APznzaZxNMpnDomQkU3vmEtYrYDEmWhPAv_qvlMk0hDRUZWtC9J2Q9dOfPCSAQIiR9xvLQp-P_H6V3yTwUmzZ5MYP1hTeXzTvTApjkUoy5fsv2KDjwM56nr0cmn_uBj8_M_D43o5Le-bchYfrGmp0V7MkRhE8fFd9EZH9DPtUwrhy1cxGFRAufvuqAzjphA0OYfVVi2e_O0KCthjL3TlWKf.pdf

URBAN DESIGN AND PLANNING AS PRAGMATIC INQUIRY Roger Boden Manuscript accepted September 1991 As urban design emerged as a separate concerning values and aims, the di...

URBAN DESIGN AND PLANNING AS PRAGMATIC INQUIRY Roger Boden Manuscript accepted September 1991 As urban design emerged as a separate concerning values and aims, the differ­ participatory procedures. This should discipline over the past 30 years, it be­ ences between inadvertent and delibe­ also recognize those areas of expertise came embroiled in a conjused relation­ rate design, and their significance for in which each of the two disciplines ship with architecture and planning. both disciplines, attitudes towards con­ can make the greatest contribution: This paper seeks to clarify the relation­ text and the degree of abstraction as­ urban design in the shaping of the built ship between urban design and plan­ sumed treating spatially-related pheno­ environment, specifically regarding ning, using the common threads of mena, problems and solutions, and the housing to accommodate rapid urban­ pragmatism, as revealed by an histori­ skills required for urban design. isation, and planning in ameliorating cal overview of theory and procedures socio-economic issues. During their in both fields, to establish areas of training, students in both disciplines overlap in approach and concerns. should acquire a firm grasp of their These include the dialectical nature of General implications include the po­ respective areas of expertise, and learn wicked problem resolution, and the tential for urban designers and plan­ how to cooperate with members of the significance of process in both dis­ ners to play truly complementary roles other, and related disciplines, in striv­ ciplines. in the Republic, and the need for a ing towards better quality urban envir­ Subtle differences are also pointed out, common approach based on open, onments across the nation. INTRODUCTION Architects and planners in the UK and and that the existing professions of Broadbent's (1990) discussion of the­ USA have disagreed over their respec­ planning and architecture are incap­ ory in "Urban Space Design" - cover­ tive roles, and visions for a better able by virtue of their training ing both urban design and aspects of society and the urban context to house methods and operating processes, of architecture, in relation to the domi­ it, for at least thirty years. As urban doing anything about it. nant architectural paradigmatic under­ design emerged as a discipline during pinnings of rationalism, empiricism, This impotence could perhaps be as­ and pragmatism. These sources sug­ approximately the same period, stres­ ses have also occurred over its role in cribed to the failure of planning and gested a disciplinary overlap in relation architecture to give urban design the to pragmatics. relation to the areas of expertise of academic attention it deserved as an planning (Toon 1986), architecture, The aims are therefore to examine the interdisciplinary activity: thus Kreditor (Senior and Wood, 1987) and land­ history of each discipline as a series of scape architecture (Knack, 1984). ( 1990: 155, 156) states concerning American experience: pragmatic developments; to identify These positions have ge erally in- major theoretical and conceptual over­ volved protecting professio'nal boun­... this singular period in American laps and differences in the two fields, daries rather than a comrrhtment to urban history failed to produce a co­ and to establish how they might affect define the scope of urban d·esign as a herent boiiy of urban design theory, education and practice in South Af­ discipline. Furthermore, while the... (and) the expansion and empow­ rica. debate over the relationship with erment of planning has failed to architecture has been extensive if inspire a vision of urban life and The approach adopted compares the inconclusive, the links with planning form. historical development of theory in have been misunderstood, or neg­ both fields; identifies common prob­ lected. Toon (1986:5) for example Similarly Bunker (1990) is vague about lems and areas of agreement and in­ mistakenly believes that urban design the nature of urban design, confusing congruity and lists some local implica is an integral part of urban planning, morphological aspects of urban design tions and proposals for further action. that the skills of an urban designer are with metropolitan planning. THE EVOLUTION OF PLANNING those of an urban planner, that the It is therefore the intention of this AND PLANNING THEORY (1945 - processes are the same and implemen­ article to examine the relationship 1990) tation is identical. between planning and urban design more closely, explicitly identifying Cherry in the UK (1974) and Scott in Yet this position is contradicted by the the USA ( 1969) have detailed the editorial in the issue of the journal in significant disciplinary conformities and differences. evolution of planning from a profes­ which his paper appeared: sional perspective; however Boyer There is growing concern that the A point of departure is Roch's (1984) (1983) chooses a broader, more open quality of new urban development in concern with the relationship between range of American sources, following many Australian cities is mediocre, pragmatism and planning theory, and Foucaultian principles, thereby illumi- 47  nating planning thought within its By 1960 therefore, social concerns New pragmatic and ideological per­ political and social contexts, and encompassing a unitary view of the spectives, reflecting the wider interests explicating its changing concerns. public good in combination with the of a new breed of students and aca­ synoptic vision championed by Geddes demics from the social sciences, gene­ These range from the perceived need to rated extensive criticism of this ap­ and Mumford, had become normative order the threatening complexity and proach and its underlying rationalist for planners. A widening grasp of the heterogeneous populations of the in­ philosophy. Considerable energy was intricacy of interrelationships between dustrializing city of the later 1800's, to therefore devoted in the 1960s and the complex forces acting on the city the desire for the City Beautiful (1890- 1970s to exploring alternative philo­ and region culminated in a widespread 1910), the City Efficient (1920s 1940s), sophies and associated procedural commitment to the replacement of and the mandate for large scale public models. Summed up in the