S4 Ep16: In Conversation with Places for London’s Graeme Craig and Mark Walker

How TfL’s land is being transformed into new homes, places, and genuine social value

In this episode of Better Places, Concilio’s Siddo Dwyer is joined by Graeme Craig, CEO of Places for London, and Mark Walker, the organisation’s Strategic Engagement Lead. Together they discuss how Places for London is reshaping the capital by unlocking land around transport hubs to deliver thousands of new homes and public spaces.

From Bollo Lane to Cockfosters, we explore how the team is tackling London’s biggest challenges - housing need, sustainability, and trust in development—while delivering value back into the transport network. Mark shares lessons from a career in political engagement and explains why listening to communities from day one is key.

This is an insightful look at how public land can be harnessed for public good—without compromising on ambition or delivery. Listen now!

Episode Transcript

(00:00):
Hello and welcome to the Better Placespodcast, where we explore

(00:03):
the people, projects and politicsshaping London's built environment.
I'm your host, Stuart One, accountdirector and CEO.
And todaywe've got a brilliant conversation
lined up that touches rightto the heart of how London
can meet its housing, transportand sustainability challenges all at once.
I'm woke.
I'm joined today by two peopleat the heart and center of this mission.

(00:24):
First, Graham Craig, director and chiefexecutive of places for London.
Graham leads the teamtransforming London's
Transport for London's property portfolio
to deliver tens of thousands of new homes,half of which will be affordable.
Welcome Graham.
Thank you very much. It'sgreat to be here.
Graham spent much of his careerat the top of TfL and now

(00:45):
steers one of London's most excitingpublic land and development programs.
Alongside him, is Mark Walker, strategicengagement lead at places for London.
Mark joined after impressive careerworking within the Labor Party's
with Tom Watson, formerdeputy of the party, Sadiq Khan,
the Mayor of London and in seniorpolitical organizing roles across London.

(01:06):
Mark could see,
he brings an unrivaled experiencein navigating,
local politics and communityconsultation, which is crucial
to winning trust and delivering projectsacross our capital city.
Today, we're going to explore placesfor London's approach
to unlocking land around,stations to build new communities.

(01:26):
We'll look at some of the big schemes
that bowler, Lane fostersand all the scope from which I'm familiar.
up in Enfieldand how they work within boroughs
with Network Rail and communitiesand how they.
That's places for London.
But it's the need for social valuewith the challenge of generating revenue
to fund, sprawling cities transport network.

(01:49):
So this episodehopefully won't be too long.
with some insights.
for anyone working within, developmentand politics, public engagement in London.
So I guess let's get started, guys.
And thank you so much for joining us in.
we're here in, White Chapelin a quite nice, airy studio.
but it will be hopefully, for fun and,casual chat.

(02:12):
but I'd really like to start with you,Graham.
So, place of London is still relativelynew entity with an ambitious set of goals.
I wonder if you could start by explainingyour overall vision for places
for London, what role it playswith the mayor's broader strategic vision,
and why it's differentfrom TfL's private property ventures.

(02:33):
Sure.
It's probably helpfulif I go back to the beginning, briefly.
I mean, when I first came into propertyin TfL,
TfL was absolutely clearthat it was a transport organization,
didn't know what it owned, didn't valuewhat it had, didn't

(02:54):
have a housing program, really didn't
see itself as being, property company.
I mean, it's one of the biggest landlordsand in the country.
Right. in London,yes. One of the largest.
Not the largest, but one of the largest.
It owns 5500 acres of land.
And of course, the first messageto get across then is, well, if you own

(03:15):
5500 acres of land, your property company,whether you accept it or not.
Now you compare thatwith where we are now.
So we've been places for Londonnow for 18 months.
So a brand that's aligned to TfL
but separate, distinct and places

(03:38):
for London was, as it happens,the first name that we came up with.
When we're thinking about a brand, we ofcourse had to then consider 200 others.
But we came back to where we startedbecause it describes what we're here for.
We're interested in places,and we're doing it not just in London,
but for London.London has many challenges.

(03:59):
And of course, first and foremost amongstthose is a lack of affordable housing.
And as long as we within this entityremember that we're we're here
to serve TfL, we're here to serve London,then we're not going to go far wrong.
also for the last,
three years
we've been financially separate from TfL.

(04:21):
So we now take no funding from TfL,
no, operating revenue from TfL,no capital from TfL.
So all the money that TfL got itcan invest in the transport net network.
Our job is to work with commercialfunders, commercial partners
to bring forward homes,

(04:43):
work space, infrastructure on the landthat we own.
All the profit we make flows backinto transport for London.
but we're absolutely here with a clearsocial purpose to do what we can
to address the challengesthat the capital faces.
That's really interesting.
I think if we could just probe a little

(05:04):
for anyone listening to this.
So, just cognizant of,
the TfL and some of the challengesit's had since the pandemic,
that was probably a conscious decision
that was made to separate,its two funding models.
Why is it because, property's

(05:25):
so risky and this is the circumstancesthat, place London.
I mean, or does it allow your organizationto go a lot bolder in
achieving some of your targets to deliverthose tens of thousands of new homes?
it's as simpleas when the pandemic struck.
TfL lost 95% of its income overnight.

(05:48):
you know,we saw numbers on the underground
that were lower than we've seensince Queen Victoria was on the draw.
It was importantthat the transport network was freed up
so that those, workers who had to get to
work were able to do so,
minimizing the risk of infectionfor those people.

