aou journal issue two

AoU Journal #2 | �

AoU Journal #2 Spring 2013

URBANISM BEYOND BOUNDARIESHere & Now

© F

ilip D

ujar

din

ww

w.fi

lipdu

jard

in.b

e

� | AoU Journal #2 AoU Journal #2 | �

Urbanism sans frontières

Learning from Europe

Learning from Lisbon: the process of renewal

Bradford: a pro-active producer city?

Social housing in Latin America

The great towns

Digital urbanism

Urban regeneration as a shared learning process

Reconnecting places & people

Malmö: reflections on a city in transition

Activity programmes

Getting involved

Academicians & Directors

The Academy of Urbanism70 Cowcross Street

LondonEC�M 6EJ

[email protected]

+44 (0) �0 7�5� 8777

The AoU Journal provides a vehicle for Academicians to discuss current issues in urbanism, share insights, challenge assumptions and stimulate debate. Each of the topics in this publication will continue to be explored online through our LinkedIn.com group

contents

KevinMurray

SarahChaplin

KerriFarnsworth

BarraMacRuairí

ClaudiaMurray

NickWright&JohnLord

TimStonor

HenkBouwman

SaffronWoodcraft

ChristerLarsson

03

04

08

10

12

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

� | AoU Journal #2 AoU Journal #2 | �

Policymakers in urbanism, whether on matters of planning, design, transport or economic and social development, tend to be somewhat constrained by a particular political leadership, administrative regime or, from time to time, the latest zeitgeist theory or technology.

But such narrow parameters can lead to dysfunctional outcomes that do not contribute positively to a comfortable sense of place. Many North American and British post-industrial cities were subjected to a generation of retail-shed based regeneration in the 1980s and 90s, partly on the premise that virtually any economic investment and job creation was an acceptable replacement for lost industrial jobs. These progressively damaged the vitality of town and city centres, often irreparably so, and also created a new shatter zone around the core, with their flotsam of soulless boxes floating in an endless sea of tarmac.

The most obvious techno-fad of the last century was the motor car, with its functionalist protagonists, from Le Corbusier to Buchanan, overlooking the point made by Mumford, in his monotechnics concept, that overdependence on one mode of technology, such as the car, was neither sustainable nor healthy. We now of course have car-free cities, cycle cities, while canal cites like Venice have survived without the car, and who would have predicted the synthesis of vehicles and people in the naked streets concept?

This edition of the journal seeks to look beyond narrow administrative, political and policy boundaries, and to consider the role of making and managing human habitats as part of a wider and longer term responsibility, where we can, and arguably must, share place-based learning and insights across national and cultural boundaries.

In the post-industrial urban era, we now find cities, towns and neighbourhoods are fighting back across the globe, with the empirical knowledge that we can always do better, even in straightened times. While rapid urban growth in South America challenges states with limited fiscal means, there is evidence of creative, greener re-urbanising approaches

Urbanism sans frontières

using innovative instruments in places like Antwerp, Lisbon and Malmö, albeit at a slower pace than South America.

As a longstanding Hansa city-state, Hamburg exemplifies a much greater sense of its civic self as a commercial trading entity than most places in Europe. The Producer City concept, emerging from places like Bradford, in which heritage and modernity, production and consumption, global and local, all co-exist in a non-binary fashion, is worthy of further examination within the commercial place-economy approach. Our partnered initiative, PlacesofConnection, offers some ideas on how we might explore the challenges and opportunities as a network of learning places, and we hope to do more with this as we have more regional and international events.

If you are interested in exploring these and similar ‘transnational’ themes with a mix of dedicated Bradfordians and fellow Academicians, or simply learning more about the work of the Academy, please come along to our Annual Congress in Bradford in mid-May. It will be a great learning event, and promises to be a memorable one too.

Kevin Murray AoUChairman, The Academy of Urbanism

Director, Kevin Murray Associates

WelcometothesecondeditionofTheAcademyofUrbanismJournal,HereandNow,wherecontributorsconsiderarangeofcontemporaryissues in a more reflective manner than is sometimes afforded them in everydaypractice.

Above: viewing the transformative outputs of ‘slow urbanism’ in downtown Antwerp

© Kevin Murray

4 | AoU Journal #2 AoU Journal #2 | 5

FormerAcademyDirectorSarahChaplininterviewedallthreeEuropean City of the Year finalists when they presented in LondonontheeveoftheAwards.

Listening to representatives from the three finalists in the Academy’s European City of the Year category share their insights made me realise how a place can undergo fundamental change and yet still retain its core identity in the process. What was also clear from the three presentations was how the speed of change can vary enormously and the political and economic effects of any intervention can be very challenging in terms of securing a desired outcome. But the thing that can hold a successful place together derives from the implicit respect shown by the change-makers for the DNA-like specificity of the place to begin with.

Kristiaan Borret, Antwerp’s stadsbouwmeester (city architect) spoke passionately and convincingly about the benefits of ‘slow urbanism’ of which he has become aware during his involvement with the gradual transformation of Belgium’s second city; from somewhere steeped in its Flemish history as a strategic – but divided – river port and a global diamond trade centre, to a burgeoning new European hub for the creative industries. He describes Antwerp’s situation within the region as ‘a point of intensity’ straddling a river, with many post-industrial voids that needed to be addressed as part of its urban renewal and social restructuring.

Their approach may have been ‘slow’, but it was also bold: the city bought a former garage site in a completely no-go area and built a new library there, hoping to change people’s habits and associations with that part of town through re-assigning its usage. It worked. The former Sailors’ Quarter, with its proliferation of malafide businesses, also became safer and fairer with the introduction of a new health centre being located just where it was most needed – close to where the prostitutes continue to ply their trade.

Part of the slowness was deliberate, but another influencing factor was the typically fragmented nature of land ownership in Belgium, making it hard to assemble large parcels of land for public projects. The city’s Vespa Housing project tackled this issue, alongside making available the kinds of dwellings that the private market is not interested in providing – a creative filling of both a commercial void and a physical place void. Borret described the confluence of political will that initiated this: a desire to provide high quality urban development and effective instruments to deliver it. Either tactic on its own is not enough to constitute a recipe for success.

Learning from EuropeAntwerp,LyonandHamburg


Confluence, a large scale project that has re-used old industrial land to double the

size of central Lyon

© John Thompson


At heart an academic as well as a practicing urbanist, Borret’s underlying research question in bringing these projects to fruition was typological: to explore the variants on the urban block more fully, in order to understand better the operational and programmatic qualities of contemporary urban tissue. Conducting this experiment slowly has meant that the usual economic peaks and troughs are less apparent; that is to say their impact is reduced, allowing longer term needs to be met. But the most important achievement was a different kind of long game: to change perceptions within Flanders, which has had a strong anti-urban tradition, so that people started to embrace the notion of urban living, and in so doing rejuvenate the social and cultural life of Anwerp. Borret revealed how an unexpected by-product of this was to forge a community that is now much more engaged with urban planning. People are out there defending their new urban neighbourhoods, holding referenda and articulating their concerns. As far as Borret is concerned, more protest means better places, and is the clearest evidence yet that their slogan – ‘The City Belongs to Everyone’ – is really working.

Under a similar rubric, ‘Die Stadt Gehört Allen’, Andreas Kellner, the vice president of Hamburg’s planning department, told a different story of post-industrial rejuvenation and engagement. As a city-state, Hamburg has pursued a self-determining agenda, aiming to overhaul its raison d’être after containerisation took away its former economic mainstay. The approach was to engage with the redundant dockland waterfront as a positive, starting from both ends as an urbanist: that is to say, considering simultaneously the massive scale of the potential project and also the small-scale day-to-day requirements of the various actors involved. HafenCity is now a central part of Hamburg’s overall identity, even more populous than it was at the beginning of the nineteenth century when 20,000 people lived there before an earlier port redevelopment phase.

The transition from a neglected wasteland to a fully-functioning and integrated neighbourhood has been fairly rapid, but it was not without its challenges, not least a grassroots conference on the future of Wilhelmsberg which could have thrown a spanner into the works, but has in fact been turned to the city’s advantage. What the conference did was awaken motivation and produce an appetite and conviction for a new approach, which culminated in 2005 in a new-style, senate-approved Framework Plan. This was as ambitious as it was unequivocal in its intent: improve

Learning from Europe cont.Antwerp,LyonandHamburg

Above: HafenCity has re-used Hamburg’s old port warehouses to create a complex, mixed-use city quarter

© John Thompson

Opposite: Antwerp, Belgium’s second largest city and one of Europe’s largest ports

© City of Antwerp

Right: François Bregnac (Lyon);

Andreas Kellner (Hamburg);

Kristiaan Borret AoU (Antwerp)

© John Thompson


the local situation for people with an innovative, portable – even exportable – approach to mixed-use development that would turn the tables of fortune for the city quite fundamentally.

