The siren noises of protesters against development are often loud, sometimes too late in the day, but nearly always hypocritical and disproportionate. Of course, in a free society, any opinion should be heard and, where appropriate, adjustments can be made. However, the failure of local ginger groups or organisations to see a wider picture is palpable, that is, assuming any development is to take place at all.
The word ‘development’ has such a bad name in the context of property and planning mainly because design and general structure of the built mass has continued to be boringly uniform and unchanged in half a century. When good design and well-set projects take place, there is invariably a most positive feeling, even from the previously antagonistic fraternity: and we can all see some good examples.
Objection comes for a variety of subjective reasons which often attempts to be disguised in some technical discussion; but development is backed by the presumption to allow once the favourable government system audits the process so as to arrive at proper allocations. The so-called plan led system. And it is at the allocation stage that protesters fail to make their mark. Though it is an irony that most opposition emanates from people who themselves are living in property that itself was permitted perhaps well within the last ten or twenty years.
Back yards must be part of the land where development takes place though the distribution needs to be well considered in every respect; and as is now becoming more noticeable, a sense of place and community is essential. Some of the aspects discussed in the essay need to come into play more strongly and an emphasis on a legacy rather than speed and cost being the expedients. This now needs to be embedded in the plan making and the public engagement introduced at an early stage will result in the shape and form of development being more acceptable.
There is hope as schemes all over the UK are now coming forward where there is much more interesting architecture, a better relationship to the pedestrian and open spaces and a sense of community. A distinct cadre of smaller developers have entered the market with very laudable and real aims to meet a new agenda; and thankfully both protesters and consumers appreciate these new efforts.
As with all innovation the best ideas and systems will permeate and become the standard: and there is a real hope that a lower proportion of back yards will be taken to fulfil a local need. But back yards will be required.
Get in touch