Plan for Future Generations: Should we change the thinking patterns of the industry to be that we don't need to build anymore?

We have seen a distinct shift in focus from bespoke new shiny buildings and setting regulations to meet future climate targets to realising our current buildings and environments should be the critical focus. It's by no means a new concept, but re-use, refurbishment, lowering carbon and, more importantly, occupant comfort and environmental improvement are critical to our future occupation of our towns and our planet. You can see this filtering out from our work with Low Energy Transformation Initiative (LETI)and the associated refurbishment guides, which focus on both the people and the community benefit of these 'low carbon ‘upgrades.

Value Diversity (1): Should placemaking policy draw people to super local hubs to spread the economic activity across the county or back to big cities -which is better for community and social inclusion?

There needs to be cash to make change. Getting people in control of their environments together and working as communities to discuss and share knowledge is essential—local policies must be aligned on a global or a UK scale. Linking hubs together outside cities and creating a culture where we're working together and being together again will be fundamental to that whole philosophy of place community and driving that change through.

People working, living, and pushing together make a change, mainly when it positively affects their environment. Although we want to create low-carbon integrated communities for the greater good of our environment, it also positively affects communities financially, creating real tangible asset value. 

Value Diversity (2): How is the physicality of space important when undertaking community consultation in different ways to attract a more diverse range of voices? 

'Community' as a briefing item is seen as a key value driver for successful development and has been a critical shift in the last few years vs max packing every site. City standards in this regard are helping re-orientate the approach. Cookie-cutter mass housing doesn't drive footfall and can create vacant communities. This doesn't go with good occupation statistics or property values. The authorities, developers, and, most importantly, local communities must be aligned. 

Work in Partnership: Developers need to share more knowledge. 

Often, masterplan principles get broken down when plots are passed to non-linked developers, each with their agendas. Connectivity and integration and the efficiencies connected communities can create can be lost. This can cause inefficiencies at an infrastructure level from an engineering perspective. More importantly, it can create a disconnected, inefficient community that ultimately doesn't serve the developers to the best of their asset potential. 

Getting past all these independent stakeholder agendas and aligning a coordinated plan can be difficult. The result is that everyone involved in the process and the communities left behind are not served as well as they could be. Simply sharing the supply chain or purchasing across a larger site, rather than siloing the process, could give all involved dramatic commercial benefit, for example, in a market struggling to cope with inflation.