(06:09):
So TfL want from went from encouragingpeople to take public transport
to asking people other than thosewho absolutely had to to stay off it.
No, that, of course, imposed, immediate
significantfinancial burden on the organization.
It had to go through a long period

(06:29):
in which it had no certaintyof funding whatsoever.
I think the shortest at TfL hadwas a funding deal that lasted two weeks.
Now, in the context of running TfL'stransport network,
that's pretty much an impossible taskor property portfolio
because on the yeah, it'sso from a property point of view,
we're kind of facedbecause TfL barely had enough money to run

(06:52):
a transport network, certainly didn'thave the money to invest in property.
So it's a fairly stark choice, really.
It was.
Do we have a farsale of assets at the worst possible time,
or do we say, actually, in the midstof all this, there's
an opportunity, opportunityhere to do something innovative,

(07:13):
which is creatinga commercial property company
that takes no money from TfL is ableactually to plan long term
because we're not dependenton public sector funding.
So actually offers the ability
to do more, be more strategic.

(07:33):
yeah.
Plan longer term,
knowing that all the moneythat we make flows back into the transport
network, but we're not divertingany funding whatsoever
from the core purpose of TfL,which is transport.
transport for London agreed to all that.
City Hall agreed to it.

(07:55):
The then government agreed to it.
I think it has been seen to be a success.
and I certainly think that we arein a much, much better position now
as a consequence of the decisionsmade at that time.
But in, in operating in such a,

(08:17):
In an open, in such an environment
that you, essentially set upby the government all the food.
How are you square in,
one directionthat was set by the mayor's office
and then also work in national governmentbecause I could bring in, Mark here,
essentially, my question is, who'ssetting your political ambitions?
You got half of those 10,000 homes thatyou wish to deliver will be affordable.

(08:43):
Is that a political ambition?
Was that an ambition?
based on the need that London has?
I mean, I think regardless of who
the government is, I think it's clearwhat the housing crisis is.
So for us,in terms of the political direction,
I think the challenges London
faces are clear,regardless of who's in power,

(09:05):
I think we're very proud of the factthat we're part of the JLA family,
and we work closely with, not only the mayor,
but the deputy mayors,both the transport, housing, to make sure
we're kind of aligning ourselveswith that agenda.
I suppose we're at a rare window
now where we havekind of, synergy fuel yet,

(09:26):
amongst government and, and the GLA,and that's certainly helpful.
But I think, as a public body,we have to be,
adaptable to whatever those winds change.
And so therefore, I think, as I said,I don't think the ambitions,
or the challenges, should I say thatwe face necessarily change.

(09:48):
because I think everyone's clearon what the challenges for London are.
Yeah.
I think it's very important the
we don't see affordable housingas some thing that's imposed on us.
It's somethingthat as a major London landowner,
we have to recognize the challengesthat this city faces.
We all know,you know, the stats about on average,

(10:10):
one child in every classroom,in temporary accommodation.
I think for me, for Mark,for everyone in the team,
part of the reason why we're here isbecause we want to address those things,
not because we're told to,but because we're in a, you know,
a very privileged positionto be able to do something

(10:31):
meaningful to address the challengesthat this the this city has.
And I'm going to zoom into some of your flagship projects.
But just to kind of, stress on this pointa little, it's more because
lots of my clients and lots of investorsprobably look to you for certainty.
And I guess while you may havea kind of overarching political direction

(10:52):
that you following, I guess it'swhat is the message to some investors
or those who are looking to youto, to to think, will your targets change?
Will your ambitions changeor your mission change?
What was your message be to them?
for as long as I'm here,the targets won't change.
as the person who has,

(11:13):
created
led places for London, I'mabsolutely clear about the fact
that our job is to understand and address
the challenges in the roundthat this city faces.
and, you know, ultimately, we're talkingabout building homes, workspace,
infrastructure, amenity

(11:35):
around the public transportnetwork in London.
I mean, that's as good
a portfolio as you'll findpretty much anywhere in the world.
You know, for me, the so, I mean,that absolutely goes alongside
the opportunity of this jobis the responsibility of recognizing,

(11:55):
and meeting the challenges.
partly on us of pan London basis.
But it's also about recognizingthat London is, you know,
a whole patchwork of individual villagesand towns and cities.
So the right answer for cock fostersisn't the same as the right answer
for school or South Kane,or more certainly get into those and

(12:17):
and obviously navigating that.
But I do think just to pick up on a pointabout the targets.
So one other thingit's worth thinking about from,
if you're thinking from the builtenvironment community looking at is that
I suppose we're ambitious in a senseif the targets are set out,
but we're also ambitious in the sensethat we're alive to the fact that we have
we are uniquely placedin terms of our landholding.

(12:37):
So there's other opportunitiesto solve some of our London's problems.
So we're not
so at the moment,
grandma, talking to the NHS, obviously,like you mentioned in your intro
to, to work with NetworkRail and stuff like that.
So wherever we can look to use our landto solve the wider issues on the face
rather than just a housing crisis,I think we're we're alive to that as well.

(12:58):
So I think we are uniquely placedin that sense.
Can I make one other pointthat I'm legally bound to make?
These are your talks to you guys.
But, please, the disclaimer,
we're
also hereto make money for transport for London.
so we have a target return 7.5%.

(13:20):
That's what we have to make.
and that flows back to transport forLondon to invest in the transport network.
So all the good things that we do,we're proud of that.
We're ambitious.
We also have to recognizethese are public assets.
TfL needs long term investment.
And one of the strong core reasonsfor setting up places for London in

(13:43):
the first place is to make surethat we're in a position to optimize,
the financial returnthat flows back, to our shareholder.
And I think that's a good segueinto one of the schemes
that you're looking to progressnow, though, the lane in Acton,
took us through that development.
What is it?

(14:04):
What's the what's the vision for it?
And how do you hope thatthat reinvestment, could
potentially improve the lives of peoplein and around, that part of Ealing,
I have many favorite schemes.
You would say that only.
But, yeah, one of them is

(14:26):
Lane is certainly, certainly
one of the most important schemes.
I should also begin by saying that
over the years I've made a few mistakes.
One of the mistakes that I madewas assuming
that developers could do thingsbetter than we could.
now we had more recently,but historically we've had some mean.

(14:50):
So it's quite consider is that because of private expertise or
what what makes youryou and your team of specialists,
able to bring forwarda scheme as good as this one?
I thought there was a time
when private sector developers,would be able to do stuff that we can't.

(15:14):
And undoubtedly there are some thingsthat, we can't replicate,
certainly across the breadthof what we do within places.
But both Elaineand Mark was instrumental in this,
along with Patriciaand the planning team, within places.
That's a schemethat we got planning on ourselves.

(15:36):
And it's a better schemethan would have been obtained
by any private sector developer.
yeah.
I think that increasingly I understand
the actually addressing the challengesthat London faces

(15:56):
is about adults coming togetherand sorting stuff.
And critical to that are the adults
from the public sector,the major landowners working together?
Yes, of course, with commercial funders,commercial developers,
commercial commsand engagement agencies and others.

(16:16):
But actually we've got access to roomsthat other people don't.
We can sit down and set out a vision
for a site like Ball Lane,
which isn't focused on shortterm shareholder return.
Boler Lane is 900 homes, an investment
in improving the local transportinfrastructure.

(16:37):
It's 50% affordable housing.
You know, it'ssomething that we can feel proud of.
It's something that we can get behind.
we had very positive engagement,
from Ealing.
Very positive engagement from the Gli.
You know,we worked collectively with those parties

(16:58):
in order to to bring forward that scheme.
We were then able to take that to market.
and Barratt London,
was successful in the competition.
And the other significant part about that
was, as well as usgetting planning on ourselves,
was the recognition that actually

(17:21):
in identifying joint venture partners,
the relationships important and the effortyou put into the relationship.
So why would you go throughall that effort just for one site?
So Boler Lane is the seat sitefor our West London partnership,
and we will end up bringing forwardthousands and thousands of homes,
with Barratt Londontaking the relationship,

(17:45):
the experience from that siteand then feeding that engine,
with other sites across west west London.
You know, Mark, your career has taken youform political organizations in your time
with, former deputy labor leaderTom Watson and the Khan
just touching on that,you mentioned that green, that

(18:09):
you guys have access to people and,and rooms
and perspectives that really helpsyou shape these schemes.
On the mark.
How's your background helped to influencethe way you approach public
and engagementand stakeholder relationships,
and how does that complement the criticalplanning expertise that you mentioned?
Patricia, was working
on, but also that development expertisethat Graham and Lewis

(18:31):
the team bring to for.
Yeah, it's a good question.
I mean, won't come as a surprise to you.
I, I tend to look upon all my workas a campaign,
whether it's this campaignor a new to me.
Actually, Mark, I've.
Or who, who doesn't know?
Mark. Mark, come out first.
When I was 16, knocking on doors, in our native Enfield.

(18:52):
And he taught me one thing,which is everything's a campaign.
Everything is a campaign.
So if you.
So I
no different from thinking, well,the election's on this day,
and I'm going to work backwardsto the day,
I think, planning committees on this date.
I'm going to work back from that day
and understand what the client well,what are the key milestones I want to hit?
And I think there is, always a challenge,inasmuch as you're going to have

(19:15):
the kind of Nimby aspect of,the community that that we all face,
regardless of the scheme,wherever you are, wherever you are,
Sherlock Holmes, I'm not, as it transpiresthis week, and I think that I think,
but I like a great example where we likelike we say in politics, bait, kill.
So early engagement, like I mentionedwith the, local authority

(19:39):
with the GLA, making sure you're havingthose conversations are understanding,
but making sure that you're marryingback to the community what they want.
So but I was a great examplewhere you had this, like, strip, quite
an awkward strip of land that TfL ownedthat runs along kind of the railway line.
On the other side, you had acting,acting gardens, which was,
kind of a clunky housing estateregeneration.

(20:01):
Now, the tempting thing for uswould be to come along and just see that
as a continuation to stick a loadmore houses, er, let it mirror
what's across the road and have a schemethat would kind of that fit that parcel.
But as a, as an organizationwe didn't want to do that.
And, and as Graham says,it's credit to the planners of the team
that actually they really looked upon itas a fresh approach.

(20:23):
And they reimagined the kind of stretcha road down, Barlow Lane itself
from Widen the Path, started
creating some kind of communityback office in that kind of way.
And that's before we started worryingtoo much about the buildings.
And straight away then the community.
Okay, I live here, I'm a resident here,and this is all so for me,
rather than going,

(20:43):
oh, that's something that's being built,it won't be, it won't benefit me.
And that was really, really important,really understanding
that kind of what the community neededand being able to deliver that.
And then likewisewith the design of the buildings,
I appreciate designs,a subjective thing and
I'm always
I'm all fortrying to get out of the planning system,
but equally to come along with with ideasfor buildings that were different

(21:04):
from each other, even within the scheme,as well as those across
it, gave it a real stamp of,independence and approval.
And I think that really helped helpwith the process.
Now, I know this from ownershiplooks like clients
that it can often feel that the commsand just engagement people are a burden.
They're always finding new ways of,shaping the scheme

(21:25):
that may be under some financial pressuresor viability pressures.
I wonder
how did the work that Marc did in goingin really early in the early conversations
that you were having with local authorityand in trying to shape Bowler Lane?
did you find that
the feedback that he was giving youwas actually quite helpful in finding,

(21:45):
shaping bowler Lane into, into, intowhat is to do?
it was not just useful,but absolutely essential.
I, I mean, again, we're we are
we sounds tribal. Kind of.
We're here to serve.
We're here to deliver what it isthat local communities one.
And if Mark is having early engagement

(22:07):
and understanding directly locally,
what is it that this scheme needs to lookand feel like,
then of course,we're going to respond to it. This
this can't work.
If we sit in an office in central Londonand just,
you know, take a cookie

(22:27):
cutter approach to whatwe're going to be doing across London.
It has to begin with what's the context,what's the need.
And the more we understand that,the more likely we are to secure planning.
But it's even thennot simply about getting.
Planning, of course, is actually going to
is about building somethingthat's going to stand the test of time.

(22:48):
And I'm resolutely of the viewthat if you do the right thing,
the commercials will follow.
If you take a narrow, short termcommercial point of view,
it's not even going to optimize.
From a purely commercial point of view,you do the right thing, and
everything else will then will,
follow you allbut the longevity of schemes.

(23:10):
And I know that
sustainability is particularly important,especially in the place that London.
can you explain how you really sought
to integrate sustainabilityinto your proposals?
And of course, oneof the cardinal aspects, and I know this
when I'm looking for new build flatto potentially when you move into,
that reduction of car usageis essential to this, to the work

(23:32):
that you're doing there.
what's the thought process behind it?
Was sustainability so key.
And, what is the mayor'svision for, let's call this, London.
there's a lot to unpack in that.
So from a place'spoint of view, we've got,
a sustainable development framework.

(23:55):
So every scheme that we bring forward,
there's just under 100 KPIsthat we look at.
and for those hundred KPIswe drill into and seek to make sure
that we're focused oninternational leading practice.
We're not an organizationthat, again, simply

(24:16):
looks to meetwhatever the minimum policy standards are.
We want to do the best.
Now, as a consequence of that,as a consequence of the Scdf,
as we call it,we were ranked by grasp last year
as the most sustainable propertydeveloper in the UK.

(24:37):
in the top half dozen in Europe.
and we're proud of that.
Again, not simply from a awardspoint of view because it
but because it recognizes the effortthat we put into
making sure that what we're doingis truly sustainable.
And, for example,
you know, the cost that our residentswill incur long term from energy,

(25:00):
which is obviously increasingly expensiveand increasingly important.
We are thinking about it from our longterm residents point of view.
We're also, as an organization, partof transport for London.
there's a mayor's transport strategyand that sets, ambitious targets
in termsof sustainable modes of transport.

(25:24):
combining those
two within places for London, we operate,
TfL 75 car parks across London.
Now, those car parks
generatesignificant ongoing revenue for us,
but ultimately is the personwho's responsible for them.
Well, there is a role for carparking around transport,

(25:49):
hubs in London.
But certainly when I was thinkingabout there and when we were looking
at some of those outlying car parks,
the majority of people using them livewell outside London.
That's the thing that's always struck me.
And terms of work on the copforces, station,

(26:09):
which for those who don't know, it'sin the northern, north western end.
Food.
Some people traveling as far as Cambridge,Peterborough even further,
just to get into a can, I guess I drive,but that seems like a long way to
for one to travel that sort of beenutilized by the locals.
Yeah.
So you know, I, I get thethis is contentious.

(26:31):
It's probably,
we'll get into it, and it's questionson, cop forces and on the screw.
But I'll let you finish.
it's contentious.
I know it's contentious.
One of the most contentious thingsthat we do.
But I firmly believe that
as an organization that owns the assets,we do protect their own stations.

(26:52):
We should be strivingto maximize the benefit for London
as a consequence of every square footthat we own.
And I fear from the individuals
who drive those long distances,driving past
multiple Network Rail stations in orderto come to the end of the tube network.

(27:13):
Now I use the tube network every day.
I understandwhy for some people it might be cheaper,
it might be more convenient,but ultimately us
encouraging people to drive longerwith the congestion
impacts the air quality impacts,the carbon impacts of that.
You won't be surprised to know that.
I think that building homes,particularly affordable homes

(27:37):
in the most sustainable location
immediately next to the transport network,makes a hell of a lot more sense
than encouraging peopleto drive those long distance as it does.
you know, I have to sayI'm a keen car driver and a big advocate,
but I think that the
there is a rationale thereand it makes sense, frankly,

(27:59):
going into Cop forces and on a scalethat have both been controversial,
it's, fair to say
what were some of the specific challengesof question to both and probably
bring in Mark firstor the specific challenges
those two schemes that they facedin planning and public perception?
And how were you squaring those holesand making the argument,

(28:19):
to those who didn't quite understandthe need to build new homes on
those car parks?
Yeah, I think, you know,I think it's a mind shift.
I think it's it's there's no one betterin London to kind of meet this challenge.
And us, wewe own the land and around station.
So we have to be careful, be the driversof this kind of the change in mindset,
in terms of how how we operate,how we get around our city and,

(28:44):
I think you're right.
We did.
We do a car park survey.
We've done them wherever,
we look to kind of meetthis challenge head on.
And it's outstanding.
Like where I, where I live in Redbridge,we had the same thing.
We have people driving in from Essex with,obviously cock fuss is a pretty.
I know quite well from previous life.
and yeah,the people are driving an awful long way,

(29:05):
but I think it's about reassuringthe kind of local politicians these aren't
your electoratethat are driving here to to part.
These are people that are driving in.
They're not going to be
we've got to help move them on to other,more sustainable forms of transport.
And I think it's difficult.
It's difficultbecause people are used to their cars.
They're driving it.
It's all wrapped up in people'ssense of independence

(29:26):
and getting around and stuff like that,and it feels like you're
you're taken away.
But unfortunately, when you look backin 15, 20, 30 years time,
you'll notice this was the right decision.
But it just takes time to evolve,and people need to get
their mind around the conceptand I think as well,
the transport system has to therefore meettheir needs as well.

(29:48):
It's no good taking people's cars away.
And then they arrive at a stationand there's not enough trains
or that they're not cleanand they're not, efficient.
And I think that we're, we're aliveto that as well.
And, and therefore, like Graham
said at the beginning, it's, it's our jobto, to to finance that transport network.
They go hand in handthat that the extra revenue

(30:08):
then that then creates a bettertransport system.
So it's not quite necessaryto have to scale it at people
necessarily thought it was.
but again, yeah, I don't think there was
any challengesin terms of the, the process that wasn't,
as you would expect, any kind
of scheme in the city in terms of peoplenot liking development, high

(30:29):
housing mix, all of those kindof same challenges that we always have
other than the fact that,yeah, like you say, all those people
are not going to park on my street,they're going to park in my roads.
You're moving the problemfor a lot of why and stuff for that.
But what what has proven to bethe case in Blackhorse Road and,
where there was a car park beforeis actually once that car parks closed
and people find alternate transportmethods, they don't go back.

(30:54):
So even if you reopened the carpark, people
then don't go back to driving,because at that point
they're used to catching a train
from Hertford or Stevenageor wherever they've come from.
So it's not dissimilar to debates aroundsmoking or wearing
a seatbelt or stuff that overtime, people get used to the change.
But you have to be the one that drives it.
And I appreciate it'snot easy in the first instance.

(31:14):
Indeed, and I think what I'd
be interested in to understand is
how could you give me any examplesof any proposals
that you've worked onin which you successfully argued?
And it's been a smooth ridethrough the planning process?
around the benefits, the,the new homes, the inscriptions,

(31:36):
the intrinsic social valuein being for those new homes and
any carrots, also any incentivesthat you've laid in place, the narrative
that you've, shared, have brought somenaysayers along with you.
I'm struggling to
think of anythat have been straightforward.

(31:58):
and I'm not sure it should be.
I mean, ultimately, we're introducing
change, significant change to local areas.
I like you.
You know,you sit through many conversations
in which people talk abouthow the planning system has to change.
It's not perfect,but I'm very, very happy to work with it

(32:20):
as it iswhere we're held to a high standard.
but that feels right to me
as a major strategic landowner
that wants to invest in London,it's right and proper that
there should be a mechanism to make surethat we're doing the right thing.
and people get understandably

(32:41):
very emotional about it.
the only way in which we can deal withthat is set out the data,
set out the facts, set out a vision for,
you know, London as it needs to evolve.
and I'm, you know, I'm proud of the workthe, the team does.

(33:02):
I thinkwe've got an increasingly strong team,
that is able to work with partnersacross London to set out,
what it is that we're seeking to achieveon a local level
as well as a pan London level.
And remember, of course,the on every scheme we are delivering
substantial affordablehousing workspace, affordable workspace.

(33:26):
We are investing in local communities,we're investing in skills.
we're about to train our 10,000th personin construction skills.
Well, because we know that we've got
literally decades of developmenton land that we own.
So why wouldn't we investto make sure that people in London get the

(33:49):
the training, the opportunityin order to take advantage of,
that work that we're helping to create.
So we're nothingif not focused, on doing the right thing.
And of course, we'll always lookon those grove, Cork,
Foster's building and everywhere elseto understanding what are those
local transport improvements that we canmake at the same time as setting out

(34:12):
clearly that all the profit that we makegets reinvested in the transport network.
So I think we'vegot as good a case as anyone.
that doesn't mean that we get anythingother
than being held to a high standard, butthat's not something that I struggle with.
I think the tangible transportimprovements is a really important point

(34:33):
the Graham makes,and the fact that our schemes
can help unlock issues arounddebt free access and stuff like that.
But I think a really good example,
if you agree, of wherewhere I've had, I'd massive impact.
Much wider would be the economy placemechanism. Yeah.
Well that's going to come on to barkingsighs a crack.
An example where we solvedso many problems in our area.

(34:56):
I've just bought a development.
Not only did we tackle the housing crisisby bringing forward that
100% affordable scheme,anyone that knows yeah,
you come out of barking side,you'd be greeted by builders yard,
very very narrowstreet, poorly lit and stuff
like that beyond the kind of reach of TfLin that sense.
However, now you're opening upto a massive forecourt, much better lit.

(35:17):
It's not a builder's yard,it houses so dramatically.
That means there's more peoplearound natural surveillance.
And so there's a phrase that kicks inwhen you. Exactly.
And that.
So I'm tremendously proud of the workthere because it's completely changed
the arrival.
We hear that word a lot in the builtenvironment, the arrival of of when you
when you come out a bark inside stationand the whole place feels safer.

(35:39):
It feels better.
I feel like that with whata fantastic scheme that
that that gives so much backto the community.
Absolutely. And, you know, it's one where
it had been quite easy
to would have probably made more money.
Just bringing it forwardis, industrial site.
But again,you're thinking you've got land.

(36:02):
Could immediately adjacent tothe transport network and bringing forward
98 100% affordable
units next to the transportnetwork is for me,
it's very easyto be blasé about this stuff.
You know, you spend a lot of time
looking at spreadsheets,but ultimately, what we're doing
is giving thousands,tens of thousands of people, ultimately

(36:25):
a front door, a roof over their head,giving people the single
most important thingto change people's life chances.
Why wouldn't you try and do thatto the maximum extent you can?
Yeah.
No, I mean, I believe in grime setting,I forget.
Anyway, Graham's donea tremendous amount of work
in terms of making sure that we havededicated members of the team.

(36:46):
Lucy, Ashley in our job,does a fantastic job of,
the play spaces for womenand young girls and stuff like that.
So it's, it's really noble that that thatreal thought and consideration different.
We do. It's really important.
Can I just build on thatjust because I think again, I know
we're not the only people who do it,but for us it's absolutely core.

(37:08):
It really well and it's somethingthat I've been following so much
and why I've invited you onbecause it is a real story too.
So, yeah,
for us,it's always about not simply thinking
within the red line of what it isthat we own
as an organizationthat's wholly owned by TfL.
We're acutely aware of the fact that

(37:30):
for people who are moving
into one of our developments,their front door
effectively startson the platform of the station.
So of course,when thinking about placemaking,
when thinking about, safety,
we're going to think about

(37:51):
something that goes beyond the developmentitself.
And Lucy, as Mark,
you know, rightly highlights,
is doing continue to do a fantastic job.
just making surethat we're all held to account
so that the qualityof what we bring forward will,

(38:11):
you know, ultimatelyserve the people who live and work
on our developmentsand certainly ultimately ensure that,
those those development standardsstand the test of time.
And, you know, I think that's a good segueinto the new concept
that we've been discussing here, which,when you call, we pinned, to an article,

(38:32):
for the Fabian Society,although it's the local government
and housing Policy group,which is always a good, acronym.
But it was around the success ofinternational examples like New Zealand,
in concentrated developmentaround things that they refer
to as station development zones.
Talkingabout working within the red lines.

(38:54):
We live in a great countryand it has a, a phenomenal history
of building incredible things, butit is a very complex system to navigate.
I wonder if there are any internationalexamples of similar approaches
that you could think of that Londoncould benefit from, and the pieces
for London not activelyand practically trying to, push that.

(39:19):
our regional national governmentimplement,
I spend as much time as I can,which still isn't enough
looking to seewhat's happening elsewhere in the world.
And that's both learning from others
and sharing with others
what it is that we're up to.

(39:41):
So I, for example, working with the,
Fcdo went to Kenya for a week recently,
sharing with the Kenyan governmentwhat it is we've done within places
for London and the benefitsas we see them,
of doing development, our own stations
and the sorts of infrastructurethat it takes to make that happen.

(40:04):
I've had
calls recently, with colleaguesfrom Toronto,
Hong Kong, Singapore, Sydney,
the answer, as you would expect,
is there is an any one citythat solved this.
And, we obviously lookedat the zoning in New Zealand.

(40:26):
And on the face of it,the significant success
that has had both in termsof unlocking development
and then directly,
improving access to housing.
but I haven't seen any one thingthat you just want to pick up
and drop on London, but I think it'sdefinitely a bit beholden on us

(40:48):
and the industry more broadly,not to sit back and imagine the,
within London or within the UK.
We've got all the answers.
In fact, even I think one thingthat I hold myself to account for
is the fact that I spend much more timetalking to other cities
around the rest of the world than I do

(41:10):
other cities elsewhere in the UK.
I try to when I can,but I, I think we could definitely do
more learning from each other,across the UK.
And it's not about,
endeavoring to drop
a solutionlike places for London elsewhere.
It's about understandingwhat's the local context, what's the

(41:31):
what's the local needs, and how can we alllearn from each other in terms of,
oh, we'll all get some thingsright, we'll get some things wrong.
But the more we share,the more successful jointly.
Ultimately we will end up, being.
I don't think it would be a surprise.
I when you say grand to see the placeskind of model

(41:52):
start rolling out in other cities.
Specialist devolution kind of moves upthe political spectrum even more.
When you see the kind of like thethe work Andy Burnham done in Manchester
and stuff like that,it seems like a natural success.
yes. Well,
the only reason for meposing is as someone who's been immersed

(42:13):
in this for a decade,there is nothing that we've done.
That to meis an obvious, logical, sensible.
But you would say that there's,you know, clearly.
Have you clearly found
a formula of building homes?
And like you said,there's some schemes that could make

(42:34):
TfL and, one public purse a little better,
but you're still looking at wherethere's social good,
and ableto bring down the cost of housing,
I think, to the Auckland examplethat you touched on,
what made that unique wasit was a clear example,
of increasing supply and seeing

(42:55):
a slowing down of cost of housing,both for rents and for people buying.
So I think to Mark's point,what lessons in your experience,
in your time is flooding in elsewhere?
Have you seen your tangible examplesof where you can bring down
the cost of housing in a sustainable way,
but one that includes access for peoplewho would otherwise afford it?

(43:17):
I cannot claim thateven if we developed all of
all of the places for London's estate,
that will by ourselves be ableto bring down, the cost of housing.
What I can absolutely sayis that in particular,
if the rest of the public sector sort.
So if we can collectivelysort ourselves out.

(43:40):
I mentioned earlier,the adults in the room,
there are a relatively small numbermajor land owners, largely
in the public sector, who I am
keen work evermore closely to together.
Each of usthinks beyond the red line of what we own.
each of us recognizesthat you can't solve

(44:02):
every problem at every site, but you know,you can make money on some locations.
That helps to offset higher social value,
higher levels of afford affordablehousing elsewhere.
But everywhere has to makeeverywhere has to work.
Everywhere has to be, a mix.
Everywhere has to be focused onwhat's the right solution

(44:24):
for that location,but also to have the ability to stand back
and then say that in the contextof a challenging economic environment
in which we know,you know, we've got a spending review
coming up,but we know there's not going to be
all the moneythat we need to address housing.
We know there's not going to beall the money that we need to address

(44:47):
transfer infrastructure.
Our health care infrastructure is there.
And I think,
a moral obligation for us
as major public sector landownersto work with commercial partners
in order to maximize the wider
public benefit that we can deliveron the land that we own.

(45:11):
And the more we do that in a joint way,the more we do that and a long
term, focused, ambitious way,the more likely we are to be a a success.
And that is a there's a core,that I think Professor Greg
Clarke has used before about,
London is a negotiated city.

(45:34):
I think that, that's a good one.
I don't think this is somethingthat's going to be imposed on us.
I think this is about uscity hall, boroughs,
Network Rail, other partiesworking collectively together
with commercial developersin order to get this done.

(45:55):
Thank you. And, Mark,you touched on this.
Well, what conversations have been had,mind you,
and I know that you work acrossthe political spectrum, and it's not just,
those in the national governmentor regional government.
Do you think
that weknow we're not getting more money, but,
What?
Yeah.
What what conversations
are happening at the momentto really accelerate housebuilding?

