Pathfinders’ progress against the NMDC – 1. Set-up

Pathfinders’ progress against the NMDC

In this chapter, we summarise the experience of Pathfinders putting the NMDC into practice over the course of the Pathfinder programme, highlighting their learning to inform future guidance and support future coding teams in the design coding process. We have chosen to order the findings to correspond with the stages of the NMDC.

The following table has been drafted based on progress information submitted by Pathfinders in monthly reports and indicates the proportion of Pathfinders who had engaged with each stage of the coding process across the twelve-month programme.

1. Set-up

This section summarises learnings from the Pathfinders on how to lay the foundations for a successful design code ahead of formally beginning the coding process itself. It includes their reflections on how they might change their approach going forward.

a. Producing a clear and well-defined brief

$ Reflecting on how they might have better prepared themselves at the outset, Pathfinders said they would have benefitted from dedicating sufficient time to assess the skills and resources available to produce the design code, as well as time to produce a clear and well-scoped brief that clearly articulated the outcome they envisioned the design code would produce. Data from the monthly reports show that Pathfinders spent up to two months developing a brief and programme. One Pathfinder, who spent significantly longer (four months) on this process was able to develop and refine their brief in conversation with colleagues in other departments which, they said, helped them in the process of developing a design code:

“It’s key to try and establish as much as you can before you get started – in terms of what you want this code to achieve, who you’re going to involve, what the timescales are going to be, what resource you need to undertake, even if you are going to be appointing consultants. [..] This was something we set up before we went out to tender and procurement, to have that working up the brief.”

$ Developing a programme plan helped Pathfinders manage expectations and ensured their coding followed a logical process. Having a clear narrative, vision, and focus on specific issues helped teams have a clear goal for the code throughout the process, and ensured those goals were being met.

Take-aways for future design coders

Allocate sufficient time to writing a detailed briefing document that includes:

$ Why a design code is the right tool for the desired outcomes.

$ How a code delivers better design and value for local communities.

$ The stages of work to provide structure to the project.

$ The skill sets and working relationships required for collaborative working.

$ Inspiring case studies that illustrate the design code’s potential.

Test and iterate the briefing document:

$ Before going to tender, to ensure it reflects priorities and to manage expectations around costs and the number/quality of tender responses.

b. Setting up a well-resourced team

$ Pathfinders found the process of developing design codes timeconsuming, leading to some instances of stress, particularly for those teams who were working on design codes alongside other responsibilities and projects. Wellresourced Pathfinder teams had a better experience. These teams often had backfilled resource or a newly created role and had ring-fenced time and expertise dedicated to developing a design code, and/or were working with a good consultant to project manage.

“Having a dedicated project manager – a ring-fenced resource – has been crucial to the process. I’m not quite sure how we would have done it otherwise. We really committed to it.”

$ Many Pathfinders preferred to carry out design code development in-house if they had the required capacity and skills available. They felt that their teams’ understanding of the local area was invaluable. Where Pathfinders did work with consultants, it was felt time-consuming to convey this local knowledge to someone new. Working with consultants felt therefore slower than anticipated.

$ Local authority Pathfinder teams valued input from their development management officers and the Highways Authority. Early engagement helped teams to understand their processes, and to align their code to their priorities. This supported code development and the prospect of adoption and implementation. However many struggled in bringing these colleagues on-board. Shorter, more focused sessions helped some Pathfinders to include their colleagues’ perspectives.

“Everyone’s capacity is so stretched, and people want to be involved, but they’ve also got this mountain of work. But I think if it’s something small for an afternoon, and not a big commitment, then that’s easier to get involved with.”

“We have a Teams channel with officers. So, whenever we’ve had anything to look at for the design code, we’ve been able to post something and say: ‘This is what we’ve got, you have a week to look at it, please feed back to us.”

$ Pathfinders working to a clear and detailed programme plan were better able to manage their time. They were able to predict pinch points, such as extended absence or staff turnover, and plan for these accordingly. Seeking feedback regularly helped one of the Pathfinder teams to maintain momentum with their colleagues and stakeholders, as well as building a sense of trust and ownership within the wider team:

“We’ve tried really hard to keep things moving and just put out a draft as it is. I’ve just said to all of the officers, ‘I’m not an expert, so tell me what I’m doing wrong’.”

Take-aways for future design coders

Establish a clear and realistic delivery plan that includes:

$ A dedicated project manager.

$ A detailed programme plan with defined roles and responsibilities for all.

$ A leader or champion who can ensure regular contributions from development management and Highways Authority colleagues (collate diaries with local authority officers well in advance given their limited availability) built in flexibility for leave, staff turnover and workloads (encourage the coding team to be transparent about their competing priorities, so that these can be accounted for in advance).

Encourage leadership buy-in, by framing the development of design codes as an opportunity to:

$ Embed a culture of delivering design quality.

$ Identify skills and resource gaps.

$ Learn from experts and provide a tool to train officers in future.

Set up a multidisciplinary in-house team:

$ Include someone from the planning policy team, and officers with urban design and development management expertise.

$ Ensure access to a wider team of regular consultees, a steering group, or design review panel that will include people with backgrounds in architecture, landscape design and sustainable travel, and with expertise that matches key policy areas.

$ Consider whether there is resource to bring in consultants to add a fresh perspective in addition to their niche expertise and knowledge of best practice.

$ Explore whether external expertise can be found through offering placements and secondments such as, for example, ‘Public Practice’ which is an organisation that offers placements for professionals in the public sector.

