• baseline information on current developments in the town together with the aspirations of the business and residential communities
• public and voluntary sector aspirations and resources
• design options addressing technical constraints and local planning policy
• an appraisal of local market conditions and commercial viability together with an assessment of public and third sector funding
• an appraisal of local community aspirations for the site and building these into the final design proposals
• visual presentations of what could be possible on the site, how this will fit with the town and consideration of sustainability, access and energy use in the design process

It was envisaged by the Forum that the Shared Vision would be a framework for regeneration of the site, providing a blueprint for future development and a context for the consideration of planning applications. It was anticipated that there would have to be a careful balance between the interests of local residents, the aspirations of the business community and the expectations of visitors. The findings of the workshops held in August and October pointed towards a number of preferred approaches to Harbour Square ranging from adopting a town wide strategic approach to improvements, through a range of expensive and hard to achieve options to a more measured and prosaic approach to the treatment of the square. The need to take a strategic approach to proposals for the square and this matched the team’s preferred strategic and structural approach to urban design. The idea that the Harbour Square consisted solely of the existing car park and the depot buildings and TIC was not considered to be taking an appropriately comprehensive view of the issues. Harbour Square is in many ways the centre of the town – it is obviously a car park and an events space but it is also a place for the community, part of the town centre, a place for business and work and a place for art and culture. In addition to this, Harbour Square is also the hub of a network of footpaths that link to music and arts venues, to shops, museums, countryside and monuments as well as along the waterfront. Many of these are within five minutes walking distance of the Square, emphasising the walkability of the town. Broadening the immediate study area to include the harbour itself, Mote Brae and critically, the full width of the streets and pavements of St Cuthbert’s Street and St Cuthbert’s Place opens up many possibilities for more comprehensive change. This study is currently ongoing and we are finalising the proposals with the Steering Group.

KEY ISSUES AND FINDINGS

We noted in our proposal for this work that there was a striking contrast between the centre of the town and its peripheral areas – almost as if the centre mattered but the rest didn’t. We had a strong feeling in Stromness that there was a need to re-learn how to build places – not so much in terms of architecture but in relation to the basic components of the external environment, the siting of development and the overall form of settlement. Our anticipated headline issues were:

• the presence of the past
• a distinctive sense of place
• learning how to build anew
• localising urban design
• traffic by design
• sustainability – a fundamental theme

These are the basic foundations of the urban design framework. If anything the contrast between the old town and the surrounding areas was more marked than we thought. There is a strong sense that the old town is regarded, like the library, as unfit for purpose in the 21st century. The decanting of uses to Hamnavoe and Garson is evidence of this while the Pier Arts Centre seems to represent the very opposite view – a well received triumph of careful design and function in constrained circumstances. At the same time, the quality of the old town deteriorates in a myriad of small ways – vinyl street signs replacing old painted versions, unnecessary parking restrictions, inappropriate ‘heritage’ street lighting, vacant property and insensitive repairs to buildings and the public realm.

In parallel with this is the sense that Garson is used as a convenient place to site things that can no longer be accommodated in the old centre. So the town has no real structure or cohesion. This was recognised in the brief for this work which stated that the purpose of the study ‘is to establish a strategic framework and vision which would direct future proposals towards a coordinated and legible urban form’. While preserving and enhancing the historic core has been an objective of the Council for some time, changes in land use patterns, changes in the type and location of housing, the relocation of important community institutions and the growing rate of vacancies in the historic core suggest a need to ask some very basic questions about the future of the town. Some of these are:

• What is the purpose and role of the town?
• What is the future of the historic core and what function might it perform?
• What are the roles of the various other parts of the town and can these areas work in an integrated and holistic manner?
• Are there too many proposals competing for scarce resources and might fewer stronger proposals help to fulfil more integrated spatial objectives?
• Should the unrelenting drift to the north be channelled into a new spatial structure for North Hamnavoe?
• Is there a positive future for Garson other than as a home for things that can’t be accommodated elsewhere?
• What can be done about the low quality of design of new buildings on the edges of the town and in the surrounding countryside?
• What size should Stromness be? Is building 140 houses by 2010 (as per the Local Plan) sensible or just very un-ambitious?
• How do we build urban form in such a low demand environment – is low density a realistic option?
• Each of the character areas described needs attention of some kind – the 4th and 5th tier areas have the most potential for change but how should these be improved?
• Can the town put its energy and sustainability research credentials to work for the Stromness environment?

These questions are answered to a greater or lesser degree in the report below. The culture of Orkney and Stromness is very project orientated and there was significantly more interest in implementing these rather than addressing strategy and policy which would in turn produce more appropriate projects than the current batch. There is also enormous resistance to change on the part of the local community and widely differing opinions about what should actually happen in the town.

The inevitable result of this is compromise and our report reflects that. However it has opened up wide ranging discussions about the form and function of the town and set out some new thinking, especially in relation to the form of peripheral development in the stunning Orkney landscape. The final report is shown below: The study team comprised WMUD (lead), Yellow Book (economic strategy), Drew Mackie Associates (consultation), Hamilton-Baillie Associates (traffic and movement), Jacobs (Strategic Environmental Assessment and Strategic Flood Risk Assessment) and Leslie Burgher(architecture).

The Outline Planning Application was approved in December 2009. WMUD coordinated a team including Jacobs (EIA), WSP (traffic and movement), HG Planning (planning support) and Nick Wright Planning (consultation).

Our starting point is that the Castle has the potential to be:

• an area which can be enjoyed by as broad a spectrum of people as possible – young and old, local residents and visitors
• a space which enhances the social and economic life of the town – including its place competitiveness in the modern global economy, contributing to Castlederg’s economic health and its ability to attract and retain residents, businesses and visitors
• an important public space in Castlederg – and is, or has the potential to be, the focus of the local community’s aspirations for the future of their town
• an important part of the much bigger reconciliation process which lies at the heart of Peace III funding for Castlederg

Developing a shared vision for the Castle has a significance which goes beyond creating a new shared space – it should be pivotal for the town as a whole by contributing to economic competitiveness, attracting and retaining skilled people, bringing about a blossoming of civic pride, presenting an enhanced image of the town to visitors, and reinforcing the town’s distinctive sense of place for decades to come. Of course, a shared space at the Castle cannot achieve all these things alone – but it can make an important contribution to each of them.