acronym "blueprint planning" by a more dy­ intervention during the Depression SIT AR, these comprised incremental, namic version. and World War II. transactional, advocacy and radical This represented the triumph of a It is a chronicle of expanding spheres options and contrasted with the "syn­ rational technocratic approach to of interest (Figure 1) and cyclical optic" (Hudson, 1979). Their charac­ problem solving in the West, yet polit­ fashions in procedural theory, reflect­ teristics have been extensively debated ically driven blueprint and comprehen­ ing a desire to solve problems compre­ elsewhere,· (e.g. Fainstein and Fain­ sive master plan hybrids became the hensively, logically and for the social stein, 1971, correlated them with polit­ dominant paradigm in South Africa, well-being of all. Boyer concludes that ical systems; Bolan (1967), and Faludi, influenced by the Group Area and the political and cultural context in the ( 1973) placed these approaches in other apartheid legislation between USA was never totally comfortable broader contexts. 1950 and 1988. with extensive public intervention where it is perceived to confine or THEORETICAL CHALLENGES DEVELOPMENTS INTO THE control private initiative and capital TO RATIONALITY 1980s formation. Between 1960 and 1975 in the USA The synoptic approach enjoyed a fresh In Great Britain planning followed a however there was a reversal of em­ surge of support during the late 1960s more institutionalized path and, due to phasis. Initially acknowledged as an under the guise of systemic planning a similar conflict between market­ analytical and synthesizing norm, both often incorporating computer model­ oriented freedom and state welfare procedurally and substantively, the ling. But by 1973 (Lee) this too was notions of planning, really came into rational comprehensive approach was under attack, on account of logical its own only after the Second World in practice difficult to implement, inadequacies and technical opacity, War. The Welfare State nurtured an particularly in the many large scale particularly in the eyes of a sceptical acceptance of planning (1946 to 1979) urban renewal projects of the 1950s public in Europe. before wilting under the onslaughts of and 60s. Instead planning theorists like Davi- Thatcherism..._ 1913 Prafe11aian. l'armeG In U.K. 0 0 a> 0 ,, \ o g: GROWING FIELD OF KNOWLEDGE FIGURE l: The Emergence of Urban Planning and Urban Design. 48 doff argued planners should advocate mented field of planning theory, Hoch gemeinschaft: corporate economic the interests of the powerless, thereby (1984) demonstrates how the SIT AR interests and power are currently more making the first deliberate political procedural theories fit within Dewey's significant than those of the polis. connection to planning. Others like pragmatic conception of human ac­ Certainly Friedmann's (1982) concep­ Camhis ( 1979) and the Fainsteins tion, satisfying the planner's need to tion of the imbalance between political assumed a marxist ideology, critiquing "do good" and "be right" simultane­ and social power- and aggressively the comprehensive approach's depend­ ously. He describes Dewey's concept as expanding economic power, remains ence on an "indentifiable" unitary resting on three principles: valid, strengthening this claim. public interest, its indifference to To identify commonalities and incon­ Problem definition is a form of expe­ community and class conflict, and to gruencies between these trends and the rience - in everyday life efforts are foggy decision environments. Forester growth of urban design theory the made to change the existing by project­ (1980 and 1983) employed Habermas's evolution of the latter is now reviewed. ing future action on the basis of past critical theory to explore the bounded­ experience, rather than ideologically­ ness this opacity created for the plan­ THE EVOLUTION OF URBAN rooted deductive reasoning. So the ner, whilst De Neufville (1983), em­ DESIGN AND RELATED existence of a problem and the devel­ ploying a pragmatic perspective, re­ opment of a solution both emerge THEORIES jected the negativeness of much of this The term urban design was first used in from experience. criticism, and looked instead for a Plan formulation is a form of prag­ 1957 at a conference at Harvard; the new paradigm born of practical expe­ discipline was perceived to be needed rience and capable of providing gui­ matic inquiry where, according to Hoch (1984: 336) "truth emerges when to close the widening void between dance for the conditions under which an idea (alternative/ hopothesis/plan) planning and architecture. The for­ planners operated. proves successful in solving a problem. mer's increasingly theoretical con­ Acceptance of these concepts entailed structs were becoming less three-di­ training planners with new skills like Plan implementation is a form of mensionally focused and more geo­ mediation (Susskind and Ozawa 1984), democratic participation - here a graphic or spatially two-dimensional awareness of the political implications distinction is drawn between planned due to a preoccupation with the deli­ of the information they gather or and planning societies. The former neation of historic, social, economic control (Forester, 1980), and of the socialist societies of Eastern Europe and political processes or influences. ineradicable role. of political processes represent planned societies: planning is Pragmatic and empirical architectu­ in the determination of resource distri­ centralised, and undemocratic, requir­ rally related questions of concrete form bution issues. (Forester, 1980 and ing authoritarian, imposed, hierarchi­ and sensory experience were being Hoch 1984). cal planning and physical or psycho­ displaced by mathematical and social logical coercion for its realisation. By concerns. Declining support for blue­ Faludi and others have over the past contrast a planning society must entail print planning reflected this shift in six years launched a 'neorationalist' an interactive, or transactive approach orientation both in the UK and USA. counteroffensive, but there is little (Friedmann, 1974). Here, intelligent likelihood as Faludi (l 985) acknow­ action emerges from a thorough grasp Concurrently architecture was becom­ ledged, that the rational comprehen­ of the empirical/pragmatic context, ing embroiled in a battle between the sive /approach will regain its former generated through public discussion or "new empiricism" of an ageing, some­ undisputed status. He accbpted that debate. what disillusioned establishment and rational methods only bec6me viable the socially-oriented, iconoclastic "bru­ Hoch completed his argument with talists" lead by Team 10. This bitter once