Not all cities are growing and nowhere embodies this more in the Western world than Detroit. Whilst Chinese cities are planning for staggering levels of population growth over the next twenty years, Detroit must respond to depopulation and falling tax receipts. It was therefore interesting to see this report on how Detroit aims to downsize by cutting off services to parts of the city (also see here). With certain neighbourhoods suffering from vacant properties, high unemployment and failing infrastructure, the city will instead focus services on a core area.
This appears to be a sensible approach that can bring a number of benefits. Increased residential densities create the critical mass for public transport initiatives which can combat the dominance of the car and bring health benefits. Higher densities also make more efficient use of land and can bring economies of scale to utilities, such as water and energy. This will save money for the city authorities and appears to be the driving force for the initiative. The reference to community farming is also positive and an excellent use of land that currently has little real estate value. Clearly the devil is in the detail and the city must be sympathetic to communities which, whilst looking desolate, do have strong social links that cannot be lost. It will be interesting to see how the city spatially develops and the role played by the planning authority in guiding the rationalisation of space.
With the UK planning system going through another round of structural reforms, it makes sense to look abroad and see how other countries and cities are tackling contemporary issues. Kristina Ford draws on her experience as the Director of City Planning in New Orleans to provide a broad critique of current planning practice in 'The Trouble with City Planning'. Ford argues that 'the plan' has failed to act as a useful and relevant document for the city's many inhabitants. Taking a historical overview, she traces how US planning has changed little from the Plan of Chicago, written in 1909. The result is that planning continues to focus too much on visioning, to the expense of everyday issues that 'really matter'. With specific reference to the problems in New Orleans, Ford argues that planning has excluded the poorest sections of society who often fail to fit into the visioning exercise each city undertakes.
I would respond that this situation should not preclude the visioning exercise being undertaken, as Ford appears to argue. One of the strengths of the book is that it made me appreciate certain elements of the UK planning system which previously I may have undervalued. The 'spatial strategy', when carried out well, presents a clear picture on how an area should develop over the next twenty years. Visioning should not be discarded, though in the US it is much harder to square with the zoning system which requires finer site detail.
So what is the trouble with city planning. Through a few excellent examples, Ford identifies the problems as: politicians overruling planning officers; confusing plans and regulations; a lack of engagement from the public; and consultation fatigue. All this is summed up neatly when she describes a typical planning meeting to gather input for the future of New Orleans and only 12 people turn up. Yes, TWELVE. This should set alarm bells ringing for the profession (in the UK as well). How can a profession that deals with such substantive issues only appeal to 12 people? Solving this requires systematic changes and unfortunately Ford only tinkers around the edges, at one point suggesting bigger maps are brought to the meetings! Similarly, offering more development options during the consultation events will not increase engagement or alter the identity of the profession. Planning will only become more visible if it gains a bigger profile from national and local government taking it serious. In the UK, planning is all too often seen as small fry, whether in DCLG or within Local Authorities.
The most troubling aspect I found of Ford's book is her description of the political influence in the US. Again, this made me grateful for the quirks of Town and Country Planning at home. Ford provides a number of examples where developers would cut deals directly with the Mayor and Councillors. This just doesn't happen in the UK, at least to this extent. Developers may get strategic reassurances from elected members, but the fine detail of a development is still required to go through the arduous process of planning approval. Ford paints a picture of schemes being waved through without being tested against policy, a dangerous precedent indeed!
Whilst the book provides some insightful examples I would have preferred greater recognition of the benefits that a development can offer an area. All too often Ford gave the impression that new development only benefits a locality through increased tax receipts. Whilst this is clearly important, especially in US cities where tax is devolved and public sector budgets are under strain, the book would have benefited from a description of development schemes that have been successful and the lessons to learn from them. How about schemes that introduce excellently designed housing or improved public spaces? Surely something good must have happened under Ford's watch!
Overall, the book was accessible for non-planners - no mean feat in itself. Ford is able to crystallise the problems with city planning well, but falls down in her suggestions for addressing the concerns. I felt she could have gone much further and been bolder in her recommendations for how New Orleans could progress in the period since Katrina.
The Musing Urbanist score: 7/10
Two big stories in the news this week centred on housing in the UK. Firstly, the Government signaled it would scrap the remaining phases of the Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder scheme (here). This was a policy much trumpeted by John Prescott in the early days of New Labour as a way to regenerate huge swathes of Northern cities. The Pathfinder scheme identified 9 areas where the housing market had seemingly failed and large-scale government intervention was required to kick-start it. The scheme was specifically tied to the North of England and neighbourhoods struggling to cope with the loss of manufacturing employment.