On the face of it, things have worked extremely well, but behind the scenes it has also demanded the emergence of a whole gamut of trust and collaboration between the various actors, not least to overcome differences of opinion. Whilst Kellner admitted this has produced a certain amount of consultation fatigue, the net result is a city that is now more than capable of taking democratic and politically robust decisions about place-making.

Lyon faced similar political and physical challenges, as François Bregnac, the interim director of the city’s Urbanism Agency, described. Built on the confluence of the Saône and the Rhône, the core of the city occupies an enviable location, but this was regrettably marred in the 1960s when the autoroute ploughed through the middle of the city, cutting it off from much of its river frontage as well as carving up neighbourhoods. Simultaneously, and failing to take their cue from Tony Garnier’s integrated modernist estates that still remain popular today, a string of high-rise mega-structures set amid green plains rose up in the banlieues surrounding Lyon; in theory a bold planning idea but in reality a living nightmare. Repairing this kind of urban damage required more than just a technical solution, and certainly more than a bunch of public realm improvements. Lyon took its cues early on from Barcelona in this respect, devising an almost spiritual approach to its urban transformation, starting with its Plan Lumière.

The introduction of an annual festival of sound and light was a key part of achieving what Bregnac calls ‘the re-bewitched city’. Evacuating 2,000 car parking spaces, bringing dance to the streets, opening up 5km of river pathways, and planting green lanes all over the city were other important moves on the part of the Urbanism Agency. Instead of large parcels of land assigned as urban parks, which was seen as a 19th century approach, nature was brought intentionally right through the city, in an attempt to reconnect the city centre with its suburbs, making the passage from one to the other easier and more fluid.

Bregnac made the process of urban change sound deceptively easy: it’s simply a case of joining up the strategy to the plan to a sequence of projects. But he

also was quick to point out this is not in any way a linear process – you have to identify projects to implement at the same time as formulating the strategy, and it generally takes 25 years before it all happens. There was a hint of frustration in Bregnac’s refreshingly honest account of his experience at the helm, as he wondered aloud if they could have been more open to innovation where their heritage was concerned and a little less enamoured of Italian urban precedent.

But Bregnac was also thrilled with the effects of bottom-up thinking in the city, which has helped establish it as something of an urban living pioneer, citing proudly that Boris Johnson stole the idea of the urban bike scheme from Lyon; this French regional capital is much further down the line towards becoming a car-free zone than London. There is still much more to be done to reconnect the suburbs to the city centre, but attitudes have shifted and it now seems possible to dream a new dream of a Garden City Lyon that goes way beyond Garnier’s modernist vision, showing us how to fashion a leisurely and liveable Garden City for the people.

Sarah Chaplin AoUDirector, Evolver LLP


InOctober2012agroupof18AcademiciansfromvariouspartsofEuropeassembledinLisbontostudylessonsfromtheAcademy’s2012EuropeanCityoftheYear.Overajam-packedthree-dayitinerary,thegroupvisitedseveralpartsofthecityandmet,listenedtoandspokewithawiderangeofLisbonites,fromtheDeputyMayortocommunitygroups,academicstoresidents.

The approach to the role of contemporary Lisbon is heavily influenced by the country’s history. Portugal’s success as an empire from the 15th to 19th centuries bequeathed the city a rich urban fabric, a trade-driven internationalist outlook and a tolerant cosmopolitan populace. Despite the devastation of the 1755 earthquake, most of the city was rebuilt within a year using world-firsts in engineering and architectural techniques, which endure to this day. However the 1910 revolution and subsequent overthrow of the monarchy led to authoritarian regimes and colonial wars, which only ended in 1974. Therefore for many of Lisbon’s current citizens, despite its rich international history, the concept of democracy and trust in political process is less mature than in other parts of Europe. Add to this the country’s more recent economic woes and it might have been understandable to expect policies of conservative thinking and retrenchment, with urbanism well down the agenda of importance.

Learning from LisbonTheprocessofrenewal

However the reality is somewhat different. In 2005 the city moved to a new elected Mayoral system, where candidates do not have to be aligned to a political party. This allows the city’s 545,000 inhabitants to elect those with the right professional skills to run a city, and with a long-term strategic approach; while circumstances and delivery policies may evolve, the long-term direction of travel remains fixed. In addition, it seems that Lisbon is managing to deliver essential financial austerity measures, whilst at the same time opening up the decision-making process to respond to local priorities and finding ways of engaging with its citizens.

This aims to build trust and mutuality in the democratic process through devolution of powers at the sub-urban scale, with approaches such as ‘participatory budgeting’, which Lisbon was the first European capital to introduce. For me this was an inspirational demonstration of true localism in action and of a potentially compelling tool to lever in community support in difficult economic times, when the popular perception is of continuous cuts to budgets and services, falling real incomes and purchasing power, and severe labour market challenges. In sharp contrast to the UK, the oft-used phrase ‘we’re all in this together’ felt genuine, with a mutual acceptance that whilst improvements may be slower and small-scale, there is still commitment to longer-term progress.

To further underpin the commitment to participatory democracy, the city has engaged with its significant pool of academic expertise to support research into citizenship and the definition of community belonging, as well as commercialisation of its latent intellectual capital. It struck me that this could be very easily replicated elsewhere at a relatively low cost to help inform and shape micro-economic policy – especially as ‘sense of community’ is often quoted as being a key critical success factor (CSF) in urban place-making, yet in the UK has rapidly diminished over the past 30-40 years.

Despite the broader national austerity agenda, it was heartening to see that Lisbon is still investing in its physical fabric (including an impressive public transport system, which will stand the city in good stead when there is an upturn in economic fortunes). This has partly been achieved by better aligning the asset investment programmes of formerly-independent city agencies, such as the Port Authority, with the wider city agenda. Interestingly, there is also a continued commitment to development and improvement of public spaces. This is driven by a strong

Below: Lisbon’s neighbourhood renewal

© Kerri Farnsworth


commodities within a local market. I have to confess it took a while for me to get to grips with the mechanics of such a system, but once it sank in I was struck by its simple ingenuity – so much so that upon my return to the UK I quickly scheduled discussions with two similarly forward-thinking city authorities to share the knowledge and to initiate exploration of a similar approach.

It is hard to sum up the lessons from such a distinctive and progressive city in a few short paragraphs. But my impression was overwhelmingly positive: particularly of Lisbon’s shared passion and commitment to improve the city fundamentally for its own citizens. This was inspiring and heartening, especially so given the current economic difficulties. The city is clear and realistic about its aspirations, encapsulated in the City Plan. And whilst it may take longer to get there, the city leadership remains firm in its convictions. Many other cities would do well to learn from such confidence in the medium-term vision.

Kerri Farnsworth AoUPrincipal, Kerri Farnsworth Associates

belief that horizontal public investment levers in vertical private investment, but also a fundamental humanistic principle that in harsh economic times, it is essential that all citizens can access high-quality ‘free’ spaces to facilitate continued socialisation and a sense of pride and ownership. A further policy of prioritising renovation of existing buildings over wholesale clearance and redevelopment not only makes economic sense, but further contributes to the sense of community stability and belonging. Lisbon’s steadfast commitment to infrastructural asset investment provided much food for thought, especially when contrasted with the recent political approach in the UK – an approach being placed under scrutiny via the current ongoing debate about the HS2 high-speed rail development.

The city is also learning how to better-lever private investment by being smarter with its own land and property assets, and has developed innovative new ways of stimulating private investment; for example, a new transferable building permit system linking conservation and new development, which effectively makes them tradable

Left: ‘Learning from Lisbon’ team

Below: historic Lisbon, in contrast to the developments of Expo ‘98, situated in the east of Libson

All © Kevin Murray

�0 | AoU Journal #2 AoU Journal #2 | ��

Bradford is a big ‘small city’ located within a very distinctive Yorkshire district. It is big in terms of its layers of history, and is also expanding further with a fast growing population that makes it the youngest major city in England, with the largest proportion of people of Pakistani origin in England. The city draws upon this scale, dynamism and diversity. Our people are enterprising, with high levels of self-employment, and the city’s creativity was recognised with the world’s first UNESCO City of Film designation in 2009. As a ‘small city’ Bradford is accessible and personable in scale, but always looking to improve the conditions for successful new investment.

Bradford supports this with an approach to placemaking that builds on its historic strengths as a producer city, earning its living by making, creating and trading. J.B. Priestley once wrote: “Bradford has never dealt with this place and that, but has dealt with the whole wide world, putting a best coat and waistcoat on the planet itself ”. Supporting our ongoing growth as an outward-looking producer city is critical to our current and future success.

We all know that effective placemaking is not a quick fix, and the projects that Bradford Council supports are often the more difficult ones, where the market has been unable to provide an appropriate solution. We are also somewhat obsessive about implementation. Our ‘team of teams’ approach, in which we focus on collaborative delivery with different partners bringing complementary resources to the table, was a contributing factor to Westfield announcing they plan to start construction of the Broadway shopping centre in 2013.

