November and December passed and we entered 1967 with Bob and Jimmy still exploring ways of moving beyond the housing issue. Somehow we managed to keep our hopes and spirits alive as our knowledge of the area grew and the possibilities for future growth captured our imaginations. Perhaps, we reasoned, we had been too optimistic about our first report.

The location of new housing and the possible extension of the city boundary were controversial political issues for the Steering Committee, so why not present them with reports that were less so and leave the controversial issues to the end? I don't know who thought of it but it was a brilliant strategy. Looking back I like to think it was me, since I had just returned from the US inculcated with the incremental American approach to problem solving, but it could just as easily have been Jim Foster who had been drafting the first reports or perhaps Peter Daniel who was carrying around a copy of Machiavelli's The Prince about this time. For example, if we were to present reports on shopping, industry, population, and other incontrovertible issues we could ask for approval of these reports by the committee. Since decisions on these issues narrowed the options for housing location (they were spatially interrelated by journey-to-work patterns, shopping, etc.) the committee could arguably not refuse to consider housing options irrespective of their political connotations.