Challenges for the London Plan The Plan as an Example of Strategic Planning LSE - 10 February 2003

1. Challenges for the London Plan The Plan as an Example of Strategic Planning LSE - 10 February 2003 Robert Upton RTPI

2. Differentiating Strategic Spatial Plans • The key questions - • What drives them? • Who owns them? • How do they expect to deliver?

3. Possible plans? • The rhetoric or the reality? • Plan as negotiation – agreeing a future • Plan as vision – seizing a future • Plan as contingent instrument – re-orienting a future • Plan as portfolio – multiple meanings, multiple consumers

4. Key issues in strategic plans (1) • What defines them - • Scale – the area within which to generate options • Horizon – the time within which to generate options • Uncertainty – which increases with time and area

5. Key Issues in Strategic Plans (2) • Drivers and levers - • Population – ‘where shall they live’? • Infrastructure and flows? • Growth drivers – ports and airports? • Environmental quality? • Management and funding (public and private)? • Vision?

6. Key Issues in Strategic Plans (3) • Internal mechanisms – hidden or exposed • Forecasts • Consultation, collaboration and consensus • Scenarios (1) – as tests • Scenarios (2) – as generators and tests

7. Abercrombie’s Greater London Plan (1944) • Prospero and The Tempest - Brave New World – or was it? • Broader geographic scope than current plan (Royston – Haslemere, Wycombe – Thames Haven) • A scheme – no phasing, except priority for ‘quasi-satellite towns’ • No adequate legal framework for delivery • Uncertainty about post-war central government role • A vision – ‘the picture aimed at’ • Emphasis on communities (the One and the Many)

8. Abercrombie’s means • Massive new building requirements • Continuing economic advantage/impetus (a north-south advantage) • ‘There can be no effective planning in the Greater London region without control over the size of its towns; there can be no control over town size without control over the location of industry and over its subsequent expansion.’ • Initial public sector impetus, private sector follow-through • Attention to detail - a sense of place

9. Ken’s London Plan (was Nicky’s) (2002) • Samson Agonistes? • Limited geographic scope – GLA area • Limited time horizon – 2016 • Limited control - ‘role will be mainly pro- active’ • Limited public sector funds – reliance on Housing Corporation and SRA (as was)

10. Ken’s means • ‘Six forces driving change - population, economic, environmental, lifestyle, technological change, and social justice’. But - • Global and world cities role paramount • Population set to increase by 700,000 by 2016 • Cannot (should not) be stopped - cannot be diverted • Key infrastructure decisions (rail, air) – outside GLA control • Uncertain interface with boroughs' plans • A more ‘first space’ vision than Abercrombie’s?

11. Regional Plan Association – Third Regional Plan (1996) • A Region at Risk – planning against the dystopic scenario • The Three Es – economy, equity, environment – equal the quality of life • ‘economic development is too often border warfare, as states within the region try to steal businesses from each other in a zero-sum game.’ • ‘social issues are either ignored or placated by a vast welfare system that fails to bring people into the economic mainstream’ • ‘environmental efforts focus on short-term solutions that attack the symptoms rather than the causes of problems.’

12. Bob Yaro’s means • Planning in a no-one-in-charge-world • the Three Es need Five Cs - greensward, centres, mobility, workforce, governance • No vision - or lots of disaggregated vision? • No specific time horizon – or a canny mixture of long-term, short-term targets? • But a genuine spatial plan, not a land-use plan • Keywords: Glue – Focus – Catalyst - Conscience

13. Strategic Planning in Hong Kong – • Visions shared and secret? • Abercrombie’s 1946 scheme - those migration figures … • 1972 Hong Kong Outline Plan – delivering not originating a housing-led vision • 1990 – a major shift – from housing to employment (flow-based) • 1990 – the secret vision – ‘accessing the deep hinterland’ - Hong Kong vs. Shanghai • Can you have a vision which is not shared?

14. Hong Kong means • Technocracy rules okay? • Characteristics: 20-25 year horizon • Scenario generation - 'the rule of nine’ • Scenario testing - all join in • Best performing hybrid option -premium on robustness • .. and then interpret and interpolate for action

15. Strategic Plan for Prague • Planning in a post-Marxist environment • A new approach to the management of the city’s development • Complex, programme document, based on agreement • Long term document - ‘ .. the time scale for the Strategic Plan .. is for the period 2015 to 2020’

16. Prague: how much agreement on goals? (%) Experts Public Culture 95 75 Learning 95 85 International contact 85 65 Science & research 85 70 Tourism 75 65 Services 70 75 Finance 65 50 Industry & population 45 45

17. Prague’s Five Main Themes ‘a system of mutually inter-linked strategic aims and directions’ 1. Successful and respected city (role and economy) 2. Kind and contented city (quality of life) 3. Attractive and sustainable city (quality of the environment) 4. Functioning city – efficient and reliable (transport and technical infrastructure) 5. Functioning city – dynamic and welcoming (management and administration)

18. Prague - some examples ‘… the self-administration, public and private sectors and the inhabitants of the city will …’ 1. Sensitive economic development … to retain and support the uniqueness of Prague which is of exceptional character … 2. Support .. a creative kind and enriching city [through] its traditions, values and potential 3. Support the development of a polycentric structure 4. Influence number and use of private cars … so that their negative effect is substantially reduced 5. Aspire to have the management and administrative components .. continually adapt to the changing needs of the city’s communities

19. A Lesson from the Port of Seattle • ‘Mr. Kanagat stated that a strategic plan is different from forecasting. He advised that a good strategic plan would have two good outcomes: 1) based on what is known now on critical factors to the bottom line, what possible futures imagined now and what could the Port do in those environments; and 2) can do multiple iterations as things change, a basic way of thinking about the future using same strategic template and planning accordingly, a frame of reference within strategic thinking.’

20. Don River Valley – 50 Year Plan • When a region loses purpose? • How do you find consensus? • What do you promise the current generation? • What about a low-intensity, background programme – • That re-creates long-term social and environmental capital?

21. Some Concluding Questions • Is strategic planning about paradigm shifts? • Is vision the basis of courage? • Who is really signed up?

22. Some Concluding Nostrums • My turn to be normative • Give yourself space • Give yourself time • Use scenarios to generate ideas • Use critical paths and phasing triggers • Take no decisions earlier than you need • Take no decisions later than you must