objectiv.es have been bstablished two caveats - Dewey reconciles values tussle left architects with neither the through political decisions (whether (doing good) with knowledge (being surplus energy nor the desire to seek empirical, pragmatic or ideological in origin). right) by relating the goals of human accommodation with this new breed of development to a learning process, planners from non-design back­ Currently, in response to the collapse ignoring often powerful political and grounds. of the marxist states of eastern Europe, institutional constraints on free learn­ the neomarxist theorists in the USA ing. Secondly, Dewey assumes learn­ In the USA the war and its aftermath are casting around for alternative ing is fundamental to the human caused the design of the urban envir­ directions to pursue. (e.g. Burgess, psyche, yet does not explore the neces­ onment to be divided between archi­ 1990). Bound by political intransigence sity for a context of mutual trust to tects, engineers and landscape archi­ for much of this time, planning in facilitate such learning, or the conse­ tects, all in the service of private South Africa has barely responded to quences when pluralistic social struc­ developers. The former disciplines these issues, despite the efforts of a tures generate trust destructive value­ designed the buildings, the latter parks, professional minority, primarily linked based conflicts. Hoch ( 1984: 3 4 2) squares and open spaces. Housing was to the English language planning concludes that all three activities re­ effectively the concern of large scale schools to change this. main ''guided more by the force of builders and engineers, who played the politics than by force of argument". dominant role in the subdivision of HOCH'S USE OF DEWEY'S PRAG­ land. Hoch is here using politics in its widest MATIC PHILOSOPHY sense rather than to describe the inter­ Hence no one was effectively taking a In seeking to reintegrate this frag- ests and concerns of the polis or holistic approach to the design of 49 c1t1es, particularly the interface be­ offices or public housing). THE EMERGENCE OF VARIOUS tween the public and private realms. A Urban designers are specifically SCHOOLS OF URBANDE GN specialist discipline was needed "with trained to consider such issues, and THEORY skills in creating proposals for the form their legal implications. Its comparative youthfulness and di­ and management of the extended spatial and temporal (urban) environ­ * geared to explore the moulding of verse origins have precluded the syn­ thesis of a mature, broadly accepted, ment" (Lynch, in Ferebee 1982: 105). urban form over extended as well as immediate timescales, utilizing an coherent body of theory in urban This was the prescription for urban understanding not only of morphol­ design. The opinions expressed below design. As this profession's skills have ogy but also of building typologies, are therefore necessarily personal crystallized they came to differ signifi­ and of the role the local authority rather than broadly representative cantly from those of architects in the can play in pacing development assessments. following respects: urban design * has a public focus and multiple through the provision of the "capi­ tal web". CITY EFFICIENT, CITY BEAUTI­ * considers a longer time frame for * is more directly influenced by envir­ clientele, FUL OR CITY SOCIABLE? These terms were coined to describe * values process equally with product, terms realisation, onmental psychology, not only in various stages in the development of of Lynch's five basic and planning in the USA. However they recognizing that at an urban scale much misunderstood criteria for participation and pluralistic values­ encapsulate broader tendencies touch­ analysing public cognitive maps but ed on below. require a different strategy from also responding to the experience of that for designing individual build­ street and square as outdoor rooms. The City Efficient, in seeking to ings for specific paying clients. achieve better transport, adequate * practitioners tend to remain ano­ (Lynch, 1960 and 1984, and Apple­ yard, 1980, Crane, 1960, Krier, 1979 waste removal or other related objec­ nymous (Pittas, in Ferebee, 1982, and Rapoport, 1977). tives of an engineering and public pl2). * attempts to encourage and enable health nature, was instrumental in the * is concerned with the form of large change with the purpose of improv­ reshaping of English cities in the second half of the nineteenth century. portions of, or entire, cities. (Crane, ing the environment, rather than It was also reflected in Haussmann's 1960, Lynch 1981, and 1976, and merely to prevent its further deteri­ plans for Paris, and the imitations it Wolfe and Shinn, 1970). oration, or protect existing property spawned. It further portrays the em­ rights and amenity. So Hack (1980) phasis in much of the planning exe­ In relation to the planner, Lynch hints identified the urban designer's activ­ cuted in the USA between 1912-1950 (1979) at some of the differences when ities as: pulse-taking (monitoring and in the planning for the white he categorized urban design as urban trends), scheming (designing communities in South Africa between a return to that old fashioned field of to initiate dialogue) packaging (pro­ c1940-1985, where the sole purpose physical city or land use planning, ducing programmes - what has to appeared to be to solve transportation but it is simultaneously more focused be done, by whom, how, and in and associated technical questions. It and yet more amply connected to what sequence) mediating, (manag­ responded to Lynch's first metacriter­ other concerns and given a sharper ing, brokering, cajoling and per­ ion, efficiency, but paid scant attention sense of humanistic purpose. suading people to participate in to his second - justice - in terms of realising the intentions of the de­ social and environmental questions. Taking the points in turn, urban design sign), and scrutinizing (reviewing compared to planning is: project proposals against design Much of the legitimacy for the City * concerned with physical urban guidelines). Crane writes also of the opportunities to design pacemaker Efficient derived from the writings. of Le Corbusier, and his influence: in form, not just land use. As Wolfe projects setting new design stand­ CIAM, most notably through the and Shinn (1970: p33 and 43-44) ards to which the private sector can simplistic analytical procedures and describe it, planners have been respond. rationalist bias of the Athens Charter. party to the inadvertent design of (Although his designs reflect a growing cities through the use of zoning poetic and intuitive emphasis relative codes and traffic engineering