City planners manage a key threshold between the public and private; they must become a ‘best of’ public / private hybrid to best help them deal with issues like public asset sell-offs, socioeconomic stagnation and a substandard built environment.
Changes to the planning system should be (1) legislative, (2) procedural and (3) strategic.
(1) Legislation presently favouring the private sector needs amending to remove ambiguity that hinders planners, provide better corruption safeguards, disincentivise land-banking and residential property investment, and introduce a land value tax.
(2) Better legal support, data access, analytics and process automation will enable planners to use their time more effectively.
(3) Using their real estate portfolios and borrowing powers, authorities and planners should themselves execute the local plan where the private sector has failed, such as in the provision of housing and affordable retail and commercial premises.
Public ‘shareholders’ have a long term view – because their investments are held in perpetuity – this allows authorities and planners to redevelop public assets to stimulate the economy during downturns.
Profits are reinvested or used to acquire derelict land for further redevelopment. With in-house control over development, planners control design quality.
Distortions from over-represented minority views can be overcome by using digital technologies to reach out to, and engage, a larger section of the public in planning processes.
The NHS staffing model could be used for these newly created operations, with expert staff commuting between the public and private sectors. Designers, financiers and project managers will apply up-to-date private sector expertise in their public sector work.