Planning’s role could be to ‘positively promote the long-term sustainable development of the nation and the health, safety and wellbeing of individuals’

These next few posts are going to be about the TCPA’s (Town and Country Planning Association) Raynsford Review of the English planning system. In 2017, I took part in one of the Raynsford Review consultations to gather evidence, to enable the review team to examine the current English Planning System. The Review analysed the evidence gathered from over 2400 professionals (in both the public and private sectors) and then made a series of robust recommendations to change the English planning system to make it significantly more fit for purpose.

Of the 24 recommendations, for me, the most significant recommendation is:

RR Planning Purpose

This recommendation goes on to define sustainable development as having two goals:

PDF #1

Refocussing the purpose of planning towards genuinely sustainable development (including promoting social justice and reducing inequality), towards the health, safety and wellbeing of individuals would be a major change from current national policy. This would shift the planning system back towards its original purpose of being about public health, and the management of land for people and communities on the ground who live and work in their places, in the long-term public interest.

Having read the final review report and its recommendations I’m very interested in whether this in depth reframing, can be a useful discussion and potentially practical tool for communities, planning and regeneration professionals and other sectors concerned with placemaking and community development in England (Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland have all undertaken their own devolved approaches to planning). For the full review for details of each recommendation, (

NOTE: Text in italics represents direct quotes from the Raynsford Review.

| Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bradford city centre – architectural delights #2

Following on from the previous post, on Bradford city centre and high street. I present some more images of Bradford city centre and it’s public realm. I’m hoping to have time in the next few months to think more about what makes good public space, those outdoor everyday spaces we move through and linger in, from a Bradford city centre perspective.

I’m thinking about what is the relationship between the physical buildings, other structures and the outdoor spaces that they shape?

I’m interested in whether its ‘legible’ – has a clear image and is easy to understand, with recognisable routes, intersections and landmarks?

What are the visual connections between different parts of the city?

How ‘permeable’ is the city – how easy it is to move around and through the city?

I’m interested in what makes Bradford walkable?

And how the city centre changes in terms of its use, movement and activity from day to night?

P1060377 - 600

All of these questions (and more) inform how we experience a town or city, whether as a resident, trader, shopper or visitor. And the answers will effect how the people of Bradford will shape their city centre and high street for the future.

Image credits: Sarah Spanton

| Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Bradford city centre – architectural delights #1

I have recently visited Bradford city centre on a number of occasions. I’ve been working with partner organisations Wur Bradford and Bradford Civic Society to host an event to begin to explore solutions to city centre issues from the bottom up in July 2019.

I present in the next two posts a selection of photos taken of Bradford’s magnificent city centre buildings and its public realm.

P1060378 - 600

Image credits: Sarah Spanton

| Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Agency, empowerment and the role of co-production when working with community groups #3

This is the last (for the time being) of three consecutive blog posts thinking around issues to do with co-production. I was particularly interested in Beth Perry’s presentation at this Jam and Justice event, where she identified that co-production might be categorised according to who and how it has been initiated, giving four examples:

  • Voluntary sector initiated
  • Public sector initiated
  • University research initiated
  • Community initiated

Given that I retrained to work with communities on planning, regeneration and economic development – the issues of who initiates and how this takes place, is a key one for me. I feel that there is a real challenge for communities wanting to initiate co-production, to find and match up with relevant professionals with the skills to work in a facilitated and empowerment focussed way.

It is my experience that my work with communities is always deeper and ultimately more successful when I’ve been invited in. However, it is also a challenge as a professional, to find appropriate ways to meet communities, so that an invitation might be extended to come and work with them.

I’ll be continuing to think through issues and ideas around co-design and co-production during my working practice and may come back to this theme in future blog posts.

| Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Agency, empowerment and the role of co-production when working with community groups #2

This post is number two in a set of three posts on co-production. I attended an interesting event focussed on debating the values and principles underpinning co-production, ran by research group Jam and Justice earlier this year in Manchester. I was particularly interested in two sets of co-production values/principles identified at the event.

