Talking to agents and developers, their biggest concern is viability: only a handful of niche sectors
find the sums add up when it comes to getting new buildings out of the ground. How do we deal with that?

Firstly, yes, we are acutely aware of that. I’d also say we’re not the only UK city experiencing this.

When you look at where we expect growth… in terms of where it's allocated in the local plan and the new mayor's growth strategy… it's largely, although not exclusively, in central Bristol. And that’s where the viability challenges are greatest. 

Existing use values are high, and that’s colliding with build cost inflation and Building Safety Act requirements. Developing in the centre of the city is also more difficult. It's harder to access.
The sites are smaller. 

The UK is a very expensive place to build, and Bristol is one of the most expensive places in the UK. Not as bad as London, obviously; marginally more so than Manchester, but significantly higher than Birmingham. 

Why? We're doing a lot of work on this in terms of our policy and regeneration approach, and also with members. For instance, we've just held a cross-party Viability Working Group, looking to understand what is driving this… including hearing from development professionals.

Does that signal that we're moving towards a more collaborative approach between members and the property sector?

I can understand why there might be an element of distrust about something so complicated: development is a very commercial exercise, members are focused on protecting the interests
of the city. 

But, unusually for a council, we have a very large freehold interest. That doesn't mean that we control everything… but it does come with influence. How we use that influence is really important, and something we've explored through the Viability Working Group. 

For decades, that extensive freehold interest has somewhat defined the psychology of the city, which then plays out in the politics. 

The land doesn't belong to the council: the land belongs to the people. 

That that's a really important point to grasp when you're understanding what's motivating decision makers.

Is a shared vision possible?

Bristol is a complex city, and its protest politics are well trailed and understood. But there is a cross-party commitment
to ensure that we enable development that delivers outcomes that improve people's lives.

That could be directly through the delivery of affordable housing – a key priority for members – or it could be indirect benefits derived from commercial real estate that attracts investment, generates employment, spin-out benefits through the supply chain and so on.

Obviously, like any other council, there will be concerns when it comes to actual proposals. That's just the British planning system and the way communities are engaged. The viability exercise process has been illuminating and it will report this February. It won't come up with all the answers, but I think it will set myself and my colleagues a series of exercises to come up with measures to show how the Council could play its role in helping to ease the challenges – some of which have been decades in the making.

Unlike Birmingham, we don't have a large number of big development opportunities: our pipeline is less continuous… more peaks and troughs. 

A steadier pipeline provides contractors with more certainty around labour and costs.

Members are very interested in how we could create large opportunities in Bristol. It's not straightforward. Does it mean compulsory purchases? If so, where do you find the money… and is there the will to do it? 

That said, we do have some big things happening… look at Temple Quarter. And there are other regeneration areas which could each probably deliver several thousand homes or more – Frome Gateway, City Centre, Western Harbour, Bedminster Green and Whitehouse Street. But even if we do have a substantial freehold position in each
of those, that doesn't necessarily translate to control.

Bristol has been unable to achieve its housing requirements for some time. How do you square that circle?

That’s true. But our delivery figures for affordable housing have been increasing in recent years. In 2023/24 we might have had our highest rate of delivery affordable homes in 20 years – over 600. In 2024/25 it was over 500. But we know a drop in the pipeline is coming, because the world has changed around viability.

That means that we’re seeing more development further out of the centre… and de-densification, because of building safety and costs. 

Because of the current conditions, we’re starting to see some innovation around tenure; and one of the design responses to the 2022 Building Safety Act is squatter, stockier buildings. We’re still seeing proposals above 20 floors, but for PBSA and co-living. 

Bristol has long had an issue around height… where do you stand on that?

Much to the annoyance of some interests in the city, I don't particularly have a view on height. 

Years ago, there was this idea that nothing should ever be higher than St Mary Redcliffe; and some people think that if something is lower, it's inherently better-quality design. I don't see that causal link at all. The market is currently delivering “gentle density”… but that’s market forces and driven by costs, as well as the time it takes to get through planning and the Building Safety Regulator.

Talking of planning… that department has been under a lot of strain. How would you characterize the situation now? 

The first thing to say is that, as an industry, planning is on its knees… austerity took away a lot of capacity and resources right across the country. 

But the position I inherited when I joined the Council was abysmal… frightening, really: about 35% vacancies and an organisation-wide recruitment freeze. The Planning Advisory Service told us that ours was the worst backlog they'd ever seen: it was taking nine months to get a case officer allocated, let alone get a decision.

We brought in the new chief planner, Simone Wilding. We worked very, very hard to fix it, and the officers did an amazing job… not just new processes and systems, but just bloody hard work. Then, the month when we finally cleared the backlog, we were designated for special measures – albeit just for non-major applications.

Now we’re consistently performing above national indicators and I’ve lost count of the letters we've sent to the Secretary of State, so I’d say it's about time they de-designated us.

We are not just performing better statistically. I think we’re a better planning authority now… more “enabling”; we understand the issues better. It was particularly pleasing to see that, at the planning committee in December, three large schemes were unanimously approved for near enough a thousand homes. Our officers did a fabulous job, and the debate between members was a good one – resulting in sound decisions and positive investment for the city.  

There will always be an agent who says, “But what about this case?” I get that, and that might be because that case is particularly difficult: there are still constraints to work through. 

I go back to viability as well: the world has changed. We need to think about the future of our next round of policies. Do we need to do anything about design guidance, or the way we apply the term “affordable housing” to be a bit more pragmatic and creative?

How would you describe your relationship with agents?

I really value it. Organisationally we do as well, and the dialogue at our quarterly meetings with the BPAA is very illuminating. I think there's a good degree of trust in the room… and a shared understanding about what each of us does and doesn't control; and, frankly, what we do and don't understand. 

Planning officers and regeneration officers aren’t necessarily going to understand the mechanics of the capital and bond markets as well as investment agents. They, in turn, won’t always appreciate the intricacies of a complex organization like the council or its politics.

Finally: where do you want the city to be in the coming few years?

I'd like a growing development pipeline… not just homes, because we have the same issues around offices. I'd love more cranes on the skyline, and for the market to continue to innovate.

And I'd really like to see a regional plan. Regional planning is fundamental to meeting Bristol's challenges, and we
have to deal with the housing pressures – otherwise, they will drag the entire region down in what should be a growth environment.