and Compared to the planner then, the to functional aspects). other standards. These have seldom urban designer focuses more directly been thoroughly tested for their and exclusively on the physical urban City Beautiful: this term was originally probable impact on urban form, environment as a product to be expe­ used to describe the influence of Burn­ either functionally (with respect to rienced - emphasizing the role of ham, White and Olmsted through the shading, preservation of views, en­ public place as a social artifact, which Chicago Exposition (189J( and. the vironmental comfort, compatibility expresses cultural values - and direct­ proposals it spawned to remould Ame­ of scale etc.), or symbolically (what ing or promoting specific short, rican cities. It focused primarily on it might mean to a community to medium and long term changes to aesthetics and urban form; in practice see areas of mnemonic or historic urban form: (Lynch, in Ferebee, 1982, it became a largely cosmetic exercise significance, being supplanted by Bartholomew, 1979, and Wallace, directed at restraining and concealing indifferent medium or high rise 1979). the restless, innovative, iconoclastic 50 energies of urban life, and thereby oper / growth model - is characterised This emphasizes the efficient use of reassuring the wealthy and powerful. by the acceptance of a desire to grow, energy, minimizing the extent of air (Boyer, 1983). and a focus on developers, transporta­ and water pollution (Spirn 1984), tion agencies or cities as clients, whose using passive solar energy designs and This approach did not manifest itself primary motive is economic develop­ densifying cities to minimize travel in its Neoclassical, axial splendor in ment through attracting market prof­ distances. Mooted by both McHarg South Africa. Here middle and upper its, as typified by popular projects like and Halprin, its antecedents lie with class white suburbs reflect rather the Quincy Mall or Cape Town's Water­ landscape architecture rather than Garden City ideal, while our city front scheme. The activities involved planning or architecture. centres were secured through legal include market analyses, scenographic Despite these differences of emphasis, rather than design means: exclusion of development in fashionable styles and there is however, one basic element of the poor, rather than beautification development packaging. urban design procedural theory which and material expressions of power. The latter emerged in the design of It is also consistent with the City deserves attention: the concept of Black townships for "security" in a Beautiful philosophy and the charac­ design as a learning process. highly diluted, local application of teristics of pragmatism. Bacon's work URBAN DESIGN AS A LEARN­ Haussmanian urban design principles. in Philadelphia (1952-1970), Barnett's ING PROCESS There are disturbing parallels between in New York, (1968-1974), and Eck­ stutt's on Battery Park City (1986 - Lynch (1960, 1971, 1974 and 1984) the polemics of Rob Krier (1979) and pioneered a rigorous basis for deter­ these City Beautiful traditions, in their 1989) illustrates this approach and its pre-occupation with private sector mining how people view cities and cosmetic indifference to everyday re­ perceive the view from the road; he ality and the plight of the poor and dis­ agendas (Buchanan, 1989). Jacob's and Appleyard's contributions to the also examines temporal effects on the advantaged. environment. This not only stimulated San Francisco Urban Design Plan The latter were the concern of the City (1968 - 1974), and its extensions in the a new field of inquiry - environmental Sociable: this movement began in the 1980s reflect Appleyard 's second psychology - but forced urban desig­ 1840s in Great Britain and the 1890s in model - the citywide conservation­ ners to consider the human users of the the USA: its concerns were reflected in oriented approach. It occurs in a urban environment, a_nd to respond to reformer's attacks on slum conditions. context of rapid peripheral growth their perceptions of significant ele­ The advent of large scale urban rene­ around CBDs and is coloured by the ments of the environment. This ap­ wal in the 1960s caused a resurgence of perceptions of clients, who comprise proach therefore recognizes urban this position when Willmott showed conservation-oriented groups and pub­ design as a learning process, involving up the failings of British new town and lic authorities. The motives are conse­ a dialogue between users, other agents neighbourhood theory and practice, quently the conservation of old areas and designers, in much the same way and Gans led sharp social critiques on and their character against highway as people are in continuous dialogue urban renewal's impact and its intellec­ construction, urban renewal, and pub­ with their immediate environment tual underpinnings in American cities. lic housing. It emphasizes citizen (Rapoport 1977). This awareness of participation, infill and low cost im­ the man-environment relationship At different times during tµis century, all three emphases have predominated provements instead of large scale and with its emphasis on public participa­ generally disruptive development. tion - in planning and urban renewal - as changing circumstance lent them brought about procedural changes in credibility. It therefore rer'nains to be Appleyard's third model is described planning and urban design and an seen how the current drivel towards "a as a community-oriented approach. It awareness that good solutions require sustainable future" throu'gh "green" is found in stagnant industrially declin­ thoroughly researched briefs (Perin, planning and design wiilI manifest ing areas, where low to middle income 1971). itself. ! neighbourhood groups demand job creation, neigh6ourhood revitaliza­ Alexander's forays into computer­ Given this background how have these tion, improved livability and commun­ aided design in the early 1960s typified changing contextual conditions af­ ity development. Related projects attempts to unravel the design process, fected urban design theory? include citizen participation, piecemeal using the computer's ability to handle development, and low cost housing complexity. However the complex URBAN DESIGN MODELS improvements based on social environ­ nature o( design problems and their ment surveys. The most widely ac­ intractability even when using the There is some overlap between these claimed example is the Byker area of computer led to the abandonment of historical patterns and Appleyard's Newcastle, England. (Erskine and this tack and his admission of defeat (1981) proposal of three major urban Ravetz, in Hatch, 1984). (1971). Nevertheless this work stimu­ design models for the first world; as lated a considerable body of research, shown elsewhere, (Boden, 1989), no Both the second and third models the most significant result of which alternatives have been specifically de­ reflect City Social positions, differing was the recognition that design, and by rived for developing countries, where only in the targeted social groups. urban design is almost unknown as a extension planning, deals with "wicked Finally Appleyard suggested a fourth problems" (Rittel, 1967, Rittel and discipline. (I). potential rather than actual model - Webber, 1972). Basjanak (in Spillers, Appleyard's first model - the w Oil- I:! "' >< z "' -':i:- > C u :::,....,: a. URBAN DESIGN APPLICATION...... Data controlled. 