Jam and Justice’s description of co-production values TERRAPINS (originally developed by Catherine Durose and Liz Richardson):

  • Transparent
  • Engaged
  • Respect for expertise
  • Relational
  • Asset-based
  • Positive sum (meaning no-one wins at someone else’s expense)
  • Iterative
  • Not decided in advance
  • Self-aware

IMG_1914 - cropped

And a set of additional principles was identified through the Elephant Project (a Greater Manchester based co-production project) – here I have added some of the unpacking of each term – please see the image for detail:

  • Diversity (diversity of people is important for high quality)
  • Strength (everyone has skills, knowledge and other qualities to offer)
  • Power (leadership, support, resources must come from everyone involved)
  • Testing (it’s important to test new ideas early on; and continue to test them)
  • Knowledge (first-hand experience is as valuable as professional or academic knowledge)
  • Relationships (positive relationships require time, respect and trust)

IMG_1915 - amended

Image credits: 1. Jam and Justice & 2. Elephant Project

| Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Agency, empowerment and the role of co-production when working with community groups #1

I’ve been thinking about co-production and discussing the subject with colleagues in the last year or so. I’m interested in individuals and communities (of place, interest or identity) having more agency in how their neighbourhoods are developed. This agency is intertwined with how services/activities that take place in neighbourhoods such as health, social care, cultural/social activities etc are developed, delivered and managed.

Co-production is a tricky word to define, being more a set of processes or approaches. But loosely speaking for the purposes of this blog, I’m describing co-production here as programmes of activity or services that are in some way designed and/or delivered by a collaboration between people receiving that same service/taking part in those activities and those professionals conventionally managing the activity or service.

It seems obvious, but if you want to enable greater agency, co-production approaches are essential to ensure participants are empowered to self-direct their own direction of travel.

I’ve recently worked on two projects with co-design and co-delivered elements, they are:

DSC_7850 - 600DSC_8794 - 600

Tales of Miles Platting (2018)

P1050543 - 1000P1050957 - amended 600

Picture This (2019)

See up and coming Post #2 on thinking about the values and principles of co-production.

Image credits: 1 & 2 Martina Magill; 3 & 4 Sarah Spanton

| Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Sensing the city; artists, embodiment and urban space #4

This is my final post on the Sensing the City Salon.

My colleague, artist and academic researcher Dani Abulhawa spoke about her recent performance work ‘Feint Lines’ as well as earlier performance work. These pieces focus on issues of play in public urban space and gendered-performance and also include ‘Alices(s)’ and ‘Unknowable’, where she performs improvised play alone in public spaces throughout the UK. Dani also makes work that references her experiences of being a female skate-boarder, which she describes ‘as a persistent backdrop to the range of things I do’. ‘Feint Lines’ in particular sees Dani performing on a skateboard, occupying a whole floor of a car park in Salford (as part of a ‘Lone women in not quite light night’ event 2018).

I find Dani’s work very evocative – when I’ve heard her speak about it, it always resonates strongly and makes a multiplicity of connections in my mind to a range of urban space issues; from the issue of whether women are allowed in public space at all (‘Occupy the night streets’ India), the controlling and prescribing of women’s actions in public space, how men choose to interact with a lone woman in public space (#MeToo movement), or simply whether or not it’s acceptable for women to skateboard (or free-running, parkour etc).

Dani Unknowable 2014

But at this salon, it resonated most around ideas of adults playing in public space, what this consists of, where and how it can take place, and the question of whether its only acceptable when formalised. For me the potential for play in public space intersects strongly with the issues raised by Dani’s work for women.

Given the issues of ‘death of the high street’ dilemmas face by all our town and cities today, where there is much planning and development-based discussion about reinventing the high street/town centres for not only shopping, but also residential and leisure. Could we open out the ‘leisure’ part of this equation and really think about what we mean by leisure. Artists are already working to redefine, re-imagine and develop our collective understanding of urban space differently. I’m keen to help make the practical real-world connections between the planning, development and regeneration sectors and the arts and artists, especially those working around dance and performance and to foster more cross-sector dialogue around all the issues raised in the last four blog posts on sensing the city; embodiment and urban space.

Image credit: Dani Abulhawa

| Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment