Deetu (BWB Consulting Ltd)- Written Evidence (NTP0050)
Executive Summary
Many consultations are treated as tick-box exercises, and in these cases, they offer very little value to the planning process. In these circumstances, the consultative process can create ill-feeling and distrust towards developers as they are not meaningful engagements. Consequently, respondents will then not engage in good faith as they lack confidence that they will be listened to, which further reduces the value of consultation.
How information is communicated is an important factor in creating value in a consultation. Complicated technical documents are not appropriate to share with the public, as most ordinary people lack the qualifications and experience necessary to properly interpret these documents. This, and other factors, dampen the ability and interest of the public to engage with the planning process.
However, if the organisers take consultation seriously, it can offer real, tangible benefits to the design process and create better informed places for new and existing residents. Methods are available that can help developers and councils to reach beyond those who normally engage with the planning process. This helps improve inclusivity in the process and creates a plurality of ideas. This plurality is necessary for the creation of healthy and well-designed spaces.
Deetu has extensive experience conducting engagement exercises on large strategic residential sites, including urban extensions. Our consultations consistently have high levels of engagement and collect high-quality data for our clients, which helps inform decision-making.
Our work showcases not only the possibility of boosting participation and improving the inclusivity of consultations but also the value that they can bring to developers. We hope that our submission evidences this and helps to set out standards for how community engagement can help progress the News Towns policy.
Community engagement, if done properly, should sit at the heart of planning new towns so that communities are invested in the future plans, collaborate in the design process of the new places and so they are informed on the decisions being made in their community.
Some of the methods employed by Deetu
Contents
Josh Dickerson, Co-Founder & Director of Place
Katy Isaac, Head of Engagement
Claire Nias, Senior Digital Consultant
Mark Cawdrey, Senior Engagement Consultant
5. Case Study: Trent Basin, Nottingham
6. Case Study: SEMK SUE, Milton Keynes
7. Case Study: Greyfriars, Northampton
8. Case Study: Northfield, Oxford
9. Case Study: Hook Norton, Oxfordshire
1. Introduction
1.1.1. Deetu is an award-winning engagement consultancy working with private developers, local authorities and regional organisations. We are part of BWB Consulting, a market leading multi-disciplinary engineering company.
1.1.2. We specialise in crafting consultations for strategic and complex sites, including the former Fiddler’s Ferry Power Station in Warrington, Elton Parkland in Bury, and SEMK SUE in Milton Keynes. This gives us strong experience of working on sites that represent major urban extensions such as those the inquiry is interested in. We have also worked on smaller rural sites such as Perrysfield Farm in Tandridge and Land North of the Bourne in Hook Norton, Oxfordshire. These sites have highlighted to us the issues that are raised by more isolated rural communities, which gives insight into the communities likely to be located around new town sites.
1.1.3. We have been conducting consultations since 2016 and were founded on the question of “What if we tried it this way?”, which is still our guiding principle today. We believe that consultation is often treated as a tick-box exercise, which does little to work with communities, nor improve the design of new development. Our five-step methodology addresses this by increasing the quality of consultation, broadening the audience and consequently the value that can be gained from engaging communities. As part of the BWB Group, Deetu benefits from easy access to a wide array of engineers and environmental consultants, who help us to create engaging materials without losing sight of the important technical details.
1.1.4. There are two main features of our methodology that is different to how many consultations are conducted. The first is that we are very sensitive to the way we communicate details and the language we use. The second is the emphasis we place on asking meaningful questions and collecting useful data. Without this, those designing new developments cannot truly consider the thoughts and experiences of the public.
1.1.5. We wanted to present evidence to this inquiry as we believe community consultation can have a positive impact on the planning process, if conducted properly. We hope that the case studies we present in this submission will first demonstrate how a broader audience can be engaged and secondly the benefits this can bring to the design process and ultimately the quality of places built. You can view examples of our work here.
Deetu’s five-step engagement process
2. Who Are We?
Josh Dickerson, Co-Founder & Director of Place
2.1.1. Co-Founder of Deetu, Josh is Director of Place within the wider BWB business, with a focus on Engagement. Josh pioneered the Deetu five-step approach to engagement which looks to overcome the barriers that traditional consultation methods create.
2.1.2. With a decade of experience leading placemaking and engagement strategies, he oversees all engagement activity within the business with an eye on the continual evolvement of our engagement process.
Katy Isaac, Head of Engagement
2.1.3. Katy has extensive experience of working in engagement and communication within the built environment across a number of different sectors and is certified by the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2).
2.1.4. She specialises in community engagement, finding innovative ways of working with and engaging the public with large scale projects, working through particularly sensitive issues to minimise risk and deliver success.
Claire Nias, Senior Digital Consultant
2.1.5. As the digital lead at Deetu, Claire is our expert in designing engagement tools for a wide array of audiences. Claire has eight years’ experience in creating digital tools in the property industry.
2.1.6. By coordinating with the wider project team, Claire takes detailed technical information and translates this into attractive and readable content that is tailored to the audience. Her knowledge and experience help us create versatile static and interactive web-based tools suitable for all contexts and readers.
Mark Cawdrey, Senior Engagement Consultant
2.1.7. A former local councillor and political campaigner, Mark understands the informal politics surrounding the planning system and has been running community engagement exercises for over a decade. For the last six years, his focus has been on engagement within the planning industry.
2.1.8. He specialises in working with clients and their design teams to understand their evidential needs. This allows him to craft surveys which collect high-quality and useful data. Mark works to identify trends in the data that highlights interesting and valuable trends. He is a member of the Market Research Society.
3. Barriers to Engagement
3.1.1. At Deetu, we have examined the barriers that are in place that prevent many people from engaging with the planning process and are continually trying to remove them.
3.1.2. An issue that the Government has identified is how ‘NIMBYs’ seek to obfuscate the planning process due to the level of influence they exert on planning committees. This is possible as they often dominate the feedback provided to planning applications, amplifying their voices and creating an image of widespread opposition to development. Councillors have to listen to their electorate and when the only or loudest voices they hear are NIMBYs, it makes development seem an unpopular and risky option to back.
3.1.3. The language used in the planning industry is full of complex and technical language. This could be as simple as the definition of an ‘affordable home’ or the methods used to assess the traffic impact on a road network. The assessments and policy involved take years of experience for those working in the industry to fully understand.
3.1.4. The National Literacy Trust has found that one in six adults in England have literacy skills below that of a 7-year-old. An NHS Trust in the North-East found that 42% of people are unable to understand everyday health information due to literacy. The average reading age of the Sun Newspaper is equal to an eight-year-old and for the Guardian it is a 14-year-old. Literacy problems are disproportionally found within communities who have English as a second language. SEND groups are also underrepresented for similar reasons.
3.1.5. Lower reading ability does not inherently exclude people from engaging with the planning process however, it should not come as a surprise that when they do, they are unable to understand what the developer has tried to communicate, so turn towards to others to find out what is happening. This complicated process full of technical language and requirements, can then be manipulated by a narrow and motivated opposition group.
3.1.6. By adopting methods that look to use more visuals, interactivity and simpler language, Deetu have managed broaden the audience for consultations that we run.
3.1.7. A broader audience reaches beyond those who normally engage with the planning process and gathers feedback from groups who have been historically excluded. This means our clients have richer feedback to use in designing their developments, which helps to create better places. Reversing the hostility to development found across the UK will need great places delivered which show the benefits well designed spaces can create for both existing and new residents.
Identified language issues in planning material before we assess and make changes
4. Scope of influence
4.1.1. A difficulty faced in planning related consultations is that a vocal minority of the public believe they can influence the principle of development at every stage of the planning process. When a planning application is submitted, the principle of building homes is often already established through a Local Plan allocation, housing land supply need or an existing outline planning approval.
4.1.2. When in these situations, Deetu place a heavy focus on the established principle during the consultation, but not within the feedback survey. This helps to provide readers with planning context without taking the focus away from the design aspects of the plans in the feedback.
4.1.3. It is important to be honest in consultations and to not try to placate those who may be opposed with questions related to the principle of development. This only reinforces the idea that the principle of development is in question. Asking specific questions relating to the design of the development helps to focus respondents’ minds onto the areas where they can influence the planning application.
4.1.4. Setting the expectations early in the process of what feedback the project team want and how that feedback can influence the scheme layout, design or deliverables can build trust from the outset. It can help move participants to a place where they are volunteering constructive feedback, rather than straight opposition. This can help tease out ways that proposed scheme can benefit existing residents, even if they are not supportive of the overall idea of development.
4.1.5. Recognising support levels is still an important factor in the process, especially when it comes to the ultimate decision-making, but for local authorities and developers, gathering the data and evidence for particular elements of the scheme is fundamental to submitting a high-quality application and delivering a site that reflects local need.
An example of our Engaged.Space tool being utilised to focus respondents onto specific design options/decisions
5. Case Study: Trent Basin, Nottingham
5.1.1. Trent Basin is a once in a generation opportunity to shape the urban regeneration of Nottingham’s waterside. Rather than being constrained by the COVID-19 pandemic, the developer, Blueprint, took the opportunity to utilise Deetu’s innovative services to provide a truly inclusive consultation using real evidence to influence the design. Our involvement began at Phase 4 of the redevelopment. Several engagements had already been completed for earlier buildout phases, and we faced the challenge of overcoming ‘consultation fatigue’.
5.1.2. Deetu’s approach saw a 1,500% increase in participation from previous phases and a 94% approval rating for the core concepts of a pedestrian-focused, car-lite scheme. Feedback throughout the engagement supported the sustainable principles of the design. In response to the feedback, far more green space was included around the basin, more planting in the courtyards and more people friendly zones.
5.1.3. The use of innovative, interactive tools, combined with powerful data analytics and an emphasis on youth-friendly content ensured that a remarkably diverse audience was consulted.
5.1.4. Blueprint Chief Executive Samantha Veal said “This engagement exercise allowed us to reach a far greater audience than our traditional approach, including a much wider demographic. Because of this, the feedback is far richer and the outcome is a better development proposal which reflects a truly representative range of needs and viewpoints.”
5.1.5. Jim Rae, Senior Principal Planning Office, Nottingham City Council said “This was a first for us. The interactive tools offered a constructive way to gain an understanding of the scheme. It not only saved us time, but gave us a lot more information to determine our views than a typical application. We hope others would use this approach.”
5.1.6. Both planning officers and the developer saw the benefits brought by expanding the audience. This shows the value that can be gained from a meaningful consultation with a focus on design features.
5.1.7. Deetu provided an evidence-based representation of the wider community, informing planners and members of the local authority of the community’s true needs and wants, filling them with confidence, and subsequently influencing decision-makers to approve the scheme.
A quote received during a youth-specific engagement exercise
6. Case Study: SEMK SUE, Milton Keynes
6.1.1. South-East Milton Keynes Strategic Urban Expansion (SEMK SUE) formed part of a wider area of land allocated for 3,000 new homes and the infrastructure needed to support these new homes.
6.1.2. Comparing engagement exercises is very hard due to the many variables influencing results, however our consultation for SEMK SUE was very similar to the consultation for the Milton Keynes East (MKE) site. Both were conducted under COVID-19 restrictions at similar times, for similar scale developments, and in the same Borough.
6.1.3. The MKE consultation included a consultation website with an 8-minute intro film, press releases in local media and the postage of a 20-page consultation brochure to 26,500 properties. A total of 46 responses were received, of which only 10 came from members of the public, which is equal to a 0.03% response rate.
6.1.4. In comparison, the Deetu consultation for SEMK SUE received 261 responses from a much smaller postal area of 4,685 addresses, equal to a 5.87% response rate. This is a 195x higher response rate from the community. We utilised many of the same communication methods as the MKE consultation but achieved a much higher response rate.
6.1.5. A major difference between the two is the effort Deetu expended to make the material understandable to an ordinary member of the public. Our tools utilised more visual ways of displaying information and are more interactive. In addition, we utilise proprietary software to do assessments on the readability of our materials, which helps us to ensure that as many people as possible can engage with our consultation.
6.1.6. These two consultative processes are an example of how the approach to communicating the details of a consultation can result in significantly different levels of engagement among the public. They show that higher levels of engagement can be achieved, which will provide a broader range of feedback and more data the design team can use to create a better-informed place. While there are still challenges to be overcome, community consultation can be more representative if you put the effort in.
6.1.7. To further demonstrate, a total of 1,715 unique users viewed the SEMK SUE materials online for a total of 54 hours of engagement time. This is something replicated on other projects, where we see levels of engagement online much higher than what could be replicated in person. This is an area we are committing constant effort to, with the aim of evolving our tools to further increase engagement. On recent residential projects we have experienced even larger amounts of engagement time, with a range of 86 to 173 hours.
6.1.8. Psychological studies indicate that people are more willing to express negative feedback than positive feedback. This creates a lower threshold for respondents to provide negative comments as opposed to positive ones, with the human brain more likely to focus on potential threats. When considering this, the number of users reading the consultation materials suggests there is a silent majority of people who, once they have viewed the materials, do not feel the need to provide feedback.
7. Case Study: Greyfriars, Northampton
7.1.1. West Northamptonshire Council (WNC) were looking to redevelop the northern edge of Northampton town centre, and partnered with Deetu to conduct an engagement exercise to inform the creation of a masterplan. They set a target to double the responses from a 2019 engagement exercise which was conducted by another agency. This engagement received feedback from 434 individuals.
7.1.2. We launched our digitally-led engagement in 2023, which aimed to not just inform but to involve. This initial engagement set out no normal plans but shared themes which respondents could provide feedback to. Structuring the consultation in this way allowed us to not just inform residents but to involve them in shaping the future of Greyfriars. We blended attractive sketches from the architects with maps of the site to showcase the potential in a context that helped readers to understand how the suggestions would interact with the town centre in reality.
7.1.3. A second round of engagement was then conducted. The design team reflected on the findings from the initial stage and produced a much more detailed masterplan for the Greyfriars area. Our bespoke digital platform offered users an interactive experience where they could explore designs, leave feedback and stay connected with the project’s progress. We presented an interactive journey through the proposed transformations of the area, linking back to the comments shared with us earlier.
7.1.4. Our engagement methodology resulted in over 2,500 survey responses with over 6,000 individual comments. This was five times higher than WNCs target. We also know over 10,000 unique users viewed the consultation websites, spending 601 hours browsing the materials in total. The social media adverts ran for the engagement were seen by 47,000 users, equal to over 19% of the population of Northampton.
7.1.5. When comparing to the previous consultation held in 2019, we proved that it is possible to drastically increase engagement with, and feedback from, the local community. The feedback received helped to inform the decisions made during the masterplan creation process and will shape the future of the centre of Northampton for years to come.
Example of information blended to create something more digestible for the public
8. Case Study: Northfield, Oxford
8.1.1. Northfield is located on the southeastern boundary of Oxford City and more information can be found here. At Northfield, we worked with L&Q Estates (now Urban & Civic) and Oxfordshire County Council to consult on a future-focused, design-led neighbourhood that challenged conventions around density and car use.
8.1.2. By creating a consultation and survey that focused on specific features of the site we moved the conversation beyond a yes/no response and encouraged much more constructive feedback. By adopting a collaborative process with the design team, we created a survey that collected data on those aspects of the design that could actually be influenced.
8.1.3. Being on the edge of the city, strong opinions were being voiced by those living in neighbouring Garsington village, particularly around the intention to reduce car dependency.
8.1.4. The participants from the adjacent village were not just opposed to the principle of the development but also the design. Their perspective was focused on their own experience of living in an area that was reliant on private vehicles, which meant they were opposed to the car-lite design. They have made the choice to live in a village, with this knowledge available, which gives us insight into the way they want to live their lives.
8.1.5. Despite this vocal opposition, we were able to evidence strong support for the car-lite design amongst those respondents living within Oxford, both immediately adjacent to the site and further afield. This is a result that would not have been heard if not for our efforts to collect high-quality data and undertake thorough analysis to better inform decision-making. It also introduced wider conversations around how the development could help address some of these long-standing issues that the Garsington villagers have experienced in utilising active travel or public transport.
8.1.6. As a result of these findings, it gave the design team confidence that the innovative design is commercially viable and prevented the watering down of these features. Furthermore, a number of changes were either implemented to the design or are being actively considered as a result to maintain the rural feeling of the village but provide new links to the development that will encourage active travel and public transport use in the future.
Respondents’ sentiment relating to the proposed car-lite design, split by the neighbouring village v other locations
9. Case Study: Hook Norton, Oxfordshire
9.1.1. Land North of The Bourne in Hook Norton, Oxfordshire, is a proportionally large site of 75 homes in a village of just over 1,100 homes. The village has seen infill development over recent decades but there is still a shortage of homes. The Parish Council was set against the application and held a position that new homes are not needed for those already in the village.
9.1.2. During a meeting of the Parish Council, members of the Council made general comments that questioned the need for new homes in the area and therefore the need for the application. We were able to address this misconception in the meeting in front of a large group of parishioners.
9.1.3. By sharing some of the data we collected, we identified that all our respondents live within the Parish and that 27% of them were either actively looking for a new home or knew someone who was. In addition, 45% of respondents, or a friend or family member, struggled to find a home to rent or buy in the area. 52% of respondents said they knew of someone who grew up in the village but has been forced to move away in order to purchase their first property.
9.1.4. This empirical evidence, presented clearly, made it difficult for Parish Councillors to raise the (lack of) need for housing in the village as a reason to oppose the development. This helped to move the conversation onto the design of the development and what could be of benefit to the existing residents. This led to very constructive conversations on the location of footpaths linking into other parts of the village.
9.1.5. This data was only available through careful consideration of the consultation process and how data both inform decision making but also the design process. It was a powerful tool to showcase how local perception of housing need by certain groups and demographics are not always accurate and can obfuscate real, lived experience.
Consultation results as shown to Parish Council members
21 May 2025