These outcomes all come on the back of tangible, physical improvements to the Castle. There are also equally important intangible reconciliation benefits which could accrue if the right approach is used for this study. To put it another way, we believe that the way in which this commission is carried out is absolutely fundamental to enable progress towards the brief’s ultimate objectives of developing a more peaceful society.

Sensitivity to the history and sense of a place is an integral part of all our projects. Castlederg’s origins as an early Plantation town, the symbolism of the Castle as a visual reminder of that history, the trauma of the Troubles, and changes in recent years have all shaped both the place and the people of the town.
Planning and designing the future of any part of the town, including the Castle, must also reflect Castlederg’s position in the geography and economy of modern Northern Ireland. The town is an important rural service centre, although many of its residents are likely to feel relatively isolated from larger urban centres and the opportunities and facilities that they provide. That reality will shape how the local economy operates and how people live their lives in the town. Whilst the design outputs from this commission may focus on the Castle, they must be prepared in the context of the town as a whole, its contemporary role, and how it is changing.

Our team for this study comprise WMUD, Nick Wright Planning and Derry based RPD. We will update this post as the work progresses.

As Iain Sinclair and others have pointed out, the breathtaking intellectual thinness of the proposed Starbucks landscape of the Olympics compares badly with the richness of the existing complex environment. This is not a plea for doing nothing – it’s more a wish that in the rush to create, to ‘deliver’ and to ‘drive forward a vision’ towards this dubious prize, designers, planners, procurement officers or whoever should work with what is there rather than scrape it away and produce just another piece of second rate UK property development. Post-Olympics the communities can have most of this back – except that there will be nothing worth having in comparison to the richness of what is already there.

Many of the issues raised here resonate with the work we did in Sheffield on the Council’s Rivers and Waterways Strategy, especially in relation to the disregard that development agencies have for existing character and their blindness to the ways in which this can be used to create contemporary environments that are rich, exciting and beneficial to local communities. The Sheffield – City of Rivers report is available below: (should be browsed fullscreen).

Public Policy

The Scottish Government wants to create a more successful Scotland by increasing sustainable economic growth. The Government acknowledges that a high quality environment is an important part of achieving this. Highland Council’s ambitions for its population are expressed in the Single Outcome Agreement, and link back to the Government’s aim of creating a wealthier, fairer, healthier, smarter, greener and safer Scotland. The Single Outcome Agreement aims to promote sustainable Highland communities, safeguard the environment and create a competitive, sustainable and adaptable Highland economy. It also aspires to a healthier and fairer Highlands with better opportunities for all.

These aims have implications for the type and form of place that Inverness should become. For example, how successful is Inverness in catering for a broad range of expectations? How well are the Single Outcome Agreement’s ambitions being met? How well does the city cater for everyone’s needs? Is any section of the community disadvantaged? Retention of the local population, in particular the 16-35 age range, is important for Inverness and the surrounding Highland communities. However, it is this age group that tends to be attracted elsewhere – so it is important to provide what is needed in order to attract and retain them.

A new city vision One way of shaping a city future is by agreeing a vision which describes the necessary ingredients of a settlement in terms of quality of streets, buildings, spaces and sets out an image of the kind of city that Inverness could be. Over the next few months, Highland Council will be facilitating a visioning exercise for the City of Inverness. This is part of the process of preparing the new generation of planning documents for the area. It is is a different way of planning. It involves working with everyone with a stake in the future of Inverness and develop a shared vision. We will be doing this at a series of special Future City Events from Wednesday 20th January to Friday 22nd January 2010 for people from local communities, businesses and the public sector. The City Vision team We have been appointed by Architecture and Design Scotland to work with Highland Council staff in preparing the spatial content of the Vision. Nick Wright Planning has been commissioned to work with the residential and business communities in Inverness in the lead up to the Future City Events as well as consult widely with a range of public sector agencies. Highland Council have set up a blog which records the process and provides a wealth of background information. The British Council has run the Future City Events have a webpage here which describes the process.

The Scottish Government has clearly taken urbanism issues seriously with a slew of publications aimed at increasing the standard of new development, a curiosity about how high standards are attained in other countries and initiatives such as Design Awareness Training for Council officers and elected members through the Improvement Service and the recent Scottish Sustainable Communities Initiative. The alignment with traditional urbanism and sustainability is aimed at improving the quality of development in new communities and in extensions to existing settlements although some of the ideas spill over into the consideration of new interventions in established urban areas. The reasons for this adoption of traditional urbanism are fairly obvious. Firstly, volume builder residential developments are not improving and there is little sign that they will. Planners are usually unable to make significant positive changes to these developments despite a plethora of conditions, design briefs and codes. Many are wrong from the outset. Secondly, a proportion of sites allocated in Local Plans for housing are often ill-chosen in relation to their potential impact on the town, transport, intrusion in the landscape and on habitats and a standard product residential development will usually exacerbate these difficulties. Traditional urbanism is potentially more sensitive to context and place and has principles and methods of practice that create developments embodying much of what is regarded today as best practice in planning and urban design so even on a poor site, it may create a more sensitive response. Thirdly, experience from around the world says that traditional urbanism sells. The VINEX urban extensions in Netherlands such as Brandevoort, Leidsche Rijn and Haverlij designed by Rob Krier, Mulleners + Mulleners, Schippers Architects and others are all incredibly popular despite the country’s reputation as being ‘the most appreciative of modern architecture in the world’. It is the same story in the United States where New Urbanism is a major factor in selling new homes. Looking at Tornagrain in more detail, it is remarkable for a number of reasons. The basic statistics are for a town of 10,000 people set out as three distinct neighbourhoods each with local centres, a town centre, central park area, green belts between neighbourhoods and a realignment of the A96. The basic plan form was created over an intensive ten day programme of public meetings and design sessions in a completely open process and incorporates all of the New Urbanism principles. These sessions dealt with regional context, business, transport issues, infrastructure, ecology, landscape, housing, social and economic issues. The plan has proved to be resilient and has only changed in minor ways between the charette process and the submission of the planning application to reflect new issues raised by the community such as the provision of allotments and other factors emerging during the preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The plan includes a supermarket, primary and secondary schools, police fire and ambulance services, hotel, community leisure and sports facilities, a park, health centre and railway station set in a mixed use framework. The future development of the town is controlled using a design code and transect which regulates almost all aspects of development. One of the keys to creating this plan is that Moray Estates has been in the area for hundreds of years and intend remaining there and so can afford to take a long term view of the development. The current estimate is that it might take 20 years to complete so this is no short term business like most of the house building industry. The parallels with Poundbury will not have gone unnoticed. Duany and the local communities around Tornagrain have produced a structured proposal for a mixed use settlement encompassing principles of walkability, variety of dwelling types, local shopping, schools and traffic attenuation. These are also attributes of Poundbury which has been successful in establishing a mixed use urban extension with successful businesses, employment and community facilities within a pedestrian orientated environment.

Of course the issue of most concern to planners and architects alike will be the architecture of the settlement and the chocolate box images which accompany the masterplan document. In the case of Tornagrain, like the parallel plans for Ellon, Cumnock and Poundbury, the landowner has set out to acquire a traditional settlement with buildings of a traditional appearance. Moray Estates maintain that over the twenty year development period for the town, it is inevitable that there will be variations in style but for now they are content for now to let the code produce a range of traditional buildings for the town. What distinguishes this recent urbanism in Scotland is the emphasis on the principles of town making and urban structure, the inclusiveness of the plan making process involving local communities, the elevation of sustainability to the status of core issue and the de-emphasis of architecture as end product. Another factor common to all these developments is that they are all being promoted by major landowners who are in the developments for the long term. These are all critical components of an urbanism approach. Getting the structure of the town right is the main objective and if that is done, planners shouldn’t need to interfere in design and the architecture debate can continue unimpeded in its bubble. It’s not about what things look like but how they work.

Architects may rail against New Urbanism for its association with the past and its chocolate box aesthetics, its perceived lack of radicalism, betrayal of modernism and a host of other reasons but for now, traditional urbanism seems to be the only game in town, in Scotland at least, and the work of DPZ, UDA and the Prince’s Foundation together with a few other practices are setting the pace in the design of new settlements and urban extensions.
Architects may consider urbanism to be an integral part of architecture – and it probably was once – but from the late 70s and early 80s in the UK, urbanism started to branch off and has become an established discipline in its own right while architecture has increasingly focused on the single building. Of course this doesn’t mean that architects and planners can’t or shouldn’t practice urbanism – they obviously do – but what it does mean is that a different agenda is being established in which the shape-making and form-giving that once passed for urban design or the underwhelming architectural masterplans for the property development industry wrapped up in elemental philosophy about space, sunlight and openness just don’t cut it anymore. Love them or hate them, traditional urbanism plans like Tornagrain represent a quantum leap forward for the practice of urbanism in Scotland over what has taken place in the last twenty years but the sound principles of urban structure expressed in these plans need to be evolved by all those involved in building towns and cities. There is a danger that this strong foundation will lose direction through early institutional acceptance and become ossified, like planning and urban design, in statutory box ticking and standard solutions. Traditional urbanism should certainly not be the only urbanism practiced in Scotland. Instead, Scottish urbanism should be a broad movement that accepts that the production of the built environment should not just be the domain of the increasingly irrelevant historic professions, the landed gentry or the property development industry but should embrace communities in a wider social, economic and political agenda.

This post was previously published in Prospect (Architecture Scotland) magazine Issue 135 in Summer 2009. It has been updated.

The LDF planning process is working through Core Strategy Issues and Options Stage, with a view to proceeding to adoption around March 2011. Work has already been done by some of the local business community on thinking about the future, and there is a diverse range of aspirations for the future. Kevin Murray Associates were appointed by Shropshire Council operate in a neutral, creative facilitation role – with a good knowledge of contemporary urbanism (supplied by WMUD) – to help explore, facilitate and develop an aspirational, yet consensual future Vision for Shrewsbury. This role is needed to work across different sectors and groups – and to do so in a manner that is fair and independent. The study was carried out through a series of workshops, followed by the production of a Vision document that draws on the workshops and relates to contemporary good practice. The Vision document will feed into the LDF/Core Strategy process, and into the Masterplan Development Framework process for the town.

• inform the forthcoming Local Plan process, in particular the Proposed Plan stage
• identify and set out the key components required within the SLA and provide an overall structure within which individual masterplans can be prepared

This report proposed a strategic framework showing how the land-use elements of the Dunfermline SLA – housing, employment, community facilities and infrastructure – could be accommodated on the city’s western flank between 2011 and 2026, in a manner which results in high quality, sustainable and distinctive place-making.

Key elements The starting point for the form of the strategic framework was the development of walkable neighbourhoods based around mixed use local centres. Walkable means preferably within five minutes walk of the local centre and or public transport facilities but this could extend to a ten minute walk. Four new neighbourhoods are proposed in the period to 2026 – a large area to the south west of the city and three neighbourhoods to the west, north west and north. Integrated with this set of walkable neighbourhoods is a new public transport system based on an integrated street system linking the new areas (rather than a remote segregated system). The eventual form of this transport system has not been determined at present but it is likely to be either a Bus Rapid the strategic framework Transport (BRT) or Light Rapid Transport (LRT). There is also a requirement for a new western distributor road for the city which would be integrated with the BRT or LRT in part.

The protection of the historic landscape of the city and the protection of the integrity of a green belt between Dunfermline and Crossford has been an important factor in the development of the framework. At the outset, it was considered that a series of neighbourhoods had a potentially better fit in sensitive landscape than a larger settlement form. Care has been taken with the siting of these neighbourhoods and their associated landscaping although it should be stressed that by designating an SLA in the sensitive landscape of west and south west Dunfermline, it was inevitable that some conflict would occur between different interests. These new neighbourhoods have to perform a number of functions in relation to the existing urban fabric of Dunfermline. For example linkage to the existing fabric is important as is the provision of facilities in the new development which enhances the quality of life in existing areas. It was also seen as important to provide only local retail facilities and not compete with the centre of Dunfermline. The provision of employment space in local centres or in associated mixed use areas is also seen as desirable.

Finally it was necessary to accommodate the quantum of development specified in the SLA namely for:

• 4,200 new homes up to 2026
• 80 hectares of employment land
• capacity for further housing and emploment growth post 2026
• a high school
• 3 primary schools

Other facilities that the development industry might be expected to provide are:

• education, sport and healthcare facilities
• local shops and services
• employment opportunities
• public transport facilities and services
• strategic and local transport improvements
• walking and cycling improvements
• affordable housing
• public art and landscape enhancement

Integrated in these new neighbourhoods are high quality design, low or zero carbon developments and neighbourhood-wide Combined Heat and Power (CHP).

Team

The study was carried out through extensive client-side workshops and collaboration. The team was WMUD, Kevin Murray Associates, Nick Wright Planning and MRC McLean Hazel.

• to enrich the quality of life of people who live and work in Rotherham, and to improve the experience of visitors
• to promote nature conservation and biodiversity
• to stimulate investment and regeneration

The policy context

Rotherham’s rivers and waterways figure prominently in regional and local planning policy, and across a wide range of other policy areas. However, while the waterways are generally deemed to be valuable assets, there is little evidence that the poor quality and condition of many of the borough’s rivers, canals and waterspaces has been acknowledged. This confirms the clients’ perception that a strategy is required to focus attention on the waterways and to devise a cohesive strategy and plan for action.

Although the potential of Rotherham’s waterways remains unfulfilled, it is clear that they can make an important contribution to the quality of life in the borough, to biodiversity and to regeneration.

Waterways in the landscape

Rotherham’s waterways have played a pivotal role in the Borough’s rich and fascinating, determining the location of settlements and sites of industry. The canalisation of the river Don in the mid 18th century made Rotherham an important inland port, and encouraged the growth of industry, even though the waterway was soon superseded by the railways. Though the borough only covers a small area, it is surprisingly diverse: while the Don and the Rother became archetypal industrial rivers, the attractive streams in the limestone country to the east feed into the Trent catchment. Ancient ponds are a feature of Rotherham, as are planned landscapes with water features, as at Wentworth.

This diversity is still reflected in the condition of Rotherham’s waterways today, which present a challenging mix of assets and liabilities. The consultant team has analysed the waterways and waterspaces by type, function and context, and we have also identified a series of distinct character areas.

Rotherham’s waterways appraised

We tested and developed our analysis in a series of consultations and at a stakeholder workshop. These events confirmed the mixed “report card” on our site visits and research. There was unanimous recognition of the potential of Rotherham’s waterways, and a broad consensus that recent successes (Rother Valley Country Park, Blackburn Meadows, Chesterfield Canal improved water quality etc) had raised public awareness of the value of water and its potential to contribute to a better quality of life. The Cuckoo Way and Roche Abbey are examples of little known delights in the borough. At the same time, the urban Don and the lower Rother still appear to be neglected and under-used places, and recent events have highlighted the threat of flooding and the presumed effects of climate change. The potential is unmistakable, but the problems are big and structural and the barriers to progress sometime appear formidable.

Developing the strategy The report draws on this analysis to map out a vision and strategy for Rotherham’s waterways. Achieving the vision will require action to nurture, restore, celebrate and care for Rotherham’s unique network of rivers, canals and water spaces.

The report frames a series of strategic objectives and identifies six broad priorities for action: river restoration, major regeneration projects, the Chesterfield Canal, nature reserves, the access network and community projects.

Given the sheer scale and diversity of the challenges, it is not possible or desirable to draw up a detailed blueprint at this stage, but the consultant team has drawn up a set of 11 guiding principles, to be applied as appropriate as new projects are brought forward.

This section concludes by highlighting some of the places and ideas that have helped to shape the Rotherham Waterways Strategy, and which should act as sources of inspiration in the future. In particular, we acknowledge our debt to Emscher Landscape Park in Germany’s Ruhr region, which is the best example in Europe of the transformation of a polluted and semi-derelict post-industrial landscape.

The action plan The themes of the strategy are drawn together in Section 6 which begins by recommending that the key themes of the action plan should be: New Life for the Urban River valleys, the Chesterfield Canal, the urban waterfront, riverside communities, Rotherham’s Hidden Gems, caring for the waterways, and celebrating them.

We also recommend the formation of a Rotherham Waterways Partnership (with a maximum 5 years’ life) to drive forward the initiative, and the appointment of a project manager.

We have drawn up an illustrative 3-5 year action plan, which distinguishes between project development activities (where the partnership should take a lead role) and influencing the work of others to ensure that benefits for the rivers and waterways are achieved. We have estimated that the partnership would require a budget of around £850,000 over 3 years to take forward this work programme.

The success of the partnership will be determined largely by its ability to engage effectively with other partners, locally and at the sub-regional, catchment and regional levels. We have identified some key connections, including with Sheffield which is also developing proposals for reviving its urban rivers.

Finally, we have stressed the importance of knowing what success looks like. A simple performance management framework is required for the partnership, which should be the subject of an independent review after three years.

Key decisions and choices

The issues and choices will be a key theme for the next stage of the study and we have set out some of the strategic choices that need to be addressed:

• should Glasgow City Centre North continue to be a location for industry in the city, or should the strategy encourage a shift to higher value uses such as offices and housing?
• is it desirable or practicable to try to provide “local jobs for local people” in the study area, or should we be encouraging a step change in the local economy?
• could all or part of the study area be reinvented as a new community, with a mix of housing by type and tenure, parks, transport and social infrastructure that will attract people to live in north Glasgow?
• are we trying to create a destination in the city or should we be aiming for an attractive, popular and sustainable city neighbourhood?
• to what degree should the strategy be shaped by economic goals, or should we also be pursuing social, environmental and cultural objectives?
• should the strategy be predicated on incremental change, albeit with a clear direction of travel, or should the partners aim for more rapid and radical change, for example, the transformational projects described above or the creation of a new university campus/innovation park?

Must-do actions

These and other choices will be identified and discussed during the strategy formulation phase, but the process has already revealed a number of areas where urgent action is deemed to be essential. Progress on these themes can be seen as an essential pre-condition for sustainable regeneration and they include:

• Mobilising community and stakeholder support: Every effort should be made to align the public sector stakeholders and resources, and the success of the project will also turn on its ability to command the support of local communities. Change projects also mean thinking about the needs and expectations of people who are not in the study area at present, but who you are seeking to attract – to live, work or visit.
• Animating the canal corridor: The canal is the study area’s unique asset, and a key source of distinctiveness and competitive advantage, but an under-used waterway can become a liability and place that people avoid rather than an attraction. For this reason, any positive future scenario will be predicated on the presence of a lively and attractive waterfront, and activity on the water; there is a need for early action to animate the waterspace and encourage people to visit Glasgow’s little-known canal.
• Improving public transport: For a variety of historic reasons, the study area is poorly served by public transport. Radial routes pass through the area, north and south, but bus services do not penetrate into the heart of the area. This only serves to compound a sense of isolation, and local business recognise it as a weakness. Sustainable regeneration can only be achieved if Glasgow City Centre North is reconnected to the city centre and adjoining neighbourhoods, and all the best European models treat connectivity as a non-negotiable requirement.
• Improving pedestrian access to and through the study area: Most pedestrian routes in and out of the study area are obscure and unattractive, and sometimes hostile. Port Dundas, for example, is easily walkable from the city centre but it is not a good experience. The study area often feels deserted: even at the busiest times of time there are few people on the streets. Over time, radical solutions may be required to remove barriers; in the short term, a plan to make pedestrian routes safer and more attractive is imperative.
• Enhancing the public realm: Although parts of the study area have a rich character and heritage, the quality of the public realm is almost uniformly poor: The canalside around Speirs Wharf is the only exception. The strategy must include a long-term plan for strengthening and enhancing the public realm and creating high quality urban spaces, but a short-term early action plan should also be devised – focusing on areas with the potential for rapid improvement, for example, by cleaning up derelict land, improving recent development sites and influencing new developments.
• Raising design standards: Recent investment in the study area is a source of some encouragement, but the design quality of projects post-Speirs Wharf has, almost without exception, been very disappointing. The City Council has a responsibility to ensure that future developments set a higher standard for architecture and urban design. One of the most disappointing features of recent projects has been the way in which anodyne buildings have eroded the distinctiveness of the study area without injecting style or quality into the townscape.

Implementation

We have advocated a twin-track approach to the next phase of the study. In parallel with work on the strategy, a second workstream should focus on implementation: producing a plan which will focus on the “how” and “when” of the regeneration process. Some of the work has already been undertaken in this study: Section 6 contains sets out a detailed and authoritative account of market conditions in different parts of the study area, although a more fine grained market appraisal will still be required to shape and inform proposals for specific sites. We have also gathered information on property and site ownerships, which are likely to be a key factor in determining the feasibility of particular proposals as well as the timing of developments.

It is already clear that only limited amounts of land are owned by the Council or key partners such as British Waterways, and that the pattern of ownership in the study area is fragmented. Experience suggests that this is likely to be a significant constraint on the partners’ aspirations, and much will therefore depend on the Council’s willingness and/or ability to create the conditions for change.

The Spatial Dimension

The spatial configuration and qualities of the City are key factors in the visitor experience. We contend that city offers are more than a collection of attractions and a series of events, but that they are a product of the totality of the urban experience in terms the quality and character of the physical landscape, the vibrancy of the cultural environment and the presentation of the City as an accessible and connected place. In this way the City is more than the sum of its parts for both the visitor and citizen.

By looking at tourism in the City from a spatial perspective we can begin to understand and build upon its structure in terms of ‘place’ and the connectedness of different and varied places within the City in order to enhance the visitor experience. How we shape the physical environment, both built and natural, contributes to our celebration of the city’s heritage, represents a city’s sense of expression, values and confidence and says something about contemporary life-style and aspirations for the future. In Belfast the visitor experience can be enhanced and is directly affected by a number of key spatial factors:

1. the quality, variety and vitality of public spaces such as streets and squares and the degree of shared ‘public life’ that is created
2. access to and use of natural assets such as the River Lagan and the Belfast Hills
3. access to and presentation of the city’s built heritage in the form of buildings of architectural and historical significance and areas of visually and historically important townscape value
4. the degree to which the city’s local distinctiveness is conserved and nurtured
5. the ease with which visitors are able to move around the city, either walking, cycling or by public transport the emphasis and importance placed upon the quality and distinctiveness of new urban interventions both in terms of buildings and public spaces
6. the degree to which different parts of the city are successfully connected by safe, attractive and visually interesting public spaces and access corridors e.g. the River Lagan
7. the degree to which environmental sustainability is nurtured by projects such as the North Foreshore, Connswater Greenway and the creation of ‘green’ connections between neighbourhoods across the City

We have already pointed to the fact that visitor surveys and other sources suggest that one of the principal shortcomings in Belfast’s visitor experience is the level of quality and appeal of public spaces and streetscapes, combined with issues around street cleanliness, public transport provision and street animation and entertainment this paints the picture of a city which lacks the kind of environment we have come to expect of our great European cities. This despite the improvements that have been brought about in recent years by the ‘Streets Ahead’ programme, the urban riverside public realm improvements at Lanyon Place and along the Lagan, unprecedented levels of investment in new development such as Victoria Square and St Anne’s Square and the emergence of locations such as the Queens and Cathedral Quarters as unique and attractive ‘character areas’.

In short, there is still much that Belfast has to do in order to build on recent investment to improve its physical environment and put it, at least, on a par with other great cities across Europe.

A ten point approach

1. Work to establish the River Lagan as a principle ‘thoroughfare’ through the city linking the Lagan Valley, the City Centre and the Harbour/Titanic Quarter.
2. Enhance the city’s public spaces, improving connectivity between attractions, facilities and city destinations (including the city’s outer neighbourhoods) by investment in key locations, in addition to the City Centre Core, such as;
   • Shaftesbury Square/Bradbury Place
   • Carlisle Circus/Clifton Street
   • Queens Quay/Station Street
   • Divis Street/Falls Road
   • Peter’s Hill/Shankill Road
   • Grosvenor Road
   • Dunbar Link
   • Oxford Street/Donegall Quay
   • Ann Street/Queens Bridge
   • Cromac Street/Ormeau Road
3. Promote investment in a sustainable city-wide public transport system building upon the proposed Guided Bus Network and existing services, connecting attractions and facilities across the City which are becoming all the more widespread and potentially disparate.
4. Work within each of the City ‘Quarters’ to nurture a sense of distinctiveness rooted in the characteristics and cultural uniqueness of each place.
5. Drive up urban quality across the City to achieve ever higher standards of design, and establish a ‘Design Panel’ to assess major strategic projects (Reference here to the type of remit exercised by the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment – CABE – in England).
6. Promote the issue of design and nurture sustainable planning principles across the City through the ongoing City Development Plan process being undertaken by Belfast City Council, and include within the Plan a Strategic Urban Design Framework for the City and a specific Urban Design Action Plan for the City Centre.
7. Develop a City-wide ‘Greenways’ Strategy based on improving connections between City neighbourhoods and to and from the City Centre.
8. Establish Titanic Quarter as a world class waterfront visitor destination which aspires to the highest the standards of urban design, sustainable transport, architecture and ‘place-making’ and which has excellent and well executed connections to the City Centre.
9. Ensure Belfast City Centre is one the principle centres in the UK and Ireland with a range of quality facilities and services, and a safe, vibrant and animated public realm.
10. Establish a City ‘Conservation Forum’ which will work to promote the best care and presentation of Belfast’s built and natural heritage assets including buildings, open spaces and parks and urban public spaces.

Positive strategic role

There is definite potential to undertake significant development on the study area – and to influence regeneration in the surrounding areas in the northern part of the Borough and in adjoining boroughs, and possibly even at a London level and beyond. The full scope and scale of transformation is dependent on a number of factors, including the ability to capitalise upon opportunities and address some very real constraints.

Constraints

There are a number of key constraints affecting development of the site particularly:

• The rail and canal corridors form barriers to north-south movement within and beyond the site. Whilst development could possibly be built over the railway, this is unlikely to be viable for the canal.
• Safety concerns around the gasholders are likely to prevent residential development on portions of the site as long as the gasholders are in place (until at least 2016).
• The single vehicular connection to the site makes it isolated, both in terms of public and private transport. It also places significant physical constraints on the quantum of development.
• The existing Sainsbury’s store may or may not wish to move from its current site – it could possibly be redeveloped as part of a larger, denser development.
• Crossrail are seeking to use part of the southern portion of the site as a temporary bus garage during construction works, to 2017.

Recommendation

The recommendation is to pursue as ambitious an option as possible in partnership with the key landowners, and to continue to build up the parallel case for a station. We see this option being represented as a composite of C and D at this stage, beginning in the eastern part of the site, and extending westwards over time as the gas holders are decommissioned. This composite is more ambitious than options A and B, but is more feasible than option E. It could also provide a basis for including part of option F if the opportunity presents itself. Scenario development Given that this stage in the process was upstream of generating any real development proposals, it was necessary to explore a wide range of possibilities in an open, value free way. Therefore, rather than ‘design’ a selection of alternative indicative schemes, the method at this stage was to explore and develop a range of scenarios (future circumstances) with associated development typologies (physical place outcomes). At this stage of feasibility testing we considered it important not to prejudge any outcome, nor to have premature preferences that may preclude creative options be explored. Also, we found it particularly important to be open-minded about both cost-value parameters (these changed even in the short time of the study) and about a potential Crossrail station – even though this has been a desired outcome of the Council – because it is not in itself a ‘given’ component. The scenario approach used enabled different kinds of future circumstances and outcomes to be constructed, explored and developed, then further reviewed and tested for feasibility and desirability. This method was wide-ranging including scenarios various people acknowledged were more or less desirable. It was not simply a wish list of a few idealised end-states. These scenarios were explored in a future situation (2025) well beyond the limits of current policy, and also without community involvement at this ‘upstream’ stage.

Our view is that this open, relatively creative approach demonstrates a wide range of possibilities. Importantly, it generated a wide range of relevant issues for further testing, review and, where appropriate, policy action and dialogue with landowners and statutory bodies.

The study team comprised Kevin Murray Associates (lead), Willie Miller Urban Design (WMUD), Alan Baxter Associates, Battle McCarthy, Colliers CRE and Gardiner & Theobald.

The decision to put the building on the market and move all services to other parts of the borough was made by the PCT board, despite last-minute pleas from John Allan of Avanti Architects and John Cooper of Architects for Health. This decision has sparked concern for a broad range of reasons including:

• the cultural and historic importance of the architecture
• the historical symbolism of the building in terms of health care
• the view that the building is entirely saveable and is not a maintenance basket-case
• the likely future of the building and the site – for example private clinic or luxury flats

Consideration of any single issue on this list might lead to the conclusion that the building should be kept and used for its original purpose never mind taking a holistic view of all the points. But there is another issue that lies in the territory of spatial planning and social infrastructure.

There are many examples throughout the UK of health authorities and others selling off city centre land and facilities at attractive prices in order to fund the development of new facilities on land that is cheaper but less well located for the very people who wish to use these facilities. More often than not, these new facilities are accessed by poor public transport facilities or demand the use of the private car. See TCPA Journal (November 2007) by Graham Haughton and Phil Allmendiger. (link here to pdf)

Over the past twenty years, planning in the UK has become increasingly regulatory rather than visionary. There is evidence that this might be changing since the introduction of a new planning system that has a strong emphasis on spatial strategy. However significant property moves by health, port or water authorities tend to become the spatial plans, rather than being determined by spatial plans – in other words planning often has had to adopt the plans of others as fait accompli even though there is little spatial or placemaking evidence that they are desirable.

Integrated strategic spatial planning needs to play a much stronger and influential role in coordinating the work of organisations like health trusts and port authorities. The fate of Finsbury Health Centre seems sadly predictable – another casualty of the obsession with money and moral bankruptcy that Monin was referring to – part of a wider culture of philistinism and short-termism which is peculiarly endemic in UK organisations that once were public goods.

Meanwhile express your views and sign the petition – all may not be lost.

Local distinctiveness has been described as an elusive concept. Essentially, it encompasses the unique physical, social and economic characteristics of a place and the interaction of people with those characteristics. There is increasing concern that the homogenising effect of the property development industry, retail trends, the underfunding of local councils and a mature tourism industry is affecting the individuality of places. Consequently, towns and cities as well as villages and rural areas are perceived as increasingly similar and visiting them may no longer provide a unique experience .