'PLANNED' 'PLANNING' ----- - AUTHORITARIAN /TECHNOCRATIC....... COMPETITIVE (CAPIT AUST) TRANSACTIONAL ANARCHIC 3...z z.....,: I :c uz Ill @ Crowlng confualon lead... z z z..,: to ehao and non­ i!:8..,:.., -'"' "'..,: u t; porllclpotlon. cit:...z LL ::, ::a i3 0... "'. 00 3t z ::a II: *.. 0 * Cl "' cp. Appleyard. FIGURE 2: Authoritarian and Participatory Planning and Urban Design Modes. 52 each case in the "graphs" on the left parties, and of the formal implication INADVERTENT VERSUS DELIB­ margin of the Figure. for the city. Wolfe and Shinn's method ERATE DESIGN of developing design hypotheses re­ The matrix suggests a striking similar­ Wolfe (1970) found a pronounced lated to each interested party's perspec­ ity in the overall distribution of rela­ difference between the products in tive seems eminently suitable for this. tionships, despite the totally different cases where a deliberate emphasis on set of approaches being assessed - it is design is evident, and those where the worth noting that both urban design SUBTLE DIFFERENCES design comprises the inadvertent con­ and planning tend to be concentrated The degree of congruence may seem sequences of policies and strategies in the competitive and transactional impress_ive, but in order to present the framed with other ends in mind. He categories. In the case of ecological whole picture the less obvious differen­ argues convincingly for the benefits urban design, symbiotic system con­ ces need to be teased out to ensure the offered by the former, if they are serving values are assumed and taken comparison is accurate. applied by trained urban designers. to be the dominant criteria in assessing THE INTERPRETATION OF options, so that human behaviour VALUES AND AIMS CONTEXT would be coerced into conforming with ecosystem priorities. Although the aims and objectives have It is currently fashionable following been mentioned previously they need the arguments of the Kriers, Rossi and to be expanded on: as a vehicle for this others, to argue a contextualist posi­ SIGNIFICANCE OF PROCESS tion in architecture. yet there is need the writings of Taylor and Williams Dewey's distinction between "planned" (1982) and Appleyard and Jacobs for a deeper understanding of what is and "planning" societies crystallized (1980) are used. The former summarize meant by context: three divergent around the planning process involved. a considerable breadth of planning positions can be employed to illustrate Techniques which rely on abstracting experience with less developed coun­ this point. Neomarxists argue context issues and consequences, or provide tries (LDCs) in a particularly appro­ is structural, bound to political issues extensive data as a substitute for par­ priate format. The latter's manifesto is of class struggles, relegating other ticipation, are at odds with Dewey's almost contemporary with the Taylor contextual facets to a secondary posi­ third axiom of democratic involve­ and Williams work, and reflects the tion, (Fulton, 1985: 8). Environmental­ ment in the learning process. Forester views of two widely respected practi­ ists and conservatives argue that the (1983) translated this issue into opera­ tioner-academics in the field. Apple­ existing natural and built context tional terms: if process changes to yard and Jacobs list a range of aims should determine permissible changes accommodate participation, as it must, which at first glance overlap exten­ - through the degree of compatibility and if complex decisionmaking involv­ sively with Taylor and Williams's displayed towards existing ecology, ing "wicked problems" depends on (1982) planning objectives for develop­ character, scale, massing, land uses negotiation, mediation and therefore ing countries. Closer scrutiny however and social structures. Explicit tech­ protracted, messy sequences and reiter­ shows the urban designers display a niques for achieving a good fit include ations, then both planning and urban marked focus on the physical, formgiv­ planned unit development and impact design should have developed a basic, ing elements of the city and on their zoning (Morphet and Boden, 1983). yet fragmented cyclical proc dure. characteristics and placemaking capa­ Environmental psychologists hold that The question appears t en to be bilities, and the planners on political, urban contexts must also satisfy cer­ whether this fragmentary \ approach economic and social concerns and tain criteria related to complexity their resolution through policy. This (Rapoport and Kantor, 1967), order, could be achieved without l'lpsing into anarchy or stalemate - "doin'g good" at can be identified in Table 1 through (Smith 1974, Lynch 1976) and mean­ the relative concentrations of points ing (Rapoport, 1982) to ensure ade­ the·expense of not "being right". The under each issue. Note here the issue of quate stimulus and interaction be­ more parties involved the rhore skills the designer/ planner would i require in the concentration of power - whilst the tween users and environment, thereby negotiating and mediating disputes, planner's response is to confront this avoiding monotony, uncertainty or and in group dynamics. Wolfe and directly, as a political problem, the information overloads. urban designer is more interested in Shinn, (1970: 30-43, 100, 101 and 137) Cultural considera ions impinge on all in describing their Bellingham case the impact this has on the grain and diversity of the city fabric. these areas. Figure 4 presents a major study refer frequently to the problems set of determinants in societal attitudes of communication and consensus Neither mentions however that in this towards context. Boyer suggests that building which attend participation in country as in others, planning policies recent developments in America have urban design, and are similar to the are usually geared to constraining destroyed the balance between cultural difficulties planners have experienced other people's behaviour (as with and economic forces in the city; Gesell­ in this regard, (e.g. Dennis, 1972, and- zoning) rather than initiating new schaft (corporate capitalist) interests Gans 1968). The more conflict-ridden projects by direct intervention or the have dominated those of the Gemein­ or turbulent the decision environment, creation of conditions conducive to schaft or community. This position is the greater the need for urban desig- change, as happens with urban design supported by Nyberg (1988). ners like planners to estab,lish in ad- projects like Newton, the Waterfront, vance a clear grasp of the major issues and Uytenbogaardt's design for the Friedmann's (1982) response to the and options espoused by the various village centre at Hout Bay. problem was to argue the centrality of 53 the connection between genuine direct "Remote-controlled" predictive and issues) to community interpretations, democracy and an awareness of place: analytical techniques are appropriate reflecting a bias towards business both in the sense of rootedness and of for evaluating different courses of interests common in capitalist societies an identifiable "human" scale (Sale, action, not excluding the public. (Kirk, 1980). 1981). The ideals in Friedmann's view To achieve a symbiotic relationship, are typified by the Greek polis, and the SKILLS both the common and the unique medieval Italian commune. Lynch (1982: 108, in Ferebee) identi­ qualities of each discipline must be Context therefore has four basic di­ fied three central skills that urban recognized. The areas of overlap can mensions: political, social, economic designers should possess: generate a better mutual understand­ and cultural, integrated through the 1. A sharp sympathetic eye for the ing of each profession's role and aims. latter's context, but the role of context interaction of people, places and Better communication should also in planning is still debated between events, and the institutions manag­ reduce misunderstandings and resul­ those who argue that planning is ing them. The focus of intervention tant animosities, and broaden the supracontextual, or even universal in is place while the source of value isperspectives and insights available in its character, and those who admit the individual and his or her expe­ addressing problems. A thorough specific planning applications are rience. grasp of their intertwined history contextually bound; Teitz ( 1984:6) 2. A thorough grounding in the the­ should prevent the duplication of past mentions a truce between the generic ory, techniques and values of the errors and create opportunities for and specific perspectives, but Fore­ city i.e. urban design. future innovation. ster's rebounded rationality concept 3. An ability to communicate in writ­ demands that both urban design and ten, spoken and mathematical Procedural theorists in both fields have forms, and in graphic images. arrived at similar conclusions: the planning explore contextual issues wicked problems they face may not be more exhaustively. the underlined sections reflect the skills identified in the same way, or receive LEVEL OF ABSTRACTION in which the urban designer differs the same prioritization, but they are from most planners. With respect to characterized by similar complexity, One consequence of these differences communication skills most planners ambiguity, uncertainty and intractabil­ has been the more abstract character are insufficiently trained in the use of ity. Hence the significance for both of most planning techniques and pro­ graphics, while designers are often disciplines of Hoch's arguments in cedures relative to urban design. By its weak in verbal and written skills and support of his theory, i.e. that most very nature design intends to produce both are perhaps deficient in mathe­ planning (and as shown in Figure 2) a tangible artifact. Planning is often matics. urban design processes fall within satisfied with a prescription about future action. Both seek to implement GENERAL IMPLICATIONS Dewey's pragmatic paradigm and that planners or urban designers committed their proposals, yet start at opposite Perhaps it is correct that the two to a "planning" rather than a "plan­ ends of the spectrum (Senior and disciplines should have different em­ ned" society should begin by accepting Woods, 1984) and the bias assumed phases, but accepting this implies a an open democratic decisionmaking contains the seeds of success and need to recognize their potential com­ environment. Both disciplines should disaster. There is a difference between plimentarity. However, this has not embrace Forester's structures for plan­ dealing directly with people and their generally been accepted or practiced ning in bounded circumstances and De perceptions where they communicate until now in the Republic. With very Neufville's argument for a closer bond their concerns directly and concretely, few exceptions - such as the LUTS between theory and practice - itself a or even with charettes where specific plan for Johannesburg - the need for truly pragmatic notion. place-related community-based pro­ such a combined approach is perhaps posals result, and the more impersonal most evident in the functionalist­ · It is also possible in examining l the approach favoured by many planners, rational attitudes in planning as com­ differences to identify which planning (particularly in this country), in which pared to the wider ranging cultural approach is most appropriate and surveys replace dialogue, observation dimension of urban design - in partic­ compatible for a specific urban design replaces discussions, mathematical or ular the latter's emphasis on the signif­ situation, and vice-versa (Figure 3). computer simulations replace goal icance of the symbolic, experiential Furthermore the "inadvertent" nature formulation through public debate. If and poetic features of urban morphol­ of much planning-initiated design the planner risks producing a poor fit ogy. This "merging" of the disciplines justifies the use of urban design cogsul between proposals and context through has growing significance for the multi­ tants to tease out these unforeseen reliance on this indirect method, the cultural "new" South Africa. However consequences and to generate better designer runs the opposite risk, of be­ as illustrated in disputes over the environmental answers wiJhout jeo­ ing unable to identify generic princi­ environmental quality achieved in pardizing other planning concerns. It ples. redeveloped parts of Sandton, a d also suggests the importance of intro­ Consequently both disciplines should rezonings in Houghton, Johannes­ ducing a design dimension into prob­ strive, in our pluralistic and turbulent burg, our planning systems still favour lem analysis and policy formulation at public decisionmaking arena, towards functional/ rational concerns over the earliest possible stage of the plan­ open-ended processes with maximum emotive and poetic issues, and "fac­ ning process. This issue is particularly interaction between interested parties. tual" evidence, (i.e. economic or legal relevant for less developed countries: 54 FIGURE 3: Comparison of Planning and Urban Design Problems and Criteria. URBAN PLANNING URBAN DESIGN COMMENT PROBLEMS/ISSUES (SOURCE: TAYLOR & WILLIAMS) (SOURCE: APPLEYARD & JACOBS U.D. MANIFESTO I. DEMOGRAPHIC: I. Privatisation leads to private afflu- Planning is relatively comprehensive - changes in population ence and public squalor. in covering these fields but urban - age composition design focusses only on those aspects most likely to affect urban form. eg. How the concentration of power this century has brought about larger developments with inhuman scale of development. 