That Bradford Council and its partners are committing for the longer-term is already apparent. When the national economy slowed, we invested in our built environment at such a scale that investors are now responding. City Park, for instance, is now an iconic space synonymous with the image of the city, but at its heart remains a social space where people from all the district’s communities come to meet, interact, relax and have fun.

Matching our own resources with government investment through the Regional Growth Fund, we have created a ‘growth zone’ in the city centre. The zone enables a focusing of resources and incentives to encourage business relocation or growth, by offering super-fast broadband and city centre wi-fi, alongside a responsive planning system, access to employment and skills support, and a

BradfordApro-activeproducercity?

business growth scheme. The latter provides rate rebates for businesses creating new jobs or bringing disused commercial space back into use.

We’ve also been at the forefront of new interventions in placemaking. The Council stepped in to provide a commercial loan to a developer when the banks could not, allowing Provident Financial to open their new headquarters at the heart of the city. Leading on the Leeds City Region revolving investment fund will create up to £500m for investment in projects that are commercially viable and support economic growth, but are unable to secure sufficient finance due to conditions in the financial markets. Bradford has been adept at making the most of the resources gained, such as levering local jobs out of construction investment in City Park, and creating meanwhile uses like Bradford Urban Garden.


Congress VIIThe Producer City: an urbanism for the 21st century?Bradford 15-17 May 2013

Using the city of Bradford as our laboratory, this year’s Congress will explore the notion of how an established ‘post-industrial city’ rethinks its roles, economy, and also recasts its physical place, to help it compete both locally and in the global economy.

Participants and delegates from a wide range of backgrounds will explore the topic and, through workshops, help contribute to Bradford’s continued thinking about how it shapes up to address future challenges in its City Plan. For more information visit academyofurbanism.org.uk

Looking ahead, the development of a new City Plan will help define and position Bradford’s future direction and set out a distinctively local approach to stimulating economic development and regeneration in the city. So far, we have needed insight and leadership, energy and persistence, and robust collaboration.

If you would like to explore the ‘producer city’ idea further, using Bradford as a model, or contribute some creative thinking towards our City Plan themes, then please come along to the Academy’s Congress in May.

You will be made most welcome in this dynamic big ‘small city’.

Barra Mac Ruairí AoUStrategic Director,

Bradford Metropolitan District Council

City Park, Bradford, winner of The Great Place Award 2013

© Bradford Metropolitan District Council

�� | AoU Journal #2 AoU Journal #2 | ��

LatinAmericawascolonisedasalargesystemofinterconnectedcitiesandisnowthemosturbanisedcontinentintheworldwithover78%ofthepopulationlivingincities.Italsohasthelargestinformaleconomyintheworldwithonly30%taxpayers.Creatingawelfaresystemundertheseconditionstosolvethehousingshortageischallengingtosaytheleast.Thecasestudiespresentedheremanagetodojustthat,butcantheybereplicated?

Housing deficit is a global problem, where the dearth of available living accommodation is often solved by informal means while creating hardship and health problems for much of the world’s poorest communities. According to UN-Habitat, 23.5% of Latin Americans live in slums and the region has a housing deficit of 50 million units. By comparison, slum dwellers in Asia amount to 60% of the total population, while in Northern Africa it stands at 13.3%. China is tackling its informal housing crisis by embarking on the largest social housing project in history with a target of 36 million housing units by the end of �0�5.

Around the globe countries face increasing demographic changes such as rural to urban migration, longevity and the reduction of household size, all of which directly affect housing demand. On the supply side, lack of affordable land and government budget cuts further add to the financial constraints. In addition and in emerging markets,

Social housing in Latin AmericaRed Road flats of tomorrow?

inefficient tax collection and the informal economy pose another barrier for the development of an efficient welfare system. According to the World Bank, 60% of Latin American workers are in the informal job market. The region also has the highest growth rate of remittances as a percentage of GDP, which stands at a staggering 133% compared to 89% in Emerging Europe and 72% in Emerging Asia. Finally, clientelism and elitism is another problem as most rich families manage to receive tax exemptions from government officials, meaning that value added tax is the main source of government income, hitting hardest the poorest sectors of the community.

Despite decades of military control and repression, Latin America is one of the most socially active when compared with other emerging markets. Community groups, NGOs and other forms of social activism have erupted after the transition to democracy, with countries like Brazil and Chile now held up as examples for their achievements in participatory budgeting and urban upgrading programmes. Not surprisingly, the headquarters of the World Social Forum is in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Paradoxically, these social approaches are emerging in parallel to a more neoliberal approach taken by some municipalities which are viewing the upgrading of informal developments not only as development opportunity for the private sector, but also as a means to legalise land titles and turn slums into taxable zones.

‘A dream come true’ reads the sign to Quinta Monroy’s new housing. Delivered as a ‘shell’, beneficiaries are expected to complete or even expand their new homes

© Elemental


Among the various urban upgrading programmes spreading across Latin America, the two main approaches are a) developing new dwellings or b) delivering improvements to the area’s infrastructure.

Both approaches depend on geographical conditions in each location, and decisions are taken according to environmental safety. Sometimes a mix of both approaches exists. The examples presented here illustrate the two possibilities: Quinta Monroy was an informal development whose settlers each received a new dwelling, while Cantinho do Céu has seen improvements to the area.

Quinta Monroy is located at the very heart of the city of Iquique, Chile. Informal development began there in the 1960s and by the year 2000 there were over 100 families living in precarious conditions in an area of around 5,000 sq. m. Being in the city centre means the land is theoretically higher in value, and therefore efforts were made to relocate those living there. After several attempts to move families to the edge of the city failed, the authorities decided instead to help the community legalise their settlement and strengthen their roots in the area, appointing the architectural firm Elemental to provide the community with a new housing development.

In 2003 Chile’s budget for social housing was very low – just US $7,500 per dwelling – to cover land acquisition,

infrastructure as well as the construction of each house, and yet at the time land alone in the periphery of Iquique was worth around US $20 per sq. m. This presented Elemental with something of a financial challenge as well as a typological challenge in relation to social housing.

Their strategy for Quinta Monroy was effectively based on sweat equity: a reinforced concrete shell (walls, floors, roof and staircase) is provided, with all the necessary plumbing but minimal fittings. The families themselves then customise their units, adding appliances and furniture at their own expense. The system relies on the families to find the means to finish their houses. Their homes are therefore the materialisation of their earnings in the informal job market. The design team involved the inhabitants directly, seeking their views and preferences.

In Chile, this was an unprecedented approach to social housing: low income families are typically given little input and just have to accept and be grateful for what they are given. The urban design layout also included four open public piazzas. These spaces were left for the community to customise, such that every family could contribute to the character of the open space, even if this was only by virtue of how they decorated their own façades.

Cantinho do Céu In Brazil some of the poorest urban favelas are found in São Paulo. The favela has been gradually and informally populated since the 1980s, but it was only in this century that the Municipality of São Paulo decided to take action and allocate funds for redeveloping one of the most deprived areas in the city.

One favela, Cantinho do Céu, lies on the left bank of the Billings dam, which is vital for the city of São Paulo, providing one third of its fresh water. It is also a nature reserve protected by the Brazilian government. Concerns over its potential contamination due to waste disposal in the dam by local inhabitants was a key imperative for the government to take action.

Five years on the ‘shells’ have been adapted and expanded to suit individual needs

© Elemental

In contrast, the favelas of Cantinho do Céu before re-development

© Boldarini Architects

�4 | AoU Journal #2 AoU Journal #2 | �5

The Municipality commissioned Boldarini Arquitetura e Urbanismo to devise a scheme to provide a safer environment for residents and formalise the land titles of their properties. Developing social housing in the context of a nature reserve was a challenge, even more so because the area has suffered severe flooding in recent years. Most of the building works executed in Cantinho do Céu, such as sanitation, flood barriers and road paving, were also aimed at recovering and protecting the wildlife. So far, 11,000 families have benefited from the scheme and local wildlife is thriving once again.

The success of both these schemes has been widely publicised in Latin America, with both architectural firms winning awards and Quinta Monroy in particular featuring in an exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art in New York City. The problem that now arises is how to repeat the density of this development on a wider scale. The question of how to apply Elemental’s approach, for example, to one of the largest favelas of São Paulo, Paraisópolis, is populated with difficulties. In pursuit of higher density, Paraisópolis resembles European social housing blocks developed in the 1970s and 1980s. Indeed, it can be argued that Brazil has a legacy of modernist schemes and whilst Brazilians are quite familiar with life in tower blocks, their failings are just as apparent as their Europe counterparts.

But it is not just a question of scale in relation to form, the issue is also about scale in relation to process: Quinta Monroy deployed a taskforce of architects, social workers, engineers and a wide range of academic experts to work on solving the problem on behalf of just 100 families. In comparison the target group in Paraisópolis is 40,000 people, who would probably need to be decanted. In the process of building new units, the Municipality of São Paulo relocated people to temporary camps while bulldozing their current favela. The break in continuity raises the issue of whether a community can survive the shock.