The search for economic advantage has fostered an interest in local distinctiveness, both as a means of ensuring the prosperity of a place through focusing on what is different, and as a means of supporting and enhancing the qualities which make the place special for local people.

Context The term Local Distinctiveness was coined by Common Ground in 1983 . Significantly this was a period during which there was a widespread feeling that towns and cities were not changing for the better. This was reflected in the rise of the conservation movement, the growth of NIMBYism as well as the mainstreaming of postmodernism in architecture and its adoption by developers.

In the context of urban design, local distinctiveness chimed with the writings of key individuals such as John Betjeman, Ian Nairn, Gordon Cullen, Jane Jacobs and Christopher Alexander. Today it is synonymous with contextualism, conservation, the work of the Prince’s Foundation and even the New Economics Foundation (NEF) through its Clone Towns campaign and its findings about the economic benefits of local markets.

Definition of local distinctiveness Local distinctiveness is closely linked to the environment, the economy and the social ambience of a place and has been defined as that which makes a place special, differentiating it from anywhere else. Local distinctiveness is the essence of what makes a place special to us. It is the sum of landscape, wildlife, archaeology, history, traditions, buildings and crafts – everything that makes somewhere truly unique.
Canterbury is a good example of a distinctive places but what exactly is the nature of the distinctiveness? Cathedrals exist as landmark features in many European towns. While they may be the reasons why towns are visited they may not be what make these towns distinctive. In Canterbury, the Cathedral is a landmark but it is also locally distinctive because of its links with:

• the murder of Thomas à Becket (national historical event) • Chaucer’s tales of pilgrimages to Becket’s shrine recorded in The Canterbury Tales (early example of written cultural history) • the continuing use of the medieval pilgrims’ inns (early tourism infrastructure) by town centre businesses (conservation of the built environment) • the specially written play Murder in the Cathedral by T.S. Elliot (interpretation of national and local history) • Michael Powell’s extraordinary 1944 film A Canterbury Tale that re-invents Canterbury as a romantic city and a city of the imagination at the heart of English art and culture • the continuity of the close relationship between Canterbury and the State (eg the signing of the Channel Tunnel treaty in the Chapter House) These factors combine with other distinctive elements of built heritage, such as St. Augustine’s Abbey (World Heritage Site), the medieval city and its walls, to create a package of local distinctiveness which cannot be found anywhere else. Rarity, authenticity and enduring value are, therefore, key features of local distinctiveness.

Non-cultural local distinctiveness Special landscapes and natural areas, eg the Lake District and The Fens, are also locally distinctive and are the result of a complex history of intervention by man with nature, interpreted by writers and painters and animated by local customs.

Manufacturing processes can be locally distinctive too – eg artefacts such as furniture, glass and pottery. Locally harvested delicacies, such as Whitstable Oysters, and manufactured food products, such as Forfar Bridies, are also distinctive but may be insufficiently strong in their own right to constitute ‘local distinctiveness’.

It is a combination of factors which makes local distinctiveness — local culture, events, traditions and the built or natural ambience in which they occur.

The fragility of local distinctiveness
Local distinctiveness is easily lost – it is elusive and fragile. Examples of subtle changes which can affect local distinctiveness and ultimately destroy it include:

• gradual erosion of the built fabric by minor changes and inappropriate development which cumulatively destroys the character of a place • destruction of the intimate feel of a place by modern infrastructure, eg road widening schemes, large scale new developments • the homogenising effect of conservation • changes in local economies, commercial rates, rental levels • globalisation of high streets driving out local shops • gentrification , lifestyle changes and fashion • environmental health regulations restricting the sale of local produce • cost-cutting measures leading to closure of facilities • lack of maintenance of important public spaces including vandalism and graffiti • loss of local pride • change in ownership of buildings especially pubs and shops • loss of a unique dialect or language • lack of an agreed vision for a place

Even if none of the above has occurred, congestion and disturbance can destroy local distinctiveness, merely because the place was not originally designed to accommodate large numbers of people. Planners and urban designers need to take these factors into account in writing local policies and in approaching strategic frameworks and masterplans.

There are a number of levels at which this process is disturbing. One of these is expressed by Edinburgh architect Malcolm Fraser: “I suppose this is us learning to be a good service-economy: to give up our most fragile and valuable natural environments to allow the rich to helicopter in for a spot of golf with associated gated-luxury housing, all tartanised by an architectural style the worst volume housebuilders would recognise, a Trumpton-meets-the-Shining confection of pointy heritage bits”. The jimmy-hat architecture of the outline proposals speaks of these trivial and patronising ambitions.

In an article in the Guardian in June 2008, Simon Jenkins noted that, “The point of environmental planning is not to capitulate to short-term market forces but to channel them to the public good. There can be no public good in building over the Balmedie dunes.” and “The truth is that Scotland is a victim of another colossal Trump try-on. This project is primarily about luxury holiday homes, not fairways. Scotland’s gullible politicians have been taken in by a New York billionaire.”

Wikipedia’s current definition of a banana republic contains much that doesn’t apply to Scotland and much that does, for example, “…a banana republic typically has large wealth inequities, poor infrastructure, poor schools, a “backward” economy, low capital spending, a reliance on foreign capital and money printing, budget deficits, and a weakening currency – rings bells yes?.” Worst of all for planning and the future of Scotland is the absolute lack of confidence and dearth of ideas that this decision says about what the country could be and should be.

For an refreshing view and intermittent commentary on the whacky world of regeneration and economic development look at John Lord’s blog at http://yellowbookltd.blogspot.com.

See also an article in the Economist on 6 November 2008 on why the controversial golf development may not make much money entitled “Trump’s Scottish Venture – Birdie or Bogey?”

Update: since the original post was written, Gareth Hoskins Architects have been appointed to masterplan the development ‘from scratch’ but obviously within the terms of the planning consent. This appointment may help to answer some of Malcolm Fraser’s concerns above. The development has also won the coveted Pock Mark Award for the Worst Planning Decision in Scotland by a substantial number of public votes organised by Prospect Magazine.

