I was asked to write a short article for the RTPI's newsletter reflecting on my experience of Strategic planning in the West Midlands. Here is a reproduction of this article.
On 29 August 2014, I left Birmingham City Council for the last time. I had been there since 1986 and before that had spells at West Midlands County Council (WMCC) and Wolverhampton MBC. My first job was as a Trainee Planner experiencing roles in all the key areas of planning including development control. A brief period at Wolverhampton in Economic Development was invaluable in giving me an understanding of development viability and implementation.
Most of my career, however, has been working on strategic planning and during this time the planning system has been altered significantly on several occasions. I thought it would be interesting in this piece to reflect on some of my experience.
It’s all about structure
Structure Planning was the name of the game in the 1970’s and, in fairness, these plans – which had 100% coverage – are fondly remembered. Whilst working on the West Midlands County Structure Plan took a fair proportion of my time, what I remember most at both WMCC and the City Council were the Examinations-in-Public for the shire county structure plans. It was through these that many of my networking contacts were initially made and these have stood the test of time.
The early ones were supporting Alan Johnston who was to go on to become the County Planner at Leicestershire CC. I learned several really important things at these EIPs. The application of tactical thinking and presenting a coherent case were really important. Preparation is the key to achieving both of these. Another key lesson was in actually addressing the questions put by the Panel and adapting the arguments accordingly. While this seems pretty commonsense stuff it was (and remains) surprising how many participants did not do this at such events! Over the years the tool I used was a copious supply of post-it notes - the easiest way to remember key points, order them sensibly and effectively produce speeches very quickly.
At the time of structure plans of course we also had local plans. My personal experience was working on the Aldridge- Brownhills Local Plan but overall this era of local planning was hardly blazed in glory. Many local plans took far too long to produce and were overly detailed and inflexible.
All change
Abolition of the Metropolitan Counties in 1986 brought in Unitary Development Plans coupled with a new type of strategic planning through new ‘Strategic Planning Guidance’. This was to prove effective in bringing together the unitary authorities and shire counties, facilitated by a Planning Conference, to ensure effective cross boundary planning. This process enabled the initial round of UDP’s to be produced, including the Birmingham Plan.
There few rules and regulations governing the new types of Plans and this presented the opportunity to produce the sort of document we wanted if we were quick enough. Regrettably, subsequent revisions to the planning system have introduced all manner of guidance and good practice to tell us how we should be doing things.
The Birmingham Plan (UDP) was the subject of Public Local Inquiry, but the best thing about this process – in my view – was that the inquiry was into objections to the plan so the LPA was able to marshal the evidence needed to make the case stick. There was not the current vogue to examine ‘soundness’ , which in my view, places too much power in the hands of PINS - or the requirement that all the evidence to support the plan has to be in-place, up-front.
Stand up and be counted
In the mid-1990’s I experienced my first big Call-in inquiry into the extension of the Merry Hill shopping centre. I helped pull together a consortium of c30 local authorities and private companies to fight the proposals. The inquiry lasted around 6 weeks and I remember my biggest worry (apart from the anticipated cross-examination!) was clocking up of various consultant’s and legal fees without an agreed budget to cover them. Fortunately everyone chipped-in so the bills got paid. However, in career terms working with Martin Kingston QC for the duration was invaluable and helped set me up for all the subsequent inquiries and examinations I would encounter. The outcome helped instil the confidence to enable the redevelopment of Bullring in Birmingham as well significant rejuvenation and investment in a host of other town centres – such as Walsall and West Bromwich. Other memories from that inquiry include John Taylor QC’s chauffeur-driven Roller and one of the late Sir Peter Hall’s few forays into the West Midlands on behalf of Chelsfield, the centre owners.
Here we go again
UDPs were replaced in 2004 by the new Local Development Frameworks although in Birmingham we completed the Alterations to the UDP in 2005. The complexity of the LDF system proved to be challenging but it did have its advantages. In a complex authority like Birmingham the preparation of a single plan comprehensively covering strategic and local aspects in one go was demanding to say the least, so the concept of the suite of documents addressing the city as a whole – through the Core Strategy – and neighbourhoods and localities or within particular policy areas was and remains attractive. I say it remains the case, because for all the bluster by the current Government, the essential characteristics of the LDF stay in-place albeit with a greater emphasis on production of a single local plan.