The other unintended outcome of formalising settlements is that the inhabitants realise the worth of their new homes by turning landlord: there are media reports of people letting their flats who have themselves moved to a favela elsewhere. This tactic has prompted the government to change legislation and unusually only give property titles to women, since they are more likely to value better living conditions and remain with their children in the new units. This brings to mind the question of whether the community that once existed is still effectively intact, given how easily members seem to want to move away after receiving their new houses.

There have been other reports in the media that many new social housing schemes are developed in complete isolation, far from job opportunities and with little transport connectivity. Furthermore, lack of adequate design and poor technical advice are creating new problems, such as proposals to canalise local creeks, which could lead to an increase in summer flooding. Undoubtedly social participation is a step towards equality but technical supervision should be better provided.

Social housing in Latin America cont.Red Road flats of tomorrow?


Both left: Cantinho do Céu, São Paulo

© Boldarini Architects

Above: newly built blocks replacing the old favela in Paraisópolis, São Paulo

© miniplanpac

Below: self-ghettoisation is inevitable when social inequality and insecurity rule the street, Quinta Monroy

© Elemental

In contrast, the intervention in Cantinho do Céu has had less impact on neighbouring areas, perhaps because the architects’ contribution was to manage what was already in place. Although some families were relocated, eviction due to flood risks could not be avoided; and whilst road access has been improved, there are still issues with connectivity as the main transport network of São Paulo does not reach an area that is used by over 10,000 people, but this problem will no doubt be addressed in future.

The bigger issue at stake in Latin America is now to address the endemic social inequality and lack of social mobility in urban areas. Even in a small community like Quinta Monroy and despite all efforts from architects and social workers, home owners insist on building fences and gates around their new neighbourhood. The need to demarcate their territory seems too strong to resist, but it has of course produced ghettoes in which social mobility is almost impossible.

No scheme will ever succeed if it is built as a ghetto from the outset, it will simply stand as a symbol of social failure. The ongoing sustainability of current government efforts to reduce informal developments is still uncertain, but what is clear is that current approaches require more conclusive research before governments and policymakers wade in and destroy existing communities and livelihoods.

Dr Claudia Murray AoUResearch Fellow, Henley Business School


TwomembersoftheAcademy’sUrbanismAwardsassessmentpanel,JohnLordandNickWright,sharesomelearningfromtheirassessmentvisits.

The nominees for the 2013 Great Town Award formed a diverse group:

Falmouth, in Cornwall, has a rich maritime history, is a working port and has a famous and distinguished art school.

Shrewsbury is the historic county town of Shropshire and a market town commanding a large hinterland on the England-Wales border.

Galway City is an historic town that grew at a spectacular pace during Ireland’s Celtic Tiger years, a centre of modern manufacturing, teaching and research, and a popular tourist destination.

The assessment visits raised the usual difficult questions: How can we compare places which, despite some shared characteristics, are in many ways so different? What defines a great place: prosperity, creativity, diversity, beauty, or some other qualities? Are we judging them on the basis of their attractiveness or economic vitality, or for the way they have responded to challenges? Finding the appropriate metrics to compare and contrast the performance of three such diverse places is not easy.

The great townsAquestionofplace

Shrewsbury is a comfortable and prosperous place. It has an idyllic setting with the historic heart of the town nestled in a bend in the river Severn, with wonderful medieval and Georgian architecture. The shopping offer – premium chains, a fine collection of independents and a great market – is extraordinarily good for a town of its modest size. This is one way in which being relatively remote from large centres of population can be an advantage. The late arrival of the railway helped to ensure Shrewsbury was not caught up in the hectic urbanisation of the mid-to-late 19th century, but it has thrived in the post-war era. The modern town is a popular and appealing place – so much so that planning for population growth is now a key challenge. There is much to enjoy here but the assessors were concerned about a dependence on Telford, Wolverhampton and Birmingham for economic vitality, an air of provincial cosiness and a sense that anodyne development may be eroding Shrewsbury’s distinctive qualities.

Falmouth, in the far south-west of England, is a genuinely remote place by English standards. The nearest city of any size is Plymouth, nearly 70 miles away, a middling-size city with a sluggish economy. This is inevitably an issue and helps to explain why Cornwall, for all its enduring appeal to visitors and artists, has a fragile, low-wage economy. But Falmouth itself has a surprising mix of activity – tourism, higher education, art and shipbuilding. Being a day’s travel from London even means that some aspects of the recent economic downturn have passed it by.

But Falmouth is not as out of the way as you might imagine. It continues to enjoy a more traditional form of locational advantage: one of the world’s largest natural harbours, adjacent to the shipping lanes that link Europe’s biggest ports with the world. The shipbuilding and repair complex is one of the largest in the UK, supporting the town’s economy and connecting Falmouth to global markets. Being distant from government also encourages independence and civic entrepreneurship. The tourist information centre is being shut down in the summer? We’ll open our own. People want integrated ticketing on buses, ferries and trains? We’ll create our own Mussel Card (because Oysters are trademarked…). In Falmouth, public, private and community sectors genuinely work together for their town; it may be a small place, but it has a true urban quality.

The same might be said about Galway City. With a population that increased from 25,000 to 75,000 in two generations, Galway was one of the fastest-growing


places in Europe until the financial crash overwhelmed Ireland in 2008. The resulting suburban sprawl has little to recommend it, and this still small city is absurdly over-dependent on the car. Galway has continued to grow since 2008, albeit much more slowly. This resilience can be attributed to the city’s success in attracting and consolidating knowledge-intensive technology investment, and forging strong links between those businesses and the two local universities. These largely foreign-owned companies are however deeply rooted in the region.

Managing the impact of tourism is a real test: the historic town is tiny and it is sometimes overwhelmed by visitors. As visitors ourselves, we responded positively to the spirit of the place, its cosmopolitan character, and its optimism and resilience in the face of a threatening economic backdrop. There is an undeniable depth to Galway’s commitment to mobilising its resources and an unmistakable sense of people in the private and public sectors working together for a common cause.

In the event, the Academy chose Galway as its Great Town for 2013. As assessors we were happy with this outcome, but in truth there was a case to be made for all our short-listed towns. Indeed, the whole process is a reminder of how challenging placemaking is in the prevailing economic climate, and also how it is not easy to make an assessment in a short space of time without it feeling like a snap judgement. We make a brief visit to a place, often at

the wrong time of year (i.e. too many visitors, not enough students – or the other way around) and try our best to weigh up incomplete data and uncorroborated claims. Impressions are inevitably coloured by the weather, the hospitality, the quality of the hotels and the food.

But that said, these are three agreeable and enjoyable places, served by committed and enterprising business leaders and public servants, and – as far as we can gauge – each has performed better than many of its peers. Equally, each enjoys advantages that give it the edge over less-favoured rivals: Shrewsbury’s natural and historic environment; Falmouth’s great harbour and Atlantic outlook; Galway’s iconic appeal to visitors from the US and the Irish diaspora.

Whatever the challenges of picking a winner, they offer valuable learning for other places. The central lessons are around the ways in which all three places have capitalised on, nurtured and celebrated the features that make them special, as well as in their response to threats and challenges – some universal, some unique to the place. In Galway, the Academy hasn’t chosen an ideal town, or anything like it. Away from the historic core, most of the new Galway consists of anonymous residential and commercial development and chronic traffic congestion. However, Galway deserves recognition for both a hugely successful inward investment-led approach to its economy and – even more impressive – navigating its way through Ireland’s financial meltdown and bitter aftermath.

Galway is now working hard to imbue the suburbs with the quality of the urban core and to promote sustainable transport. Whether it succeeds will determine whether it will be a contender for the Great Town Award when the opportunity comes round again in 2023.

Nick Wright AoUDirector

Nick Wright Planning

Left: Shrewsbury’s acclaimed local market

© John Thompson

Opposite: tourism and higher education keep Galway’s high street busy round the year

© Stephen Gallagher

Falmouth: thriving as both a destination and commercial port

© Nick Wright

John Lord AoUDirector

yellow book Ltd

�8 | AoU Journal #2 AoU Journal #2 | 19

Digitaltechnologiesoffernewformsofonlinehumanconnectivity.Doesthismeanwenolongerneedtraditionalcitylayouts?Notatall.The lure of onlineThe future form of towns and cities is a key issue for urban planners, designers and policymakers and one that divides opinion. There is a body of professional thought that believes we no longer need cities, at least in the relatively large, continuously connected form in which they have evolved over centuries. Instead, the view is that, connected online, people can now live in small-scale towns and villages, which are supposedly more humane. People can disconnect physically and reconnect online. This idea has huge appeal and is shared by many environmental campaigners because it is thought to reduce carbon footprints. It is a popular idea within the technology community and it has fans in many schools of architecture, planning and landscape design. But it is, I believe, fundamentally flawed. The spatial layout of a town or city is a piece of critical infrastructure, not to be experimented with unless the consequences of doing so are deeply understood. By creating physical connections between people, the spatial pattern of a village, town or city is the principal organiser of human movement and interaction as well as the flow of goods and services. These flows lead to the enacting of social and economic transactions, which are the building blocks of society, of culture and therefore of being human. The urban record shows that the most vibrant, most culturally rich and economically productive places are also the most connected: continuously interlinked by streets, paths, public spaces. The continuously connected city: a common urban heritageUp until 150 years ago there was, arguably, one kind of city: the grid city of trade – social as well as economic trade. Urban settlements at all scales provided edge-to-centre connections to create relationships between global

and local movement: radial high streets that were in turn fed by orbital links that together created more or less regular grids and, in doing so, brought local inhabitants into co-present relations with visitors from out of town. The ‘rub’ between these two communities was the trade that created urban economies and fuelled processes of social interaction and cultural creativity.

