A Critique of Urban Design Framework Services Description

Document Type : Technical Paper

Author

Fculty Member, Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran.

Abstract

Urban Design Framework is a documentary qualitative study employing a process-oriented approach whose application requires a similar procedural planning process at the city level to comply with that. The absence of such a fundamental basis and the lack of systematic knowledge of the content and outcomes of this approach may lead to an inappropriate result that undermines its application. There are basic challenges in understanding the concept of the Urban Design Framework and the application of this approach as a whole. There is also a contradiction in the procedure of activities. Apart from that, its contents and outcomes are subject to ambiguity. However, the fundamental problem of this service description is its integration within the wider framework of the statutory planning document. Reviewed Urban Design Framework service description includes two levels of studies, whose incorporation into one toolkit is not only unnecessary but also inappropriate.  The reason lies in the feasibility of procedures. A three-dimensional Master plan is a supplementary tool introduced in this toolkit, which has basic ambiguity in its title, content, and applications. The most important challenge posed by this Master plan is associated with a procedural aspect and refers to the timing of its application, which is supposed to happen at the same time as the Framework itself is being developed, without the participation of stakeholders, beneficiaries, and the interested groups. In addition, service description in this level (Master Plan) has posed challenges in terms of the content and the nature of outcomes. 

Keywords


Christmann, G. B., Ibert, O., Jessen, J. & Walther, U. J. (2020). Innovations in spatial planning as a social process–phases, actors, conflicts. European Planning Studies, 28(3), 496-520.
Davoudi, S., & Strange, I. (2008). Conceptions of Space and Place in Strategic Spatial Planning. Abingdon: Routledge.
Dühr, S. (2007). The visual language of spatial planning: exploring cartographic representations for spatial planning in Europe. London: Routledge.
Faludi, A. (2000). The performance of spatial planning. Planning practice and Research, 15(4), 299-318.
French, S. (1988). Planning under Pressure: The Strategic Choice Approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 39(11), 1067–68.
Harary, F., Jessop, N., Luckman. J. & Stringer, J. (1965). Analysis of interconnected decision areas: An algorithm for project development. Nature, 206(4979), 118-118.
Mastop, H. & Needham, B. (2000). The Performance Principle in Strategic Planning. In Salet, W., & Faludi, A. (Eds.), The revival of strategic planning: Proceedings of the colloquium. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Mastop, H. & Needham, B. (2000). The Performance Principle in Strategic Planning. In Salet, W., & Faludi, A. (Eds.), The revival of strategic planning: Proceedings of the colloquium. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Morphet, J. (2011). Effective Practice in Spatial Planning. London: Routledge.
Roodbol-Mekkes, P. H. & Van den Brink, A. (2015). Rescaling spatial planning: Spatial planning reforms in Denmark, England, and the Netherlands. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 33(1), 184-198.
Salet, W.& Faludi, A. (1999). The revival of strategic planning: Proceedings of the colloquium. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.
Strydom, W., Puren, K.. & Drewes, E. (2018). Exploring theoretical trends in placemaking: Towards new perspectives in spatial planning. Journal of Place Management and Development.
Zekavat, K. (2018). Jay-Gah-e va Mohtava-ye Asnad-e Tarahi-ye Shahri dar Nezam-e Barnameh-Rizi-ye Fazayi [The place and content of urban design documents in spatial planning system]. Tehran: Azarakhsh.