(46:18):
And what creative thinking do you,are you hearing about,
that are being proposedand some of these, white papers,
to accelerate and catalyze, the housing that we need.
I mean, I, I mean,
it's it's fundamentally about the leversthat government can pull.
It doesn't necessarily needto be about money in the first instance.

(46:38):
Appreciate moneywould make a lot of the problems go away.
But where the money doesn't exist,there are levers
that can be pulledthrough the planning process.
And I'm pretty sure everyone is listeningto this.
Certainly distances for the length of timewe we in chat will appreciate the,
the the process that's holding upcurrent applications
and, and the 40 odd weekshe's taken, etc., etc.
but I think that the,why why I think there is a risk

(47:03):
that the conversation at timesfocuses too much on fairness in the market
and actually what bringsthe price of down is demand fundamentally.
So if we can get stuffbuilt, it's not on us
to be the sole provider of the solution.
But we can certainly be partof the solution and we're keen to do that.

(47:25):
But until we managedto get the homes built,
then we're not going to actually be ableto have a real grownup
conversation around, how you howyou solve the, the wider housing market.
So I think there is a, there is a growingneed for some of the kind of
the levers around government to be pulledthat will makes the process easier.
Appreciate it does not without fixyou still need manpower, etc.

(47:45):
in terms of process and applications and
certainly anything coming to safety
should not be compromisedby, by a, by one inch.
so I think that listening andand speaking to
to senior politicians and stuff,it's clear that there that that works
being done to make sure the process levereven if the money is not there sir
at the moment toto find the kind of quick solution,

(48:08):
can I just say that
the single most helpful thingthat this government did on coming in,
which is talking positively about the factthat homes need to be built in mute
music, is so important. Yes,that's something I've learned.
Certainly in the private sector,if there's no confidence in the market,
then any story that you tell will

(48:28):
just be hit backwith, doubts and worries.
Yeah.
Not least because itit gives voice to those people who
often will not have the time
to turn up to a planning committeeor an engagement event.
We know that those people who, who are more time rich,

(48:50):
we know that those people who have a home
are more likely to turn up to object.
those people who are trying to juggle 2or 3 jobs in order to get onto
the housing ladder are much less likelyto be able to turn up.
I think just hearing it said loudly
and clearly that we need to buildmore homes

(49:11):
is extraordinarily helpful thingfor all of us who are in this industry.
You mentioned cock fostersand I know scroll.
We heard examplesthere and elsewhere where
local MPsthankfully no longer MPs, have come out
squarely against the notionthat we need to build homes.
just getting the understandingthat homes need to be built.

(49:35):
We're very, very happy to engage on
the massing design.
You know, all of that stuffwe're happy to engage with. It's
it's difficult to engage with someone
who doesn't even recognize the thewe need homes.
One interesting thing,
going back to the boilerexample, actually, you touched upon,

(49:56):
it felt to me a littlebecause some of the Bollo consultation
took place during the pandemic,
so I had to quickly rethinkhow we would do it in the webinars.
And exactly that.
The, the, the, the church hall boards are
and I feel sadly to me, a little bitas a, as a comms sector
within the built environment isthat we've almost just gone back to that.
Yeah.

(50:17):
And, and for some of us, I've,and I just feel like
if you're going to really engagein, if you're really going to speak
to the people that need the housesin the future, invest in the community
future, not not just the peoplethat are trying to pull up the ladder.
How do you speak to those people?
And I it makes me sad, almostwhen I think about the
we made massive strides Apollo becausewe had to think about how we can solve it.

(50:40):
So we did it in lots of different ways,like you say,
using webinars, using differentforms of technology and stuff like that.
And now I feel like we've almost goneback to the point where
we're we're running out of church hallwhen those people are coming up.
And, and I think it's somethingthat we're, we're keen to do at places
to make sure that we are really doingeverything we can to make sure
that many people are engaged as possiblewhen we go through these processes.

(51:01):
And, you know, in closing,I think there was a forward look here.
last you questionsindividually as we look ahead.
Mark, so do you think
after five years in the role,what have you found
to be the most valuable lessonsin terms of community engagement?
Well, you touched on it.
but what is the future?

(51:25):
What does the future look likefor community engagement?
and communicationand how those lessons help
you shape your future strategiesto really get
to those who are less likelyto engage a cross-section.
And yeah, I know it's a big question,but no, no, I mean,

(51:46):
the first rule of politics is learnhow to count.
So I can't lie,
my concern ishow many people are going to say
yes on the planning committee,and I have to.
I'd be being disingenuousif I said that wasn't a concern of mine.
And in my in my previous life,obviously I would I would spend hours
and hours in Sobek Hall or Broad Houseor whatever to take you back to them

(52:07):
in either, poring over, demographicdata and, and how to best target black.
I think the
solution is in my,my five year experience is
getting the compromise in the room.
And what I mean by that is the NIMBYsand the people want development
where you can help them both understandthe compromises that need to come about.

(52:30):
Okay, so where you've gotand to be fair to Dan Tomlinson,
he's donea terrific job in this in High Barnet.
You have to let everyone understandthat we need to develop these homes.
That's a given.
They're not not going to be developed,but getting everyone in a room together,
helping understand the challengesthat the fact that the the height pays
for particularly excellent playgroundor you can have less of that

(52:53):
but you you then you need to satisfyall of those kind of challenges.
No one believes youif it's just the developer saying it.
Everyone, everyone believesyou're being disingenuous.
Let the two groups talk.
Talk to each other.
And I said, where possible, you want tocreate an environment for that debate.
You want to create informed discussionand let them people understand
each other's needs, each other's concerns,and then come to a solution.

(53:16):
That's right.
That's that'swhat I think the future is for engagement.
Quite.
The answer can always be no.
Yeah. And it's what does this look like.
And exactlybecause we are going to progress.
And ultimately the thing that strikes meand I've delivered leaflets
across, the south of England also,across the country
is will come up against a new buildhousing development.