Then, at the turn of the 20th century, driven by a desire to clean up the dirty and unsafe city, Garden Cities and Neighbourhood Unit planning emerged, providing a new kind of more divided and fragmented urban footprint yet, reinforced by public transport, still managing to connect to traditional urban centres in a low carbon way. The fatal blow for cities was dealt by Modernism and its massive, experimental zoo of urban forms, which produced highly disconnected and diluted urban networks, using landscapes and fast highways to partition the city. Witness Skelmersdale, Cumbernauld, Washington New Town or countless other planned communities: failures of the art of creating great places despite the best intentions of their planners, architects and city leaders.

Along the way, vitality was lost. Cities underperformed. The common, slowly evolving historic thread was broken. Social networks in physical space were damaged to the point where some urban planning projects removed them almost entirely – people no longer knew their neighbours and, stuck in suburban sprawl without a car, had nowhere to go to make new connections. Urbanism was transformed from a rich, mannered, cultured, protocoled – if sometimes insanitary – world of rich social relations to one where such links no longer existed. A digital future?It is within this problem context that the emergence of online social connectivity should be considered, offering transpatial networking that might fill the gaps left by failed urbanism. If people find it hard to meet in person, might they manage to transact more easily online? This is certainly

Digital urbanismTheroleoftechnologyinthefutureofourcities


the vision of many technology providers, for whom plasma screens and high-speed broadband are replacements for streets and public spaces. The advent of resources such as Facebook and LinkedIn has offered a new form of social interactivity to compete with and even replace urban propinquity. Yet, the reality of online social networking suggests that the networks it creates are, on the one hand, duplications of pre-existing, physical social networks or, on the other, comprised of very weak connections with people that are not obviously of value. A large network of Facebook ‘friends’ is no guarantee of a large network of good friends. A key weakness therefore in delivering the online image of the future city has been that the search-and-discover nature of online social networking has largely been poor. It is no easier to make new good friends online than it is to find them in the dark corners and elevated walkways of a failed public housing project.

Yet efforts continue to improve online encounter. Massive, experimental exertions that beg the question: is the internet doing for social networking (i.e. improving it) the reverse of what cities have done for relations in physical space (i.e. to damage them). Starting with febrile experimentation and underperformance, is online evolving towards consistency, protocols, intelligibility and, most importantly, towards serendipity: the spark of humanity? Digital technology is a new urban utility of immense value to the social, economic and environmental performance of cities. Undoubtedly, digital technologies can take a greater share of the strain where physical connectivity is an issue. The digital economy is an attractor of investment – particularly with start-ups – and therefore an attractor of talented people who settle and ultimately make place. The UK appears keen to maintain this momentum by way of substantial investment in ‘Future Cities’ through the Technology Strategy Board.

Digital urbanismHowever, in adopting new technologies, urban policymakers should be careful not to abandon the historically successful form of dense, compact and continuously connected cities. The two processes – on-line and on-land – should be made to work together, to create an effective digital urbanism. After all, online technologies cannot fully replace the powerful and beneficial effects of the highly connected street grid and, in particular, the essential magic of urban living: unplanned ‘first contact’ between people that have not met before and may not have known that they would benefit from meeting. Serendipitous encounter is perhaps the single most important advantage of urbanism and also the one most likely to pervade. Certainly, cities have been damaged by divisive and polluting land use planning and highway engineering but these failings are recent mistakes in the long history of urbanism. They can, should and are being fixed. Unless digital visionaries and urban leaders alike appreciate the risks of small-scale, dispersed, disconnected settlement patterns, they may be lulled by the quaint imagery of a highly damaging rural idyll. This would be detrimental to the social, economic and environmental sustainability of our urban places and, ultimately, to the cultures that they nurture. Instead, the future city should continue to be densely connected by both physical and vir tual means, built according to planning guidelines that focus on the creation of high quality interpersonal transactions.

What does this look like? Most likely, it entails a return to the continuously connected city, providing streets, parks, cafes, workplaces and public realm to be occupied by people in pursuit of social and economic exchange.

Tim Stonor AoUDirector, The Academy of Urbanism

Managing Director, Space Syntax

© Incurable Hippie


Over the last forty years a phenomenon has taken place across many European cities that has seen large areas of inner-city land restructured to improve ‘places of connection’ and enhance the value of existing assets.

Whilst experiencing several of these (re)developments throughout my career as an urbanist, I have always been amazed to discover that client-promoters opted to re-invent the wheel as the result of a mainly inward-looking process that addressed local and temporary issues, often viewing developments as a manageable collection of individual projects.

But urbanism is not large-scale architecture! These developments may take a generation to complete and have a profound impact on the character and function of surrounding areas, not to mention the life and energy of the wider city.

Urban regeneration as a shared learning processTheLearningCitiesPlatform

It is therefore critical to look outward to define the essential urban principles required to sustain a development until it reaches the threshold of maturity and becomes an embedded part of the city’s fabric.

Based on a mutual appreciation and concern for this issue, John Worthington AoU and I established a virtuous and active platform on which specific knowledge of complex inner-city developments could be exchanged. The Learning Cities Platform was formed with three aims: (1) to give cities the chance to share experience and identify common problems; (2) to bring together their public, private and community partners; and (3) to develop robust approaches to managing the process of transforming places of connection that transcend political aspirations and organisational structures.

During 2012, the Learning Cities Platform, supported by the networks of the AoU and INTA, brought representatives of six European cities together over three days in Utrecht. Each brought with them a frank and open attitude towards their key projects and a willingness to invest a level of trust in their fellow cities.

The group comprised Utrecht (Central Station District), Hamburg (HafenCity), and Bordeaux (Euratlantique) as principal Learning Cities, with Malmö (Western Harbour), Tampere and Cardiff as Reference Cities. To allow comparison between the approaches of these six different projects, discussions were structured around five themes: Connecting, Changing, Collaborating, Communicating and Controlling.

The activities of the three-day process in June have been distilled into a report, PlacesofConnection, which demonstrates the methods of comparison used by the learning platform. It concludes with a set of common principles that can be of use to other major city developments. Relating these principles to the presented plans helped give new insights to participants and a heightened awareness of their individual roles in the process. For me however, the platform’s greatest success was the freedom it gave these cities to explore behind their PR ‘fronts’ to discuss challenging issues openly in a trusting peer group environment.

Of the ten principles that the group agreed upon, the following three struck me as being particularly paramount to the long-term success of any development.

HafenCity, Hamburg, where complexity has been a key driver to ensuring a lively sense of place

© Stijn


� Collaboration and trustThe long-term character of most developments calls for a new attitude to collaboration. Principles deriving from this include:

Alignthestakeholders&identifythechange-makersEnsure the goals and aims of the collaboration are clear for all parties and acknowledge the importance of small groups of committed individuals by giving them a voice. For instance, Bordeaux celebrated 2012 as the Year of Collaboration! A competition was held that called for five city-wide dialogues on the future of urban development, rather than ready-designed architectural entries.

RecognisecommunicationasaninitiatoranddriverofchangeGenuine, structured communication generates citizen commitment and engagement, and is essential to delivering collaborative development.

Build confidence from resultsAllow for continuous change – constantly evaluate outcomes and feedback to inform ongoing development. For example, Malmö has understood that delivering long-term complex projects is a process of building trust between different interests and establishing common goals. In the Western Harbour development, the planning department worked with a wide range of partners to apply a value-based urban design model that generated a structure of agreed priorities that can vary over time, as needs and conditions change. This process created an open dialogue that brought on board all interests and encouraged a continuous process of feedback and improvement.

� ScaleNot the same as size, but the factor of scale, including how to connect people and places:

TurnplacesofseparationintoplacesofconnectionSuccessful places unlock latent value in centrally located, but spatially fragmented, areas through the creation of new connections. The new Bordeaux tramway not only provides a physical connection, but also demonstrates the rich value of the city’s distinct quarters.

RecognisethedifferentscalesofconnectionResolve potential conflicts caused by the large and segregating infrastructure of global movement systems, including rail and water, by careful design of the interface with the local scale of pedestrian and cyclist amenities.