In late 2010 we produced a draft Core Strategy which, with the benefit of hindsight, could and possibly should have been pushed through to submission and adoption in the light of delays to the revocation of the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS). It is, of course, the revocation of the RSS’s that is the ‘Achilles heel’ of the development planning system. We now have to rely on the tricky cross-boundary strategic stuff being sorted out and then taken forward in the district-level plan. Initially, the RSS’s may have had few friends, but in the West Midlands the Regional Plan was responsible for heralding the urban renaissance approach on the back of the Lord Rogers Task Force. It was a successful in that it ensured effective cross-boundary planning across 38 local authorities. Policy-led planning was then the vogue.
Pickled, or maybe not?
This brings me up to date and to the Duty to Co-operate (DtC) which was introduced to fill the strategic gap left by the RSS revocation and occurred in parallel with the establishment of the new LEPs. In the West Midlands I tried to encourage discussions at regional, metropolitan and Greater Birmingham and Solihull Local Enterprise Partnership (GBSLEP) levels early on, based on the premise that working together should be less risky, more effective and more efficient than relying on bi-lateral liaison. This particularly applies in the West Midlands where so many authorities need to be involved. To my mind, since the LEPs were the new show in town it was logical they should be a focus for strategic spatial planning activity. The Black CountyCore Strategy which was in a separate LEP would not be reviewed until 2016 so a strategic spatial plan needed to be taken forward in the GBSLEP area.
The emerging GBSLEP’s Strategic Plan for Recovery and Growth (SPRG) offered the most significant challenge and scope for innovative thinking for many years. Strategic planning capacity had already been drastically cut, the Regional Assembly’s capability had all but disappeared and in the City Council resources had been reduced by more than one-third. So how could we produce the new-style spatial plan? Essentially the answer was to bridge some of the lost capacity by directly involving our partners from other sectors, not just as a sounding board, but by asking them to lead some of the work. To some, the ‘loosening’ of local authority control might be regarded as a risk, but I saw it as a key strength because it engenders what I have described elsewhere as ‘collaborative responsibility’.
One of my regrets in leaving my job is that I am unable to oversee the completion of the next stage of the SPRG, but make no mistake if this happens it will be a huge achievement which will demonstrate that the DtC can be made to work and is an approach that could almost certainly be adapted and adopted in other areas.
The planning system: in need of an overhaul?
If the GBSLEP fails to produce the second stage of the SPRG then the thorny issue of the scale and distribution of long term growth will remain unresolved. This will render the DtC as unworkable and the development planning system will need a fundamental overhaul. Perhaps of greater significance, however, would be that the economic potential and future quality of living in the West Midlands would be compromised.
In approaching the DtC, whether in joint or bi-lateral discussions, my strategy has always been to try to provide leadership, since that is what I believe the largest local authority is expected to provide, but to do so in a way which is neither dominating nor insensitive to the views in the adjoining areas. It will be for others to judge whether I achieved this and time will tell whether the City Council continues to adopt this approach or if the nature of relations across the sub-region enter a new phase.
The next step
Throughout the second half of the c20th Birmingham’s population was in decline, a process that was at least partially driven by the post WW2 planning policies of decentralisation. This decline has now been reversed, no doubt assisted by the successes of urban renaissance strategies, which whilst critical, require a refresh in the light of significantly changing circumstances. In a period of rapid population growth in my view we should adopt a twin-track approach which continues with urban renaissance but also allows for significant growth elsewhere.
My prescription would be to ‘go for growth’ but to concentrate this in a limited number of both brownfield and greenfield locations. This would allow for a selective review of green belt and also consider the creation of a new industrial or economic zone, or zones, close to the conurbation. Such an approach would take the pressure off most areas and provide a plan that unequivocally answers questions on the strategic direction of long term growth. Coupled to this would be a requirement that infrastructure investment should follow the growth leading to a rewriting of investment priorities.
While strategic planning has been in the doldrums, it is beginning to make a return. The GBSLEP can see its value and it is interesting that the LEP’s Strategic Economic Plan’s Growth Deals make a welcome reference to need for positive planning being a pre-requisite for securing funds.
Uncertainties over Governance remain an issue and there must be some hope that there might be a move towards a combined authority across the wider city region. The Leaders of the metropolitan districts have taken control of transport agenda but this really needs to be far better integrated across and on equal terms with other policy areas thus enabling West Midlands achieve its full potential.