(53:40):
The may the model will come outthat the door and I'll see what I'm doing
and I'll tell them that about a schemeI'm working on next door.
And the immediate response is,oh, I don't want new housing.
I sometimes have to remind peoplethat you're stood in one just there.
So it's me, you know,
how do youensure that the answer isn't always no?
And what does a compromise like thatyou look like?

(54:03):
Yeah. And and.
Yeah.
And that and that has to comefrom the people that live around them,
that they reflect each otherrather than ask you turn up and then
move back to or get on the train backto as nearer to Westminster,
a lateral idea who's going to get acrossto them at some point?
Graham to close, with you,we haven't really touched much
on private partnerships or partnershipson the place London, may touch on.

(54:27):
I know that you're talking about,about a bit earlier.
Looking ahead,what is next for places for London?
Is it that,
and are there any particular projects,locations that you're excited about?
and what's your kind of closing message?
I'm going to give you a few few minutes,if you will.
so for our listeners who've taken thetime to listen to us one on,

(54:50):
well done for anyone
who's, lasted out this long,
the next 12 months, by a distance,
the most important within placesfor London.
by a distance, the busiest.
bear with me.
Just want to run through for a minutewhat we're doing this year,
and then I'll that.Then I'll talk about the future.

(55:12):
So we've got schemesthat will be completing,
Fennec at barking side
next phase of Wembley Park.
we will be starting,
Tupelo Lane, the, main site there.
we will be going in for planning for
Edgware, 3365 homes,

(55:35):
Earls court, 4000 homes.
will be going infor planning at High Barnet.
300 homes,
Woolwich OSD 500 homes.
will be continuingwith our commercial office
scheme above Bank station,which has just started.

(55:58):
ten King William Street
will be starting on site at our nextcommercial office at Paddington.
Will be starting our fresh student schemeat Suffolk.
will have completed our first
ultra
rapid electricvehicle charging hub at Hatton Cross.
That's going to be the first of 65.

(56:20):
we will be completingthe asset management investment,
significant investment,just down the road at White Chapel.
we'll be bringing forward, reconditioned
archers will look fantastic at Kilburn
major schemesalso Wood Lane, Baker Street.
You know, we're investing hundredsof millions of pounds across London,

(56:46):
bringing forwardliterally dozens of schemes
that will transform the city for decadesto come, doing everything that I've said
in terms of social value,afford affordable housing,
local investment, community engagement.
We'll also be bringing forwardwith Network Rail, opportunities

(57:09):
with Network Rail on one and a half timeswhat we do in London alone.
brilliant opportunitiesworking with them.
at places like, Waterloo,
Victoria,Woolwich town Center and elsewhere.
And for me, the future is everything
that we're talking about from a place'spoint of view.

(57:32):
We can look over the fenceand see what the real opportunity here is.
If the public sector gets itself together,it gets organized.
It works in a more ambitious,strategic, collaborative way,
working with commercial partnerswhere up to nine

(57:52):
nine joint ventures, increasingly
those, multi-site, multi-decadejoint ventures, I think,
I said earlier, I've made lots ofmistakes, but we've learned a lot as well.
And we are very happy to work with anyone
who shares the valueswe've got, the ambitions that we've got
from making this citya better place to live and to work,

(58:16):
and whether those people arein the private sector, the public sector,
we will sit down.
I will sit down at any stage with anyone
who wants to work with usto make all of this happen.
That's an incredible outro, I have to say.
And,
you know
that actually the very best of luckwith student schemes, I have to say, even

(58:38):
see some of the low linesthat you've talked about.
Because I know,
because the students actually, I thinkone of the most compelling argument
is it will free up, especially in innercities, more traditional forms of housing.
Yes, it does then turn to HMOs, whichis a model that works for some people,
but for others, and particularlythose who are having to move out of London
with the people, place planning, crisisthat we're facing,

(58:59):
hopefully some more family sizehousing, will be able to let or by
and I think last yearboth of you in a sentence
what drives you about the impactabout what you do in the places of London?
And, again, to close a messageabout the future of what London can be.

(59:19):
I mean, I'm tremendously proud to workfor places.
I'm tremendously proudto be part of the TfL family.
I guess the the fact that we can solve
or help solve so many of the problemsthat we face as a city.
I'm immenselyproud to be from East London.
I've emphasized that East, but, I, I am

(59:42):
you have to every day to come into workand to think about the challenges
that we face as a cityand play a role in help solving them.
You have more than enough motivationto be in at 9:00 every morning.
Grim.
I was brought up in Edinburgh,spent ten years living in Bristol.
I'm now in London.
I, I can't imagine being anywhere else.

(01:00:02):
London is just great to see you on afor me.
Exactly.
Anywhere else would feel like a step down.
we've got the ability to shape London,make London a better place.
I have got one of the best jobsin this city.
like Mark.
Incrediblyproud of what it is that we're doing.
London's best days are ahead.

(01:00:25):
we want to work with peoplewho want to make that happen.
Thank you so much.
And having listed all of those, honestly,I don't know how
how you have so much time in the day, butparticularly to spend it, here with us
so that is all we have time for on thisepisode of the Best Places podcast.
And a huge thank you to Grahamand to Mark, for taking the time,

(01:00:46):
for such an opening,an insightful discussion.
it's clear the people of Londonare at the forefront of rethinking how
we can make the most of the public land,that we have available to build
and create vibrant communities and supporta more sustainable future for London.
so I hope you've enjoyed this episode,and don't forget to follow subscribe

(01:01:07):
on your favorite platforms.
We'll be back soon with more conversations
on the intersection of politics, planningand placemaking here in the capital.
And you may well see my face again herein this lovely studio, in Whitechapel.
So, until next time.
So do. Well, thank you for listening.