Street votes: A breakthrough in local democracy or a red herring?

Originally published by The Planner 31 January 2024

Are street votes the way to increase democratic participation and accountability in planning? Or are they, as our External Affairs Manager Emma Cooke suggests, more of a distraction from more effective approaches to inclusion?

I’ve just submitted the Quality of Life Foundation’s response to the government’s consultation on street vote development orders and it’s really got me thinking about what the democratisation of planning could and should look like.

You may expect an organisation that advocates for a greater role for communities in the planning process to be all for an initiative that claims that it “will provide the means for residents to work together and decide what development is acceptable to them”.

And, yes, we are very keen for local people to participate in the planning and development processes. Indeed ‘having a sense of control’ is a key pillar of our Quality of Life Framework.

But we’re struggling to get behind a policy that appears to be, well, a bit of a red herring. The street vote idea gives the impression of giving local people more of a say in what happens in their local areas. But when looking closer, it seems that it will do that only for the few – and that few are already very privileged.

 

A policy to benefit the already privileged

As we explained in our consultation response, people who want to bring forward a street vote must have the privilege of having both the time and resources to do so. With this being the case, it seems unlikely that the policy will benefit those people on low incomes, those in overcrowded homes, or those in areas with high levels of private or social renting, where there is likely to be high housing need.

With this in mind, it appears that the street vote initiative will do nothing “to support the delivery of additional or more spacious homes in areas where they are needed most” (an honourable aim that’s stated in the proposals). Nor will it provide opportunities for engagement for those communities who already lack a voice in so many decisions that are made about the places where they live.

Instead, it will support those with the privilege of time and money to make more money from the property they already own.

So, if street votes are not the answer, what could or should be done to support increased democratisation in the planning process?

True community empowerment

Well, of course, I’ll start by shouting about the importance of effective community engagement at every stage of the process. If we want to democratise the planning system, we need to be sure that we are really and truly engaging with the local communities who live or work in an area.

And we know that that’s not happening across the board at the moment; as the Community Consultation for Quality of Life research revealed, a huge majority of people do not recall ever having been asked to participate in a planning consultation.

So, a good starting point would be for professionals working in the planning and development world to commit to becoming better at community engagement. As a sector we need to commit to doing at least ‘good’ engagement on all projects – whether that project is developing a local plan or bringing forward an infill site.

And a great place to start with that would be in adopting our recently published code of practice for effective community consultation and engagement in development, planning and design.

Important lessons from projects happening now

But we’re far from the only organisation beating the drum for improved community engagement in planning. RIBA has published its Engagement Overlay (led by the Association of Collaborative Design and Sustrans, with support from Landscape Institute. In doing so, it aims to elevate engagement standards throughout the built environment sector, significantly enhancing the places we live, work, and socialise.

And let’s not forget the great work happening across the country that’s come out of the Department for Levelling some really important lessons, showing how PropTech can increase both the quantity and quality of engagement responses, as well as to reach a wider range of communities.

Seeking the genuine democratisation of planning

Engaging in the consultation on how street votes should be implemented has led us to scrutinise the underlying dynamics of such initiatives. While on the surface the concept appears to empower local residents in decision-making, closer examination reveals a potential bias towards the already privileged, raising concerns about inclusivity and equitable representation.

In fact, the limitations of street votes underscore the necessity for true community empowerment in the planning process. To achieve a genuine democratisation of planning, professionals in the field must prioritise effective community engagement at every stage.

Learning from initiatives like those outlined in this blog, the emphasis should be on elevating engagement standards throughout the built environment sector. It is through a collective commitment to inclusive practices and ongoing improvements that we can pave the way for a more equitable and participatory planning process, ensuring that the voices of all communities are heard and respected.