65% of Pathfinders had extant planning policies or existing guidance that referred to architectural styles

c. Identifying design code champions

$ Having champions as part of the project team was seen as helpful by Pathfinders to contribute to the development of the design code. We identified four kinds of champions that supported Pathfinder teams:

• Technical champion: understands the planning system and can bring relevant people together, as well as contribute to the development of the code in technical terms.

• Department manager: makes connections between different workstreams.

• Executive leaders: secures engagement of seldom heard stakeholders.

• Political champions: crucial to secure long-term buy-in needed for eventual adoption and implementation of design code. These political champions range from parish and town councils acting as NPGs, to councillors and local MPs.

“Try and get key elected members on board as early as you possibly can: We got the mayor involved very early in the process, and key politicians, members of the business community, to do walking tours around the town, so they could listen and have it explained to them what the process was.”

d. Auditing policies and evidence

$ Existing development plan policies offered a clear idea of local priorities and an up-to-date local plan made the process of developing a code easier for teams. This was especially the case for authority-wide codes. It was also the case where an adopted SPD for example a design guide, or other planning guidance, was already in place.

$ Sixty-five per cent of Pathfinders had extant planning policies or existing guidance that referred to architectural styles2. Working with out-of-date development plan policies posed challenges to Pathfinder teams developing a design code. In some cases, Pathfinders had to write guidance or review and update local plans concurrently with developing their design code, which resulted in an increasingly unclear scope and confusion about what to code for. Ideally codes reflect and elaborate on adopted policies and existing guidance.

“If you go for a borough-wide level code, make sure that you’ve got masterplans for the big sites, because then you can just hang general coding off the bottom of those master plans, rather than having to code on an individual site basis.”

$ When determining the policy areas to address, policy matrices were a useful tool to keep track of everything that needed to influence and inform the code. Selected Pathfinders used this tool to determine the focus for the code and avoid possible duplication or contradiction between policies, guidance and the code. This tool also helped to make the design code easier to implement by development management officers, by referring to the NPPF and the NDG.

Take-aways for future design coders

Analyse and audit existing evidence and data

$ Check ahead of time for access to up-to-date (in-house and national) data needed for baseline evidence to help understand the need for new mapping.

Analyse and audit all relevant policies, plans, and guidance

$ Check if the development plan, relevant design guidance and any masterplans are up-to-date and consistent with national planning policy.

$ Be aware of upcoming NPPF changes and updated national guidance (allow flexibility in the code to respond to updates).

$ In absence of an up-to-date local plan take time to develop a locally informed vision to establish strong design principles.

Map existing guidance to avoid repetition and contradiction

$ Check existing policies for gaps and cross-reference all planning guidance.

$ Check NPPF and relevant legislation, with respect to heritage protection and building heights to ensure compliance.

e. Procurement

$ All Pathfinders worked with at least one or two consultants on developing their design code. Just over half said that a consultant was leading on the overall project management of the design code, and a third had a consultant managing the community engagement. In general, consultants were supporting every stage of the process, particularly the Design Vision, Coding Plan stages3. On average, it took eight weeks to procure consultants and 40% of Pathfinders said that this caused delays to the programme. This was not necessarily a bad thing. One Pathfinder told us: “We were the last to appoint consultants, but I’d argue that that is because we spent a lot of time getting the brief right, which is probably why our code journey went so well.”

$ Working with consultants was a mixed experience. Some Pathfinders benefitted from a genuinely collaborative working relationship while others found consultants – predominantly those developing authority-wide codes –did not produce work to schedule. Pathfinders that were successful at building a strong working relationship with the consultant credited this to having developed a clear brief.

“You have to make sure the brief has the right sort of ingredients. We were quite clear in our brief the output we were looking for, the different issues it needed to address and the process that they needed to work with us on.”

$ A strong working relationship and shared, deep understanding of the code’s purpose and scope were just as important as the competence of a consultant. Most Pathfinders found that their brief and scope changed over time as it evolved with the findings from the engagement process and said that a flexible and collaborative mindset were other important qualities for a consultant.

“It’s also a learning experience for the consultants… we’ve all needed to continually re-evaluate, and try and keep on track. The consultants have been very open to that. But again, that was their brief: that they were going to work with us to find the best solution.”

$ It was seen as beneficial to work with consultants that had an existing understanding of the local area and/ or had worked with the Pathfinder organisation before as on-boarding consultants that were unfamiliar with the area took considerably longer than some Pathfinders anticipated.

40% of Pathfinders said that the procurement of consultants caused delays to the programme

Spotlight on Bradford Council: Procurement of consultants

When selecting a consultant for its design code, Bradford Council set a brief in conversation with colleagues to ensure it would reflect priorities across various departments. This resulted in a comprehensive briefing document outlining the desired outcomes and the process the consultant would be expected to deliver. The selection process involved a competitive tender, with ten companies submitting proposals. The successful consultant demonstrated its understanding of the challenges and issues faced by the district and its ability to work with the council and the community. The consultant team included experts in urban design and planning, and brought in additional consultants focused on community engagement, civil engineering and cost and viability analysis. The team worked closely with the planning authority in testing the emerging code and responding to stakeholder concerns.

Take-aways for future design coders

Find a collaborative consultant:

$ Explicitly request a partnership approach, manage expectations on scope of their work.

$ Interviewing potential consultants may help to gain a better understanding of their expertise, their understanding of the brief and will offer the opportunity to explain your requirements of the working relationship.

Ensure consultant has the right skill set, consider:

$ Urban design, architecture, landscape design.

$ Technical skills, including data analysis, GIS, 3D modelling, technical drawing.

$ Good understanding of the planning system.

$ Digital expertise for digitising the code.

$ Graphic design to support the development of an accessible design code.