The brief called for a feasibility study into the long term economic potential of the Haughs in Turriff. Although the Haughs is used by residents and visitors for a range of activities, TDL believes that the area is under-utilised. The study was intended to identify and appraise a range of options for the site, focusing on activities which will attract more people to the Haugh and generate expenditure on local goods and services. Our key conclusions and recommendations were that Turriff Haughs is an attractive site in an excellent location, and it is a highly valued community asset. However, local residents are disappointed with some aspects of the Haughs including poor maintenance and anti-social behaviour, poor ground conditions, dull planting and a lack of facilities.

TDL’s aspirations for the Haughs are consistent with policy on planning, economic development and tourism, but the site is a Protected Area, which means that there will have to be a compelling case for built development on the Haughs. The site currently serves three principal functions: town park, showground and events venue. As a town park, the site is popular and well-used but it does not fulfil its potential. The Show is successful and has an enduring appeal, but some aspects of the event need to be upgraded or refreshed. The site has potential as an events venue, but is underused and the demands of the Show constrain the use of the site for other events.

Agricultural associations throughout the UK have diversified and innovated: site ownership is not a pre-requisite for innovation, but some associations that do own their sites have invested in all-weather facilities. Community development trusts are playing an increasingly prominent role: many communities have used trusts as a vehicle for developing and operating new facilities. We have recommended early action to make the Haughs a great town park including:

• an improvement plan for the Haughs
• creation of a green and open space network
• consideration of the case for forming a community trust to develop and manage the Haughs

We have recommended early action, through a partnership between TDL and TDAA to build on the success of Turriff Show which includesagreeing a 5-year development plan for the show and developing an opportunities programme to ensure that local businesses benefit from the show.

We carried out a detailed options appraisal for the events programme; we recommend that TDL should proceed on the assumption that the Haughs is suitable for outdoor events only, although this may change in the future. In addition, the Haughs is a suitable and attractive site for a range of outdoor event types and we have developed an illustrative events programme The case for an all-weather facility is not a stand-alone issue; it needs to be considered in the context of the community’s requirement for modern meeting place. We believe that, ideally, the facility should be in a central location, although the Haughs cannot be discounted: TDL and the Community Council need to reach agreement on a preferred location, and then work together to deliver it.

We have indicated that implementing these recommendations will have significant resource implications, and we have highlighted some of the potential funding sources. Whether or not TDL decides to pursue a community development trust, the recommendations contained in this report are only deliverable if the partners can demonstrate community ownership and commitment.

These short film clips featuring Lewis Mumford, author of the City in History, were recently published on the Planum website.

Before the end of 1961 the New York publishing company Harcourt, Brace and Co. had the first edition of Lewis Mumford’s highly successful book The City In History ready for publication. Two years later, in 1963, the National Film Board of Canada funded the production of six documentaries, each lasting 27 minutes, for a series entitled Mumford On The City. The material for the films, based on the book, was prepared by Mumford himself. The director Ian MacNeill wrote the film script and produced the various parts: The City: Heaven and Hell, The City: Cars Or People, The City And Its Region, The Heart of the city, The City As Man’s Home and The City and the Future. In 1963 Mumford was 68 years old and agreed to appear as the presenter of the six films, expressing his personal view about the future of the western city, interspersed with pictures of places, cities, archaeological documents, works of art and architecture.

The City in History remains a classic text of urban design. Mumford urged that technology achieves a balance with nature and hoped for a rediscovery of urban principles that emphasised humanity’s organic relationship to its environment. Forty-five years on, the film clips look incredibly old and the message delivered in a rather morbid and factious manner (to quote Jane Jacobs), with a slightly ‘Outer Limits’ or ‘Twilight Zone’ ambience. Yet some of the key ideas promoted by Mumford have increasing resonance with the sustainability and green agenda of the early 21st century. In the increasingly praxis orientated and commodified world of urban design, whether anyone is listening or not is another matter.

The Spring 2008 edition of JoLA, the excellent peer-reviewed academic Journal of Landscape Architecture established by the European Council of Landscape Architecture Schools, contains an article on the work of Gregor Graf which raises the question, “How do we read a city without signs?”. With a mixture of purist medium format photography and Photoshop, Graf has painstakingly deleted all traces of language and signage from view – as well as people and cars. His series of images featuring London, Linz and Warsaw are striking and unreal. It’s a wonderful collection of images linked here and on his site here (look for the Hidden Town link). The imagery is uncannily close to some contemporary techniques of urban representation employed by architects – minus the beautiful people.

His work is a step further in the direction pioneered by São Paulo where in 2006, city officials enacted a radical ban on almost all outdoor advertising. Photographer and typographer Tony de Marco documented the new ad-free world of São Paulo, publishing a sequence of images on Flickr. A city stripped of advertising with no posters, flyers or advertisements on buses or trains sounds like an Adbusters dream but it became a reality in 2007.

The implication of these unreal and real examples is that in the absence of signs, people need to re-learn what was once recognisable city terrain, marked out urban space, defined focal points and obvious boundaries. One of the São Paulo experiences was that it was initially easy for people to get lost when well known reference points – such as 48-sheet hoardings – were removed. Of course, residents were quick to re-orientate themselves around landmarks, buildings and urban form very much in the way that architects, urbanists and writers on the city would like them to behave.

Perhaps Robert Venturi and Denise Scott-Brown have more to offer here than they are given credit for. Their book Architecture as Signs and Systems for a Mannerist Time explores Venturi’s recurring affair with pluralism, multiculturalism, symbolism, iconograohy and popular culture. It is an important work that dissolves professional boundaries and broadens our view of urbanism – often in a disturbing way.

While urban designers and town makers concentrate on producing legible urban form through sequences of squares, streets, edges and landmarks (after Kevin Lynch’s Image of the City), the easy-read of contemporary urban areas will often be through advertisements and signs. Looking at the freshness and clarity of Graf’s ad-and-sign-free images set against Venturi’s challenging and dissonant work it is hard to imagine common ground between the two. But that may be exactly what towns and cities need in the 21st century.

related links:

• Gregor Graf
• Business Week: São Paulo: The City That Said No To Advertising
• São Paulo No Logo – a new identity
• Adbusters: when the centre collapsed
• Venturi Scott Brown and Associates