way, that we design, which, I suppose, would lead me, I will come to you in a minute. Reject. Someone asks you a very, very specific question about what this means for furrows and our clients. But will it with that in mind, if we take those stepping stones, you are comfortable, and confident, asked, to design, and say, you know, are you comfortable, and confident that we have a better chance of achieving beauty.
49:34
I think we come back to the title of the webinar, Beauty is in the Eye of the beholder. It's gonna be a real test, I guess. And we won't know for some years whether people are engaged enough to understand whether the product is beautiful to them. Because beauty is not just about the visual, it's about the function of the integration. What happens in those spaces? You know, people take them as being homely do.
50:03
They want to go there and experienced that place and say yeah, that's a very big question is it has the potential to improve quality.
50:13
I think beauty is.
50:17
You go back to the Roman Architect Vitruvius, the dual architects must invest in and look at firms commodity like it's got to spend more.
50:27
It's got to be usable. It's going to be busy.
50:30
Those, uh, aspirations. Yeah.
50:33
I'm never going to completely achieve a new has been trying to do best but this should be able to support that price. Yeah, I would agree with that.
50:43
Perfect, thank you, Richard, As I've said, I was going to come to, can I just ask quickly, and I'm conscious of time, What does this mean? I suppose, fit for you, and I town planners, What does this mean for our world, and what, what, do you think? What sort of advice do you think we need to be given to our clients, And you know, how we engage with with people. Or counter?
51:00
And Patrick, where are you sort of out on this?
51:03
Yeah, I think it's a positive initiative.
51:07
I think engaging people in, in planning, and an early stage is is positive. And I don't mean insensitive developers in front of the week when we work with I think a lot of them are doing this kind of stuff anyway, and to a high standard, so.
51:26
No.
51:26
For, for those organizations, I don't really see, it's going to have that much of an impact. All you know, is significant.
51:35
Changing. The Embryo. Suppose! You know? When we've taken the principles and applying it to existing areas, perhaps smaller sites might get caught by, by the new and sort of the coding practice, which may not be a bad thing.
51:52
And we, I think, I think the main thing is going to be sort of the way that we interact with people, putting application stage once the codes are in place.
52:02
And perhaps a lot of the detail has been agreed with more of the detail that there's been a great day during the process. And I think I think that's sort of the danger desert. I think there's a real risk of a function at that point.
52:15
Especially if the people that you are approaching with proposals haven't been involved than not the people that have been involved it earlier enough in that piece, because they're sort of inheriting the decisions, like guesses of others which is a bit of attention. Person Been off. I think it's, I think it's positive. I think it's, it's sort of opportunity.
52:37
Perfect. Thank you. To, say, I'm conscious of time that, that that's probably a nice spot for us to, to finish on. I mean, you know, we can talk about this for a long time, That There are several things that we've not we've not touched on. The, you know, we talked about when we all got together a couple of days ago. So it's been a brilliant, brilliant discussion. And obviously, from my point of view Thank you, Patrick and Richard, for feed.
52:58
Offering up your views to, to our listeners, and thank you, to those of you who've just joined isn't tuned, and we haven't answered any questions. We will, we will try and come back to those, and I promise you, you will receive a copy of the webinar. And hopefully in your inboxes and together with a short survey, which I'd be very grateful. If you would, fill out the webinars, or polish more on demand webinars there. If you want to watch any of the others, we do try and improve as we go along. So, surveys are really important. Part of that really would welcome your feedback. And I suspect with, with not much further ado, it just remains for me to say thank you for joining us today. Thank you.
How can we help?
Our expert lawyers are ready to help you with a wide range of legal services, use the search below or call us on: 0330 024 0333