The normal practice was for the Council to produce a map to identify those premises earmarked for demolition, usually red-brick terraces. Owners would then be compensated and plans drawn up for the replacement housing. But the process rarely went smoothly and Council (and national Government) delays often left residents in limbo - unsure whether to invest in their home or not (see here). Some people moved out the area, whilst others (and often the most vulnerable) were left isolated in a community devoid of life and services.
However, this should not be a reason to finish the Pathfinder scheme through to the conclusion. I agree with Owen Hatherley, writing in The Guardian, that the scheme acts as gentrification and fails to serve the original working-class communities. Large-scale demolition and Government incentives have allowed developers to enter these neighbourhoods to produce housing far too expensive to the local community. The impact is that the local community is split up and dispersed across the city as they search for replacement accommodation, as described by Anna Minton in her excellent book Ground Control. The Pathfinder scheme was too quick to condemn neighbourhoods as blighted and the Government must look closer into whether the existing stock could be refurbished first.
The other housing story in the news was the decision by the High Court to quash the move taken by Eric Pickles MP to revoke Regional Spatial Strategies. In layman's terms, Labour imposed housing targets on Councils whilst the Conservatives want to scrap the targets and allow Councils to decide their own housing levels, as part of the drive towards localism. Therefore not long into his job as Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Pickles revoked the regional tier of planning. However, he didn't. Because to revoke regional planning requires primary legislation, as stated by the High Court last week.
The end result? Planning, like the Pathfinder residents, is once again in limbo. Should Councils use the old targets or devise their own (lower) targets?
This episode raises two points about the Government's approach to housing. Firstly, Pickles has an arrogance towards the planning profession where he thinks he can make major changes without going through the due process. Secondly, housing targets will be scrapped eventually and many Councils across the country will use this as an excuse to stop any house building in their area. Most local Councillors are elected on the basis of promising less development. So, will the incentivised approach favoured by the Conservatives work instead? The Localism Bill is due out next week so stay tuned for a review. In the meantime, get your planning applications submitted now, who knows when things will change again!!
Believe it or not, but planning still relies on good old multi-coloured plans to allocate future land uses. In the age of GIS and the 'network society', the 2D plan is still king. Whilst technology is slowly filtering into Council planning services, one could be forgiven for thinking that society has differed little from 1947. So a special report on Smart Systems in the latest edition of The Economist has got me excited about the opportunities for technology in planning the city.
Firstly, what is a Smart City? It characterises an approach where improvements are made to the quality of life and economic performance of a city through the application of information technologies. This involves building a system whereby the feedback of performance data allows the component or system to become more efficient. It is usually applied to major infrastructures, such as water, energy and transport, but can also apply to city management.
This article (here) describes how Singapore is at the forefront of urban technologies and encourages private firms to try new approaches in the city before selling them elsewhere. Similarly, new cities such as Masdar have placed great emphasis on joined-up systems that showcase a range of green technologies. For example, the use of sensors allows new kinds of data to be generated to help practitioners understand how the urban environment operates in reality.
This clearly has huge potential, as demonstrated by TheSmarterCity programme being pushed by IBM. With technology infiltrating all elements of society, it is only time before our homes become more responsive as a result of interpreting data. Clearly, the ownership and safety of data must be addressed, but that should not hold this back.
However, whilst smart technologies can easily be incorporated into Masdar and other planned settlements, the role of smart technology in existing cities is more complicated. Getting permission to dig up the road is hard enough, let alone trying to integrate services that often date from Victorian times! But this should not be a barrier and smart technology can operate on a number of scales - from the city-level down to individual homes. The Amsterdam Innovation Motor is one such example that aims to identify and support emerging smart systems that can be built into the urban environment. It is therefore up to planners to promote Smart Systems at all levels, from national policies to site-specific policies.
So how does this relate to day-to-day planning? Well, instead of 2D plans perhaps it is time to move towards, what Paul Finch has termed, the Mastersection. This moves beyond the common Masterplan and seeks to look beneath surface and understand how new (and existing) development should combine with underground services - whether this be utilities or fibre optics. It does seem odd that what goes on underground is such an afterthought. Perhaps if we considered a holistic approach to land development there would be greater opportunities for Smart Systems to be established. It would definitely reduce the amount of road works! This requires a shift of mindset and for planning to move away from (above) land uses and more towards being a city engineer that understands how the city operates as a system of networks and infrastructures.
