The Draft NPPF, The Draft Design And Placemaking PPG, Sesame Street… And Sarah
Or, why a draft guidance note and Sesame Street might just be the street design heroes we didn't know we needed
“I have an affection for a great city. I feel safe in the neighbourhood of man and enjoy the sweet security of the streets.” – Henry Wadsworth Longfellow
I hope you have your large glass of malbec at the ready because once again we’re diving into the dense, slightly dusty world of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) consultation.
I know, I know… usually reading planning policy is about as exciting as watching a highways officer explain why a tree isn’t adoptable. But bear with me, because there is a glimmer of hope buried in the paperwork that might actually start to change the lives of women, girls and, for that matter, anyone trying to get about on foot.
Our friends at Transport for New Homes (TfNH) have released their reflections on the current NPPF consultation, and their verdict is... well, it’s a bit of a could do better. They argue that while the government is making the right noises about “vision-led” transport and “decide and provide”, a massive amount of detail is still missing.
Citing good practice from abroad, where:
New housing is focused in areas where the economy is growing…
Mass transit systems are extended to connect new areas to the town centre…
Density is sufficient to support shops, services and public transport…
Large developments are combined with green infrastructure and other amenities to create places rather than bland housing estates…
Location determines which sites should be developed as a priority…
… here in the UK we still seem to have a system that will continue to create yet more car dependent sprawl. TfNH is rightly concerned that without extra detail, we’re just inviting more nowheresville developments where the pavements end abruptly at the edge of an ASDA car park.
And this is bad news for women, who are statistically less likely to have access to a vehicle than men.
As I may have mentioned before, the NPPF itself has been famously silent on the specific safety of women and girls.
It seems particularly poignant to raise this again now, as, here we are, five years on, if you can believe it, from the abduction, rape and subsequent murder of Sarah Everard on 3 March 2021.
Whilst the most safely designed street in the world can’t necessarily protect you from a police officer who was a well known sexual predator, it could, hopefully, give you a chance by creating an environment that’s so awkward for the perpetrator to carry out an attack, they ultimately think better of it.
At the very least we need good lighting, mixed uses, overlooking and CCTV coverage that keeps an eye on you. Streets where anyone being bundled into a car is seen and questions can be asked and the authorities notified. A street should be as welcoming to everyone at 9.30pm as it is at solar noon.
That’s freedom.
But currently it’s as if the policy-makers think the 1.5 million homes in the government’s pipeline will be populated by gender-neutral avatars who never have to worry about a dark underpass or a blind corner that creates prime real estate for a horror movie jump-scare.
But wait!
There is hope.
Before we descend into a pit of cynical despair, it turns out that the Draft Design and Placemaking Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) actually mentions women and girls specifically.
Yes, you read that right!
In the sections on Movement and Public Space, the guidance finally acknowledges that half the population exists and uses places differently. It talks about safety, accessibility, and the specific needs of women and girls in the public realm.
This is a massive deal. While the NPPF provides a generalised high-level “what,” this PPG is starting to hint at the “how.”
If this draft guidance makes it into the final cut, it could be the light at the end of the tunnel – albeit a small candle – for gender-responsive planning. This isn’t just about being “nice”; it’s about complying with the Equality Act and fulfilling our statutory duties as placemakers.
As the guidance suggests, if you plan for the most vulnerable, you improve things for everyone. Here’s what the light looks like if we actually follow the PPG:
Movement networks fit for purpose: “a connected network of routes and clear pattern and hierarchy of streets that provide safe and accessible movement for all”. This “supports the safety of women and girls and enables safe and secure movement for everyone…” (104.)
Safe public spaces: “Designing for safety in public spaces, considering people who occupy the buildings around them, visitors and passers‑by, helps overcome crime and the fear of crime enabling everyone including women and girls to enjoy them.” (149.)
Eyes on the Street: “Designing security features early on helps people feel safe, secure, creates a sense of belonging, and deters those with malicious intent, without the need for retrospectively adding security measures. Security features should be designed to support the safety of women and girls” (150.) and include active frontages, natural surveillance, activities that draw people in and positively designed security measures.
However, there is still one massive, transport-shaped hurdle. As I’ve pointed out ad nauseam, planners have a duty to follow this guidance, but highways authorities do not. This is why we end up with dual-carriageway gateway features instead of liveable streets. Remember, Cookie Monster doesn’t live on Sesame Street for a laugh. He’s there because he never knows which of his pals he’ll meet on the way to the grocery store. He likes walkable neighbourhoods. He likes the well-loved buildings and the fact that people look out for him.
The TfNH reflections highlight this exact disconnect between engineering and placemaking. We can have the best Design and Placemaking PPG in the world, but if the Highways Officer is still obsessed with the DMRB and DB32 (the ghost of street design past), we’re still stuck in the late ‘70’s. Nobody wants that.
For the benefit of those at the back: DB32 was withdrawn in 2007 when Manual for Streets was published and should no longer be used!
SHOCKER!
So, is there hope? I think so. The fact that women and girls are finally appearing in draft guidance is a huge step forward. It gives us a lever to pull. It gives us guidance to point at when a developer tries to value engineer out the lighting or the eyes on the street.
We need to push for this draft guidance to be adopted with teeth. We need to ensure that the stewardship Greg Reed talks about at Gilston actually includes the safety and autonomy of everyone who will live there.
Until then, keep your phones and keys at the ready, ladies… but keep your voices ready, too. Because for the first time in a long time, it seems like someone might actually be listening.
Amirite?
Question: Do you think the new Design and Placemaking PPG will actually help planners change the behaviour of highways authorities, or are we just decorating a car-centric cage with better wallpaper?
#placemaking #genderresponsiveplanning #NPPF #TfNH #womenssafety #urbandesign101 #amirite #sesamestreet #equalityact #streets
… and if you liked it? Well…