� Urban complexityFor me, one of the most insightful and eye-opening ideas came from HafenCity, where complexity is an active ingredient to success:

Celebratecomplexity–beexpansivenotreductiveCities thrive on diversity and ambiguity – be prepared to take manageable risks allowing for choice, diversity and the unexpected. Hamburg has already completed a major part of the new HafenCity quarter by implementing its framework for ‘actor-centered induced development’ focusing on integrating old and new. They have changed perceptions of urbanity, not with a fixed masterplan, but by supporting collaboration and co-production within a guiding framework.

The approach recognises that if a city is to achieve the right diversity of uses that can elicit a lively sense of place, it must increase its complexity.

Looking to the futureThe two-day symposium in Utrecht firmly established the value of bringing together cities with common and shared challenges. The Learning Cities Platform (www.learningcitiesplatform.eu) provides the foundation to expand the network to other cities across Europe, based on a programme of learning, research and exchange of knowledge. It is not a network of consultants, but rather a network of people with different roles and backgrounds, who work within urbanism and who love cities!

During the coming year, the Academy aims to draw together those cities that participated in the Utrecht symposium and finalists from our European City award to establish a European Learning Cities Network.

Henk Bouwman AoU Director, Urban-imPulse.eu

Download a copy of Places of Connection from www.LearningCitiesPlatform.eu

Bordeaux’s tram system, connecting its distinct

quarters

© John Thompson


It might seem like a cliché to begin a discussion about the boundaries of urbanism with a quote from Le Corbusier, but this well-known statement sums up concisely the tension that exists between the two dimensions of urbanism, defined on one hand as the characteristics of urban social life and city dwelling, and on the other, the physical processes of planning and development.

The architecture critic Ada Louise Huxtable, writing in the 1980s about Le Corbusier’s experimental community at Pessac, recognised in this quote that Le Corbusier was not confessing his project to be a failure because the occupants had chosen to adapt (in some cases quite significantly) the architecture and spatial plan.� Rather, he was acknowledging the messiness of everyday life, the complexity of human interaction with the built environment, and the inevitable, incremental adaptation and appropriation of spaces and plans that are not imagined by the architect or planner.

Reconnecting places & people

“Youknow,itisalwayslifethatisrightandthearchitectwhoiswrong” Le Corbusier on Quartier Modernes Fruges at Pessac�

Pessac: Le Corbusier’s housing project in Bordeaux built in the 1920s. During the 1940s, residents took to individualising the properties according to their own needs. At the time of this image, the houses were in the process of being restored to their original condition

© Willie Miller, WMUD

References1. Le Corbusier’s housing project – flexible enough to endure, Ada Louise Huxtable

2. History Repeats Itself, But How? City Character, Urban Tradition, and the Accomplishment of Place, Harvey Molotch, William Freudenburg, Krista E. Paulsen

3. Architecture, urbanism, design and behaviour: a brief review, Dan Lockton


As a professional practice and field of policy, urbanism is dominated by the physical: architecture, planning, development, regeneration, housing, infrastructure. The social life of cities and in particular, the ordinary, the everyday, the mundane aspects of urban life are frequently overlooked in the rush to create and regenerate at scale or to a pre-defined set of principles – Garden Cities, New Urbanism, Compact Cities, Modernism, Smart Cities, Eco-Towns, Sustainable Urbanism – each generating their own assumptions and limits about how people will live and work within their boundaries.

Past experience shows that people need scope to shape and adapt the environment around them. From Pessac to Pruitt-Igoe and many more, less visionary examples in between, the experience has been that reality takes hold and life diverges from the plan. At one extreme, open spaces are reimagined: benches become skateparks, bus shelters temporary housing, The Shard becomes a destination for romantic liaisons. At the other end, visionary plans stumble or fail but not always in the same way or for the same reasons: people struggle to manage the technology in their eco-homes so abandon the cause, gleaming Smart Cities fail to attract new residents and workers, some new towns struggle and others flourish.

Intuitively we know what makes one place different from another. Yet this difference is hard to articulate and even harder to translate into the planning and design process. Arguably, the answer is not in a particular model of urbanism but in finding a way to reconcile the physical and social, grand vision and local reality, in order to plan, design, develop and manage places in a way that is attuned to local circumstances.

Harvey Molotch’s work on place difference provides a framework for thinking holistically about local context. He traces the development trajectory of Ventura and Santa Barbara, two neighbouring California counties with similar socio-demographics and similar opportunities. Both experienced oil development, freeway projects, and housing growth at the same time, yet the specific local circumstances – politics, social networks, community organisations, local history, culture and global connections – created very different, measurable outcomes in terms of employment, wealth and future infrastructure.

Molotch stresses the importance of understanding ‘connective tissue’ – the multiple connections between

people, organisations, ideas, opportunities, cities and neighbourhoods, that ‘lash up’ in different ways to create processes and outcomes that are specific to times and places.�

If we know that similar places with similar opportunities develop in dramatically different ways, what does this mean in practice? As practitioners, we need an understanding of what places mean to people and how they can shape quality of life, wellbeing and opportunities. We also need to understand the multiple connections and interactions people have with the built environment without getting caught up in the trap that ‘place’ automatically means a bounded community and consensus.

Molotch’s work on place difference is one way to think about circumventing the artificial boundaries between social, physical, environmental and economic factors that are becoming encoded and taken for granted in planning, policymaking and development. Dan Lockton’s fascinating blog Architectures proposes another approach. Lockton examines Stewart Brand’s concept of ‘High Road’ and ‘Low Road’ architecture. ‘Low Road’ architecture is designed for adaptation, to allow users to make changes as their needs evolve, while ‘High Road’ architecture is designed specifically to shape the behaviour of future users. Lockton proposes a ‘Low Road read/write urbanism’ that creates space for adaptation as patterns of social behaviour emerge. His proposal is more subtle than the top-down versus bottom-up discussion which debates often default to when the question of user involvement or local circumstances are raised. Both Lockton and Molotch’s approaches seem to argue for a shift from fixed models to fluid, locally specific understandings that can combine plans, strategies and control with insights about everyday life that will hopefully lead to the creation of places that work better for people.

Resources are scarce so there is little scope for making mistakes with the current generation of housing and infrastructure projects, and tough decisions have to be made. However, this kind of pressure also opens up spaces and opportunities for innovation and change. Can we use this opportunity to think about urbanism that goes beyond community involvement in planning and design to become genuinely informed by the everyday social experience?

Saffron Woodcraft AoUFounding Director, Social Life


Christer Larsson AoUhaswidelybeenrecognisedasasignificant force in exemplary regeneration during his time in charge of Malmö’s planning office. His exceptional work, combiningshiftsincollaborativedesignandsustainabledevelopment,ledtheAcademytoappointChristerasourthirdHonorary Academician. Here, we invite Christer to reflect on Malmö’ssuccessesaswellashintingathowitwillovercomeitsfuturechallenges.

The journey Malmö has undertaken from its roots in heavy industry to today’s knowledge-based city with high ambitions in the field of sustainability, has inspired its neighbouring regions and many others from around the world. It has, for example, become a role model for cities in England and China. But this success has left Malmö with a demography that imposes entirely different demands and also presents us with completely new opportunities – around lifestyles, workplace change, and multi-ethnicity, to name a few.

To continue to offer an attractive and enticing city that also meets the next generation’s lifestyles and preferences, we must develop the concept of sustainability much further still. It is perhaps easy to focus on the environment, where efforts are recognisable, but it is equally important that social and economic sustainability receives as much of our attention. In response to this, we have embarked on a continual process of change and improvement, where the realms of design and planning blur with progress made in relationships and cooperation.

One of the areas where change has been most prevalent is the link between Malmö and the wider region. Ongoing infrastructure and transport investments such as the Öresund Bridge, for example, have integrated and tied together not only the region and the city but also the inner-city. This has given Malmö a new and active role in the regional context, that has in turn provided a new impetus to the city. By making these sorts of investments that align with our strategy of creating a dense and mixed city, we can also reduce the amount of transport dependent work activities. So, what is our next step? How can we take advantage of our development benefits? We have already started the spatial reorganisation of the city through densification, and through the conversion and re-appropriation of industrial areas. But in our masterplan, we aim to increase the population of Malmö by 100,000 over the next 20 years, which implies further reorganisation as well as improved public transport solutions.

As I see it, our key challenge is helping our population become more aware of how we use our resources. Malmö has a major challenge in terms of its energy objectives: by 2020, the city’s commercial buildings will be powered by renewable energy and by 2030, this will apply to the entire city. The work we have done with our four Climate Arenas has reached out and created considerable awareness among all target groups throughout the city. But in order to succeed, I see a paradigm or value shift away from a more physical appropriation towards a more human capital/network solution – that is to say, a form of committed participation throughout the entire population.

Our success must also be seen against the background of strong political leadership, where in recent years the municipality has been the agent of inspiration and the initiator of many successful development projects. However we cannot rely on this scenario alone; the city or the municipality cannot do everything itself – we also need other players involved. Citysamverkan, the Institute for Sustainable Urban Development and Malmö University are all examples of those that need to come together. The participation and cooperation processes developed in the Climate Arena Västra Hamnen – where a great deal of the work can be attributed to cooperation with private operators – has produced many positive knock-on effects in other areas of development.