2. ECONOMIC: 2. Giantism: loss of control. - poverty, unemployment, dual- closed off, defended precincts. ism, (formal/informal economy). - financial plight of urban governments. - overconcentration in primary centre. 3. POLITICAL: 3. Injustice. - power concentrated in hands of wealthy elite. - top-down decision-making. - polarization of urban: rural populations. 4. SOCIAL: 4. Loss of individuality: Urban design focusses on spatial - family and traditional values. loss of cross class/income expressions of social concerns. - crime and social pathologies. interaction. - health services. - educational services, relevance. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL: 5. Diversity spontaneity and surprise Both list the same number of con- - use and ownership of land. - urbanity cerns under this heading but less than - insufficient serviced land. - poor living environs: pollution, half have a similar emphasis. (TRANSPORTATION): noise, unsafe environs. - mixed land use patte'rn. - impersonal large scale projects.. - fime gram. I - centrifugal fragmentation. i - poor quality housing stock. - destruction of valued places. - adequacy of public ttansport. - sense of placelessness. - traffic mixture. ! 6. TECHNOLOGICAL: 6. Rootless 'professionalism' - the * These concerns would figure prom- - civil engineering international consultant with no inently with urban design in LDC's - transportation: public & local commitment. - need for but Appleyard & Jacobs were writ- private* participation. ing for the first world only. - health: water, wastes and stormwater. - management of services. 7. PROCCESS: 7. Not specifically discussed. Similar concerns about the need to - budget based incrementalist involve people, (see 3 and 4) but not style of planning in most about the areas in which this should LDC's. occur - socio political and economic - non physical policy oriented. often seen as an end in themselves in - economic bias. planning. - formal not informal bias. - clearer goals and objectives. - better management systems. - technocratic rather than socio- cratic bias. 55 FIGURE 3 Continued. CRITERIA 'Spiritual' criteria include security, identity, equity, respect, choice, participation I. Planning values must be 1. Liveability: sanctuary of family- responsive. rearing cycle: resting, recovery, privacy free of hazards. 2. Security: Physical (safety) eco- 2. Balance between individual and nomic (employment) legal (non- collective needs. capricious)+ social (design for community). 3. Consistency between objectives, 3. Authenticity and meaning: reveal policies and programmes. time origins and purposes. 4. Respect for people's psychological 4. Self reliance and justice: good identity and self respect; respect in environment for all. managerial areas. 5. Identity: respect social, religious 5. Identity and control - area and ethnic identities. Respect for belongs to residents/owners. 'core' values of communities. 6. Equity Economic: able to share in 6. Access to opportunity/ imagina- goods. tion and joy. Social: equal access to resources. Legal: equal access to legal machinery and rights. Managerial: access channels of communication to leaders. 7. Choice: choice of jobs 7. Choice of next experiences; choice about location alternatives. choice of association - openness to communities, and choice whether to be public life. politically active. - committed to neighbourhood and the city. 8. Participation Economic freedom 8. Process is vital: multiple small to run businesses as they wish. inputs rather few large ones. Social freedom - does pig. process strengthen people's involvement. ESSENTIAL PHYSICAL Managerial - does pig process QUALITIES encourage pp to become involved 1. Liveable streets and ' in the design, execution and main- neighbourhoods. tenance of projects/ programmes. 2. Minimum residential densities: 75- Legal: can pig proposals be modi- 150pp/ha fied or changed. 3. Intense concentration of land uses. 4. Integration of different activities. 5. Man-made environs define public Not possible through standards spaces. alone. 6. Many buildings in complex, fine Zoning usually works against all grain matrix. three of these. -· 56 as our cities experience the effects of deformed. to do so. The Masters degree in Urban urbanization, and the intensification of Design has accordingly been taught to development within the older inner EDUCATIONAL IMPLICATIONS architectural and suitably qualified suburbs, so the importance of these Three principles should apply here: planning graduates at the University of design skills becomes evident, if we are first find ways of incorporating the the Witwatersrand since 1976. to avoid the low quality environs one learning, dialogue paradigm of plan­ sees in parts of Hillbrow, or south of CONCLUSION ning and design into both program­ Marabastadt in Pretoria. The problem mes. Secondly, identify the commonal­ Clarifying the relationship between of housing urbanising squatters is not ities in their values, procedures and urban design and planning is of more simply quantitative in nature: the basic substantive elements, and com­ than theoretical interest. It is funda­ patterns and quality of built environs bine these, into programmes which will mental to identifying policy, procedu­ they establish will, as history shows, encourage both disciplines to work ral and educational changes required constrain the future form of our settle­ together. Thirdly ensure that those as­ to improve on the dubious past perfor­ ments: sensitive design frameworks are pects which differ are recognized and mance of planning (Dewar et al, 1978) therefore essential if resources and the taught as such. Postgraduate program­ in influencing the quality of the built human spirits that will be formed in mes should allow those who are cap­ environment, both generally and speci­ these contexts are not to be abused and able of developing skills in both areas fically in this country. ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL FACTORS FACTORS historic patterns family - extended fa Labour intensive demography technology institutions ROLE OF CONlEXT clustering of aroups - transfer of skills existing form is either. - transformed - expanded - ignored Future form is CULlURAL invented In response to historic egs. symbolism formal/historical interpretation structures COSMIC/lHEOLOGICAL nations could in some cases be seen as hovering over the cultural VARIED INVOLVEMENT May/may not indude sophisticated technology within the culture: it can be imposed or inherenl FIGURE 4: City Form Determinants. Intrinsic processes of change and growth in relation to culture. 57  MORPHET, G. AND BODEN, R. 1983. Struc­ BIBLIOGRAPHY ture and Development Planning and Impact ALEXANDER, C. 1977. A Pattern Language. FALUDI, A. 1985. The Return of Rationality. Zoning, Planning and Building Develop­ New York, Oxford University Press. Werkstuk 54. Planning and Demography ments. August 63 pp. APPLEYARD, D. AND JACOBS, A. 1980. Institute, University of Amsterdam. NYBERG, F. 1988. Seattle: Towards a Rhetoric Towards an Urban Design Manifesto. FEREBEE, A. 1982. Education for Urban of Place. Lecture University of the Mimeo. Berkeley, University of California. Design, Proceedings Urban Design Educators Witwatersrand. APPLEYARD, D et al. 1970. Street Livability Retreat, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 1981. Insti­ RAPOPORT, A. 1977. Human Aspects of Study. San Francisco, City of San Francisco tute for Urban Design. Urban Form. Oxford, Pergamon. Department of City Planning. FORESTER, J. 1980. Critical Theory and RAPOPORT, A. 1982. The Meaning of the BARNETT, J. 1982. An Introduction to Urban Planning Practice. JAPA 46:3 pp275-285. Built Environment. Beverley Hills, Sage. Design. New York Harper and Rowe. FORESTER,J. 1983. The Practical Politics of a RAPOPORT, A. AND KANTOR, 1967. Com­ BARTHOLOMEW, R. 1980. Urban Design - Rebounded Rationality, or How Administra­ plexity and Ambiguity in Environmental Some Basic Questions, UD lntnl, I, 2, ppSO, tion can be both Practical and Rational; Design. AIPJ 33:4 pp 210-221. 56. Paper. National Conference of American RITTEL, H. 1967. Some Principles for the BAZJANAK, V. 1974. In Spillrs, W. ed Basic Society for Public Administration. New Design of an Educational System for Design. Questions of Design Theory. New York, York, April 16-19. Paper. Washington University, St Louis, Elsevier, pp 3-19. FRIEDMANN, J. 1973. Retracking America - printed in Jnl of Architectural Education 26 BEACREGARD, R. 1990. Bringing the City a Theory of Transactive Planning. Garden 1-2(1971) pp 16-26. back in. JAPA, 56,2, p210-214. City NY, Doubleday Anchor. RITIEL, H. AND WEBBER, M. 1972. Dilem­ BODE:'\, R. 1989. The Crban Designer as FRIEDMANN, J. 1982. Urban Communes, mas in a General Theory of Planning. Work­ lnterpretanL lnpublished Ph D. Seattle, Self-management and the Reconstruction of ing Paper /94. Institute of Urban and lniver,ity of Washington. the Local State. Jnl for Pig Education and Regional Development, University of Califor­ BOLA'\, R. 1967. Emerging Views of Planning. Research 2: I pp 37-51. nia, Berkeley. A!PJ 33,4 pp233-245. FULTON, W. 1985. On the Beach with the SCOTT, M. 1969. American City Planning BOYER, \f.C. 1983. Dreaming the Rational Progressives. Planning 51:1 pp 4-9. since /890. Berkeley, University of California City. Cambridge Mass, MIT Press. GANS, H. 1968. People and Plans: Essays on Press. BlCHA7\A.,, P. 1989. What City? A Plea for Urban Problems and Solutions. New York, SENIOR, B. AND WOOD, E. 1984. Livable Place in the Public Realm, Architectural Basic Books. Cities: the Need for Comprehensive Design of Reviev.. 34, l l p3 l-33. HACK, G. 1980. Urban Environmental Design: the Public Environment. Arch SA, 5-6 pp 34- BCSKER, P. 1990. Urban Design in a Metro­ Urban Design as Public Policy. UD lntnl 2:1 35. politan Setting: a Case Study of Adelaide. pp 34-37. SMITH, P. 1974. The Dynamics of Urbanism. Town Planning Review, 61:1, pp21-40. HATCH, R. Ed 1984. The Scope of Social London, Hutchinson. CAMHIS, M. 1979. Planning Theory and Architecture. New York, Van Nostrand SPIRN, A.W.1984. The Granite Garden. New Philosophy. London, Tavistock. Reinhold. York, Basic Books. CHERRY, G. 1974. The Evolution of British HOCH, C. 1984. Doing good and Being Right SUSSKIND, L. AND OZAWA, C. 1984. Town Planning. Leighton Buzzard, Leonard Hill. The Pragmatic Connection in Planning The­ Mediated Negotiation in the Public Sector: CRANE, D.A. 1960. Chandigarh Reconsidered. ory. APAJ 50:3 pp 335-344. the Planner as Mediator. Jnl Pig Education A/A Jnl 33:5 pp32-39. HUDSON, B. 1979. Comparison of Current and Research 4;1 pp 5-15. DEWAR, D., UYTENBOGAARDT, R. AND Planning Theories Counterparts and Con­ TAYLOR,J. AND WILLIAMS, D. l982. Urban tradictions, APAJ 45:4 pp 387-398. Planning in Developing Countries. Oxford, HUTTON SQUIRE, M. 1978. Urbanism: A KIRK, G. 1980. Urban Planning in a Capitalist Pergamon. Comp_arative Study of Housing in Cape Society. London, Croom Helm. TEITZ, M. 1984. Planning Education and the To_wn. Cape Town, Urban Problems KNACK, R. 1984. Staking a claim on Urban Planning Profession. Jnl of Pig Education Research Unit. Design. Planning 50:10 pp 4-11. and Research 3:2 pp 75-77. DE BONO, A. 1970. Lateral thinking: Creativ­ KRIER, R. 1979. Urban Space. New York. TOON, J. 1987. The Role of the Town Planner ity Step by Step. New York Harper and Row. Rizzoli. in Urban Design. Australian Planner 25:1 pp DE NEUFVILLE, J. 1983. Planning Theory LEE, D. 1973. Requiem for Large Scale Mod­ 5-9. and Practice - Bridging the Gap. Jnl Pig els. AIPJ39:3 pp 163-178. WALLACE, D. 1979. Urban Design as Science. Education and Research 3:1 pp36-4S. LYNCH, K. 1960. The Image of the City. Ud Intnl I: I pp 10, 32. DENNIS, N. 1972. Public Participation and Cambridge Mass, MIT Press. WOLFE, M. AND SHINN, D. 1970. Urban Planners's Blight. London, Faber and Faber. LYNCH, K. 1972. What Time is this Place. Design Within the Comprehensive Planning FAINSTEIN, S. AND FAINSTEIN, N. 1971. Cambridge Mass, MIT Press. Process. HUD Demonstration Project, Uni­ City Planning and Political Values. Urban LYNCH, K. 1976. Managing the Sense of the versity of Washington. Affairs Qly 6:3 pp342-362. Region. Cambridge Mass, MIT Press. ZEISEL ,J. 1981. Inquiry by Design: Tools for FALUDI, A. 1973. Planning Theory. Oxford, LYNCH, K. 1981. Good City Form. Cambridge Environmental Design Research. Monterey, Pergamon. Mass, MIT Press. California, Brooks Cole. 58