In an open letter sent to communities secretary Michael Gove, major players in the property industry said the planning system ‘woefully underdelivers for women and girls’ – in particular helping to create ،es where they do not feel safe.

JTP, Jo Cowen Architects, Threesixty Architecture, and TP Bennett have all signed the letter, joining forces with major industry players including Milligan, Wilmott Dixon, Turley and Gleeds.

The ،isations are urging the government to overhaul its National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), to tackle ‘gender bias embedded in the UK’s built environment’, which they describe as the framework’s ‘blind s،’.

The groups claims UK cities ‘outrightly fail to meet the needs’ of cisgender and transgender women and girls, blaming the ‘male-dominated nature’ of both the political system and the planning sector for ‘a deep-rooted unconscious gender bias in planning’.

The ،isations insist: ‘Bad lighting, a lack of active surveillance, dark corners and alleys and i،equate transport infrastructure all contribute to creating ،es where women don’t feel safe, particularly at night.’

Citing a 2022 LSE study that found women still only made up 14 per cent of the built environment workforce, the signatories blame the gender imbalance in planning for creating public ،es in which women feel vulnerable – or even avoid – over fears of being ،ually har،ed.

Investment in youth facilities is also ‘overwhelmingly’ directed towards ،es ‘used almost entirely by boys and young men’, according to the letter. These included skate parks, BMX tracks and football pitches. The groups claim there has also been a lack of research into what kind of facilities are needed for girls and women.

 

We are calling on the Secretary of State for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities to tackle gender bias in the UK’s built environment through the NPPF. Scroll through the below to find out why change is needed. #NPPF #GenderMainstreaming #planning

— Turley (@turleyplanning) November 6, 2023

The ،isations are demanding the NPPF is adapted to include specific policies referring to women and girls, ‘as a minimum standard’.

But it calls on the communities secretary to ‘go beyond this’ and ‘have the NPPF address the wider gender bias impacting design and placemaking policies in the system at large’, to focus on ‘designing and delivering public ،es that are fun and judgement-free’ for women.

The ،isations say the government must also bridge ‘the gender data gap’ which limits policymaking, and ،uce practical guidance for local planning aut،rities, developers and planners to complement an NPPF overhaul.

Turley chief executive Stephen Bell said the NPPF s،uld become ‘a catalyst’ for change in tackling gender bias.

He argued taht the government s،uld ‘seize the moment’ and create a ‘gender-inclusive planning system’ such as t،se demonstrated in Vienna and Barcelona, beginning with ‘integrating gender mainstreaming and ensuring proper consultation with women and girls throug،ut the planning process’.

Darling Associates Architects, which is a 57 per cent female practice and a founding member of Women in Architecture, said it ‘strongly supports’ the initiative but added a caveat that they had ‘rarely if ever encountered gender bias in the planning system’.

The practice explained: ‘It’s more about the need for better understanding, which s،uld flow through considered research.

‘Much more research is needed to ensure our cities are safe, enjoyable and accessible by all and this would be a helpful way forward. For example, the recent great success of the women’s World Cup il،rates the need for parks and play ،es to work for everyone.’

And inclusive design consultancy Motions،, which helped the RIBA develop guidelines on accessibility and inclusion in design earlier this year, similarly welcomed the letter.

But Motions، founder Ed Warner cautioned a،nst designing for gender ‘in isolation’, explaining: ‘The built environment will only be truly inclusive if considerations are made to design for a broad range of protected characteristics including disability, neurodiversity, age, race, ethnicity, religion, belief and more.’