Planning in London

Design for a greater London and the London Plan

The end of May saw the publication of both the initial proposals for London's Spatial Development Strategy, now re-titled The London Plan and the Design for a Greater London report by RIBA London region. Simon Foxall reports. [from PiL 38]

Douglas Adams in the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy noted that "The history of every major Galactic Civilisation tends to pass through three distinct and recognizable phases, those of Survival, Inquiry and Sophistication, otherwise known as the How, Why and Where phases. He went on the characterise these by the questions 'How can we eat?', 'Why do we eat?' and 'Where shall we have lunch?' Towards the London Plan is similarly divided although it goes for the subtly different; Why, How & Where categories: Why does action need to be taken?, How shall action be taken? and Where will the action be?

Design for a Greater London seeks to address the next question in line and one omitted from Adam's taxonomy i.e. 'What shall we order for lunch, or having determined that action is necessary', establishing the quality of the resulting intervention. Towards the London Plan starts with a recognition of the current condition of London, a city with major problems but also great strengths and then outlines a series of six challenges and aspirations a vision for the future. It identifies clear areas for action, housing and transport in particular, although curiously skimming over schools provision as a major urban generator, and locations predominantly the Thames Gateway but also the Wandle Valley and an area to either side of the A/M40 described as the Western wedge. But it leaves the specifics to the Plan itself a first draft is due in late 2001/2 -following the upcoming period of consultation.

The Design for a Greater London report, produced with the participation of a wide range of professional bodies, restricts itself to proposals for improvements to London's public realm and makes a series of suggestions as to how ideas already implemented in London and elsewhere might be reproduced across London. In this it fits well with the desire of the mayoral document to improve the public realm and takes it to the next stage of development. Both documents emphasise the key principle of quality in the urban design of London, something that has often been lacking in the way we have dealt with our public spaces, streets and facilities.

The GLA will have to work hard to maintain this principle against the cost-cutting tendencies of public procurement and the general lack of generosity to works that do not have a direct and obvious payback. But as the examples illustrated in both documents show, high standards are possible and have already been achieved on a wide range of projects. The need is to make such standards the norm and the GLA can lead the way in ensuring that all building and environmental improvement projects it carries out or supports are designed and built to the highest quality. The Design for a Greater London report also places great importance on the need to involve Londoners in the debate on the city's built environment and to encourage public participation in the planning process. It recommends a London Architecture Centre should be created to promote excellence in design and to exhibit aspects of London's environment and major proposals for the city together with permanent interactive models, both physical and virtual.

The report also recommends promoting demonstration projects with appropriate seed funding to show the benefits of well designed small interventions in all areas of London. Many of the changes London requires in its public realm are small-scale works in individual streets and town centres; the creation of pocket parks and well designed and positioned street furniture. Not necessarily proposals that find a place in strategic plans, but work that needs recognition and support. London has long suffered from short-term thinking and under-investment in its basic fabric and Towards the London Plan recognises this, identifying a range of 'significant and, in some cases, worsening problems.' It also (and frequently) gives London the fashionable label of 'World City', indeed 'the UK's only opportunity to maintain a world city', and spells out London's strengths in support of this. The document can be read as a necessary proposal to maintain this status. Yet the document does not discuss what constitutes a world city or establish what standards we will have to achieve to maintain London's position.

I would suggest a number of criteria: An ever changing city, that leads the world in its achievements A confidant city with a living and vibrant culture, constantly adding to and redefining its heritage An inclusive, diverse and welcoming city that shares its achievements with the rest of the world and then: A successful city for commerce and business A well-educated, knowledgeable city A healthy city A prosperous city with a relatively even spread of prosperity A city with a strong identity and an active citizenship who identify with it. A city that everyone in the world would want to visit at least once in a lifetime. The ambition of the London Plan should improve on the patchy ability of London to fulfil these criteria but will it be bold enough to go all the way?

The Design for a Greater London report can be obtained from www.designforlondon.com Towards the London Plan is available at www.london.gov.uk/mayor/ strategies/sds/index