In order to obtain the maximum return for the city, greater regional cooperation is also an important factor. At present,

MalmöReflections on a city in transition

Honorary Academician, Christer LarssonDirector of Planning in Malmö


Malmö is developing forms of cooperation both in the east and in the west through collaborative projects with Lund and Copenhagen.

This whole process of change may also be regarded as a conceptualisation of the city’s main themes: regionalisation, infrastructure, workplace change, new lifestyles and the development of the concept of the public sphere. As we make progress and take our next steps, additional factors must be added to the concept in a lucid and coherent manner, namely: climate and management of water; how spatial organisation can strengthen social sustainability; culture and collective knowledge as a driving force; and, last but not least, the processes that generate participation and trust.

Trust is important, but so too is health. That is why I am involved now in the ‘Commission for a socially sustainable Malmö’, which is geared towards greater social cohesion and participation, and a reduction in disparities in health. The model we have adopted is that of the

Western Harbour: groundbreaking in its approach to sustainability and collaborative design

© Kevin Murray

Marmot Commission (Marmotkommissionen), capable of implementing projects at city level. In my role as a commissioner, I am looking at how the tools we have can contribute to a fairer distribution of health.

The tools we have and how we use them are of fundamental importance in any change process. In this continuous development of the city, our tools are being constantly adapted. We now view the older tools as rather static with regards to urban planning and tend to work with a much more process-oriented approach that can incorporate the ideas of today’s citizens. We also make use of methods that are determined by the values that we want to create in this particular journey, in the context of the city of Malmö.

When Malmö writes the next chapter in its change management, it will be written by its citizens, and will draw on their relationships and knowledge about how the city is organised in spatial terms, and how we as a city are responding to climate change and sustainability.


The Academy of Urbanism is an autonomous, politically independent and self-funded organisation that extends urban discourse beyond built environment professionals.

We bring together an active group of leaders, thinkers and practitioners involved in the social, cultural, economic, political and physical development of our villages, towns and cities.

We aim to:

Advance the understanding and practice of urbanism through evidence-based inquiry

Provide an inclusive forum for dialogue across all disciplines

Proactively shape places by sharing knowledge and partnering with communities

Foster, validate and celebrate excellence in placemaking

Nurture and include the next generation of urbanists

Activity programmes

The Urbanism Awards

The Academy recognises fifteen great cities, towns, neighbourhoods, streets and places annually through The Urbanism Awards. Accolades go to places that have worked successfully with inherited assets to improve their economic, social and public life. The Awards generate a body of evidence-based best practice which we disseminate both online and in publications.

City X-Rays

City X-Rays are a holistic approach to measuring the quality, potential and success of our cities, neighbourhoods and streets. We use a range of tools and processes to analyse performance, from data mapping through to experiential observation. City X-Rays expand our collective understanding of what underpins great places.

Congress

The Annual Congress is an inspiring, thought-provoking and entertaining opportunity to exchange ideas and hear leading-edge thinking from urbanists around the globe. It is also an opportunity for our host-city to utilise the assembled expertise of Academicians through hands-on workshops that tackle important local issues.

Publications

Our learning activities feed a number of publications. These include: LearningfromPlace – published by Routledge – which distils lessons from The Urbanism Awards; SpacePlaceLife, which celebrates our fifteen award finalists with a sketch, a figureground and a poem by Ian McMillan; and bespoke publications as a result of themed learning visits.

Diagnostic Visits

The Academy offers a Diagnostic Visit service to help neighbourhoods, city-quarters and towns gain a better understanding of the elements that help or hinder their success. It utilises the broad expertise of Academicians to help frame issues by identifying synergies and conflicts, reviewing local aspirations and suggesting direction.

UniverCities

UniverCities are strategic partnerships across towns and cities between civic authorities, private practice, academic institutions and citizens. They promote the virtues of shared understanding and follow the premise that by working together, our towns and cities can achieve more and compete at a higher-level.

Regions & Nations Network

Academicians are encouraged to take ownership of activities and themes locally. From informal discussions in cafes and pubs to small conferences with invited speakers, Academicians are pushing discourse out from the conventional theatres to engage further and wider on great placemaking.

Student Membership

With an eye on the place-makers of tomorrow, we are including students and young professionals in the debates of today. Learning moves in two ways between Academicians and Student Members, as practice and research converge at events and special networking evenings.

Learning from Place

Place Partnering Developing the Academy

Left to right: Finalists of 2013 Urbanism Awards: Chapel Street (Penzance), Bournville (Birmingham),

Galway, Falmouth, Hamburg, City Park (Bradford), Antwerp, Creative Quarter (Folkestone),

Exhibition Road (London), Shrewsbury, Brixton (London), Lyon, Kings Place (London),

Hope Street (Liverpool), Sowerby Bridge Wharf


Getting involved

Become an Academician

The Academy is built on the knowledge and expertise of over 520 Academicians drawn from across all sectors and representing a wide range of backgrounds, embracing planning and design, community and cultural development, engineering and property, policy and politics, academia, media and the arts.

Academicians are nominated by their peers and selected on the basis of their demonstrated commitment and achievement in placemaking at a variety of scales.

If you would like to find out more about becoming an Academician, please get in touch with Alistair Cartwright, Membership Coordinator, on +44 (0) 20 7251 8777 or by emailing [email protected].

Please also visit academyofurbanism.org.uk for more information.

Academy Team Alistair Cartwright Membership Coordinator

Stephen GallagherCommunications Manager

Linda GledstoneDirector of Operations

Helen LucAccounts

Bright PrydeRegional Networks Coordinator

Sponsorship

The Academy is able to achieve its goals because of the generosity of our sponsors, whom we thank for their support.

Sponsors*

Alan Baxter Associates

Barton Willmore

Crest Nicholson

Grosvenor

Lathams

Muir Group

Savills

St George Plc

Winckworth Sherwood

Supporters-in-Kind*

Architecture + Design Scotland

Baker Tilly

BDP

Charles Russell Solicitors

Ecobuild

Gillespies

Jas Atwal Associates

John Thompson & Partners

Kevin Murray Associates

Paul Davis + Partners

Prentis & Co.

Space Syntax

URBED

If you or your organisation is interested in sponsoring or supporting one of the Academy’s learning programmes or activities, please get in touch with:

Linda Gledstone, Director of Operations+44 (0) �0 7�5� [email protected]

* At 1 January 2013

Right: a selection of images from the many Academy activities undertaken during 2012


Academicians 2013*

Arthur Acheson Robert Adam Marcus Adams Lynda Addison OBE John Adlen Kyle Alexander OBE Peter Alexander-Fitzgerald Malcolm Allan Sandy Allcock Joanna Allen Ben Allgood Nigel Anderson Ian Angus Debbie Aplin Judith Armitt George Arvanitis Stephen Ashworth Philip Askew Jasvir Atwal Jeff Austin Janice Balch Jonathan Barker Yolande Barnes Alistair Barr Irena Bauman Alan Baxter CBE Trevor Beattie Ian Beaumont Matthew Bedward Simon Bee Andrew Beharrall Michael Bennett Neil Bennett Robert Bennett Janet Benton Duncan Berntsen John Best John Betty Richard Bickers David FL Bishop Alastair Blyth Martin Boddy Kristiaan Borrett Henk Bouwman Christopher Boyle Mark Bradbury Rosemary Bradley Chris Brett Guy Briggs Ross Brodie Annabel Brown Jonathan Brown Patricia Brown Mark Burgess Andrew Burrell Jonathan Burroughs Richard Burton John Bury Malcolm Bushell Peter Butenschøn Prof Georgia Butina Watson Peter Butler Bruce Calton Fiona Campbell Charles Campion Steve Canadine Tony Carey James Carr Sam Cassels Lynne Ceeney Sue Chadwick Tim Challans Marion Chalmers Joanna Chambers Sarah Chaplin Dominic Edward Chapman James Chapman Peter S Chapman Richard Charge Giles Charlton Stephen Chatfield Alain Chiaradia Nick Childs Tom Clarke John Henry Cleary Clare Coats Dr Jim Coleman Robert Coles Jason Collard Garry Colligan Paul Collins Martin Colreavy Max Comfort Peter Connolly Charlotte Cook Karen Cooksley Prof Rachel Cooper OBE João Cortesão Will Cousins Rob Cowan David Cowans Toby Crayden Chris Crook

