This week, Minister for Housing Matthew Pennycook announced the closure of the Office for Place. Launched in 2021, the Office for Place shifted the housing debate away from bricks and mortar, pounds and pence, to focus on places and people, I, for one, welcomed this. The 2022 announcement that it would become an arms length body was even bolder.In full disclosure, I was one of four candidates selected by the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC), now known (once again) as the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), for the role of Chair of the Office for Place. While this role wasnt one I had initially considered, my research into the organisations remit piqued my interest.To prepare for the interview, I spoke with many colleagues and friends in the industry. I had always felt I understood the challenges we face, but speaking with others reminded me of Albert Einsteins words: The more I learn, the more I realise how much I dont know.AdvertisementThe key message from these conversations was clear: aligning the goals of key stakeholders is critical. Creating a coalition of the willing, as one colleague eloquently put it. Issues such as land value, funding gaps for art, culture, public realm, sustainability and risk are important; but the first step is uniting these disparate groups. This should have been a key goal of the Office for Place.As I rearranged the ferns in my office, crafting the perfect backdrop for the online interview for the job, I was tickled by my obsession with making my place perfect. I was uncharacteristically nervous as the panel appeared one by one on my screen. After the polite introductions, I was asked to articulate my vision for the Office for Place. I kept it simple: it must bridge the gap between our housing ambitions and the ability to deliver them. It must break down barriers to development, unite stakeholders and remind them that, despite differences in approach, we are working toward the same goal.I went on to explain that the Office for Place should use its political influence to guide the government on meaningful actions: lowering the cost of land (starting with revising the strategic land process), simplifying the planning system (through expanded planning passporting in key areas), innovating funding methods (such as tokenising funding), and developing powerful stakeholder engagement strategies. Above all, it must be attuned to the unique needs across the country. There is no one-size-fits-all solution to placemaking. Every development, community and location is different and thats the challenge of placemaking.Although Im disappointed by the disbanding of the Office for Place, I believe this will not be the end of the governments focus on place. The New Towns Taskforce is promising, but I hope its vision doesnt become too narrow. The government must be mindful not to shift its focus entirely from people and place to numbers and units and build on the work of Nicholas Boys Smith and the wider Office for Place team.Regeneration will be key, as these sites are often in areas where people want to live. We need to understand how to retrofit place to safeguard and enhance existing communities rather than displacing them.AdvertisementTrue placemaking demands that we look beyond buildings, beyond houses, and focus on community, health, culture, art, nature and wellbeing. Thats placemakings secret sauce.In recent days, many, including Michael Gove, have suggested that Labour has gone wrong by shifting focus away from beauty in the creation of homes, cities, and towns. However, the Office for Place should never have been centred around beauty. Beauty is important; but it is too ephemeral a concept to be used as a yardstick for judging good development. Instead, places should be judged by how they improve the lives of the people who live, work, play and move through them.The Office for Place should have focused on widening our understanding of good development, figuring out how to adapt and replicate that in other areas and encouraging the government to support these developments through ambitious policy and legislative changes.With its closure, I hope this broader, more holistic vision of development is not lost. I hope that we have not lost our sense of place. If we have, I fear that we will not be able to deliver the homes, places and spaces the country needs.Kunle Barker is a property expert, journalist and broadcaster2024-11-18Kunle Barkercomment and share