The evidence linking the intrinsic relationship between our health and the shape, and management, of our cities is now well-accepted. Attention is now being focussed on how well this knowledge is implemented. Has the substantial back-up research been translated into practical planning and urban design tools and outcomes? And if so are these useful, and successful? What has been working well, and what needs improvement? 

There have also been three other timely prompts:

1. the spotlight the current pandemic affords on the role urban planning has played in combating previous pandemics via modifications to spaces (and behaviours) – domestic and city-wide,
2. a renewed attention generally on place management and urban design matters. In New South Wales (NSW) for instance this is reflected in a proposed new place-making State Environmental Planning Policy, and
3. renewed recognition, again prompted by the current pandemic, that effective urban and public health outcomes have always required equal attention to social equity matters (and the consequent political and process implications). 

This paper reports recent (2019-20) research that directly explored the questions above. Just ahead of the 2020 pandemic, we surveyed 350 built-environment practitioners in NSW working in local and state government and as consultants and in a diversity of fields about the barriers and opportunities (personal, workplace, regulatory and attitudinal) they experience when seeking to deliver health-supportive places.