Linda Curr Ned Cussen Justine Daly Jane Dann Alex Davey Philip Davies Nick Davis Paul Davis Simon Davis Mark Davy Eric Dawson Peter De Bois Neil De Prez Sophia De Sousa Ian Deans Toby Denham Guy Denton Nick Dermott Hank Dittmar Andrew Dixon Lord John Doune Martin Downie Roger Dowty Paul Drew Peter Drummond Rosamund Dunn Paul Dunne Prof Mark Dyer John Dyke Duncan Ecob David Edwards Luke Engleback Gavin Erasmus Karen Escott Roger Estop Prof Graeme Evans Roger Evans Nick Ewbank Dr Nicholas Falk Ross Faragher Kerri Farnsworth Max Farrell Sir Terry Farrell Jacqueline Fearon Ian Fenn Jaimie Ferguson George Ferguson CBE Diana Fitzsimons David Flannery David Fletcher Prof Carlotta Fontana Richard Ford Sue Foster OBE Bernie Foulkes Jane Fowles Simon Foxell Alan Francis Jerome Frost Daisy Froud Jeremy Gardiner Carole Garfield Lindsay Garratt Tim Garratt Angus Gavin John Geeson Lia Ghilardi Andy Gibbins Prof Mike Gibson Bruce Gilbreth Ian Gilzean Christopher Glaister Stephen Gleave Keith Gowenlock Charles Graham Gerry Grams Gary Grant Michele Grant Mark Greaves Ali Grehan Simon Guest Pippa Gueterbock Richard Guise Patrick Gulliver Trutz Haase Susan Hallsworth Tim Hancock Derek Harding Liane Hartley Geoff Haslam Philip Hayden Helen Hayes Michael Hayes CBE Peter Heath Prof Michael Hebbert Michael Hegarty David Height Wayne Hemingway MBE Simon Henley James Hennessey David Hennings Mark Hensman Paul Hildreth Jason Hill Stephen Hill Tom Holbrook Eric Holding Peter Hollis Stephen Howlett Jun Huang

Board of Directors

John

W

orth

ingt

on

Prof

Chr

isBa

lch

Jane

tSu

ther

land

John

Tho

mps

on(H

on. P

resid

ent)

Prof

Kev

in M

urra

y(C

hairm

an)

Dic

kG

lees

on

Pam

Ale

xand

er O

BE

Stev

enBe

e

Prof

Bri

anEv

ans

Tim

Ston

or

* At February 2013


Jonathan Hughes Richard Hulbert Michael Hurlow Prof Maxwell Hutchinson John Hyland Delton Jackson Philip Jackson Sarah Jackson Dr Noël James Dr Ying Jin Cathy Johnston Chris Jones Gwilym Jones Howard Jones Peter Jones Stephen Jordan Youssef Kadiri Dr Kayvan Karimi Andy Karski Dr Harald Kegler John Kelpie Jonathan Kendall Angus Kennedy David Kennedy John Kennedy James Kerr Mary Kerrigan Ros Kerslake Anne Kiernan Janice Kirkpatrick Angela Koch Prof Motoo Kusakabe Chris Lamb Charles Landry Derek Latham Diarmaid Lawlor Adrian Lee Marcus Lee Sir Richard Leese Alan Leibowitz John Letherland Harry Lewis Michael Lewis Kevin Leyden Chris Littlemore Michael Liverman David Lock Robin Lomas Fred London John Lord Vivien Lovell Mark Lucas David Lumb Barra Mac Ruairí Robin Machell Mary MacIntyre Keiji Makino Geoffrey Makstutis Louise Mansfield Riccardo Marini Andreas Markides Peter Marsh Derek Martin Dr Kat Martindale Mike Martyn Phil Mason Andrew Matthews Dr Alice Maynard James McAdam Steve McAdam Richard McCarthy Prof Michael McGarry Kevin McGeough Aideen McGinley Martin McKay Craig McLaren Mary McLaughlin Paul McTernan Craig McWilliam Ian Mellor David Miles Stephan Miles-Brown Gerry Millar Robert Millar Stephanie Mills Shane Mitchell Kris Mitra Prof Bill Morrison Prof Ruth Morrow Paul Morsley John Muir Ronnie Muir Eugene Mullan John Mullin David Murphy Dr Claudia Murray Prof Gordon Murray Hugh Murray Peter Murray Vivek Nanda Stephen Neal Peter Nears Marko Neskovic Francis Newton Lora Nicolaou Ross Nimmo Taryn Nixon Malcolm Noble John Nordon Richard Nunes Calbhac O’Carroll Dr Dellé Odeleye Simon Ogden Killian O’Higgins Chris Oldershaw Wally Olins CBE Tiago Oliveira Breffni O’Malley Trevor Osborne Paul Ostergaard Chris Pagdin Dr Susan Parham Chris Parkin John Parmiter Liz Peace Richard Pearce Adam Peavoy Ross Peedle Prof Alan Penn Alison Peters Andrew Petrie Hugh Petter John Phillipps Jon Phipps James Pike Steve Platt Ben Plowden Demetri Porphyrios Dr Sergio Porta Prof David Porter Robert Powell Sunand Prasad John Prevc Dr Darren Price David Prichard Paul Prichard John Pringle Rhona Pringle Douglas Pritchard Stephen Proctor Matt Quayle Helen Quigley Shane Quinn Mark Raisbeck Peter Ralph Leonie Ramondt Clive Rand Mike Rawlinson Tony Reddy Richard Reid Cllr Sian Reid Amanda Reynolds Christopher Rhodes Lindsey Richards Antony Rifkin Prof Marion Roberts Prof Peter Roberts OBE Dickon Robinson Dr Rick Robinson Bryan Roe Lord Richard Rogers Angela Rolfe Alexandra Rook

Pedro Roos Anna Rose Graham Ross Jon Rowland Sarah Royle-Johnson David Rudlin Robert Rummey Gerard Ryan Dr Andrew Ryder Stephen Sadler Robert Sakula Judith Salomon Rhodri Samuel Clare San Martin Peter Sandover Hilary Satchwell Biljana Savic Bridget Sawyers Alberto Scarpa Dominic Scott Symon Sentain Toby Shannon Dr Tim Sharpe Cath Shaw Richard Shaw Barry Shaw MBE Keith Shearer Anthony Shoults Ron Sidell Paul Simkins Dr Richard Simmons Andrew Simpson Anette Simpson Tim Simpson Alan Simson Ann Skippers John Slater Jonathan Smales Malcolm Smith Paul Smith Prof Austin Smyth Jim Sneddon Carole Souter CBE Adrian Spawforth Andy Spracklen Tim Stansfeld Alan Stewart Alan Stones Rosslyn Stuart Peter Studdert Nicholas Sweet Stephen Talboys David Tannahill Ian Tant David Taylor David J Taylor Ed Taylor Nick Taylor Rebecca Taylor Sandy Taylor Ivan Tennant Alison Tero Alan Thompson Chris Thompson David Thompson Robert Thompson Dale Thomson Lesley Thomson John Thorp Andrew Tindsley Damian Tissier Canon Andrea Titterington Ian Tod Peter Tooher Robert Townshend Rob Tranmer Stephen Tucker Neil Tully Lisa Turley John Turner Jonathan Turner Stuart Turner Chris Twomey Julia Unwin CBE Giulia Vallone Urban van Aar Honoré van Rijswijk Atam Verdi Jonathan Vining Andy von Bradsky Brita von Schoenaich Prof Lorna Walker Ian Wall Ann Wallis Russell Wallis Brendon Walsh David Walters Dr Gerry Wardell Paul Warner Elanor Warwick David Waterhouse Nick Wates Camilla Ween Oliver Weindling Dr Michael Wells Jan-Willem Wesselink Rosemary Westbrook Allison Westray-Chapman Duncan Whatmore Craig White Lindsey Whitelaw Peter Williams Patricia Willoughby Marcus Wilshere James Wilson Godfrey Winterson Saffron Woodcraft Geoff Woodling David Woods Nick Woolley Nick Wright Ian Wroot Tony Wyatt Louise Wyman Wei Yang Bob Young Gary Young John Zetter

Honorary AcademiciansJan Gehl Prof Wulf DasekingChrister Larsson

Honorary TreasurerDavid Miles

Artist in ResidenceDavid Rudlin

Poet in ResidenceIan McMillan

�� | AoU Journal #2

The Academy of Urbanism70 Cowcross StreetLondon EC1M 6EJUnited Kingdom

For more information please contact

Linda GledstoneDirector of Operations+44 (0) �0 7�5� [email protected]

Visit us onlineacademyofurbanism.org.uk

Follow us on Twitter@TheAoU

Join our LinkedIn, Facebook & Flickr group pages by searchingThe Academy of Urbanism

Editorial Team

Sarah ChaplinStephen GallagherKevin Murray

Images contributed by

Boldarini Architects,Bradford Metropolitan District Council, Bridget Sawyers, City of Antwerp, Daniel Ducci, Elemental, Fabio Knoll, Falmouth Town Council, Filip Dujardin, Henk Bouwman, Incurable Hippie, John Thompson, Kerri Farnsworth, Kevin Murray, Kings Place, Marcelo Rebello, Miniplanpac, Nick Wright, Paul Brock Photography, Sarah Blee, Sarah Jackson,Stephen Gallagher, Stijn, Willie Miller

Front and back coverAntwerpThe European City of the Year 2013

aou journal issue two

Documents