UDC Section 6 Implementation and Delivery
UDC Section 6 Implementation and Delivery
06 AND DELIVERY
6.1 Managing the design process 6.2 Stage one: getting started 6.3 Stage two: appreciating
the context 6.4 Stage three: creating the urban structure and making the connections
6.5 Stage four: detailing the place 6.6 Stage five: following up
Crescent Block, West Silvertown, London (Designer: Tibbalds Monro)
A review of the case studies makes it clear that in general success
emerges from:
DELIVERABLE
1 GETTING STARTED PRODUCTS
• Assemble steering group and core client team • Form a multidisciplinary project team
• PROJECT BRIEF
• Identify project manager • Define the project terms of reference, responsibilities • PROJECT
• Set project objectives and authority delegations EXECUTION PLAN
• Outline a strategy and its resource requirements • Establish overall objectives, scope of work • INITIAL PROJECT
and deliverables PROPOSALS
• Define budgets and funding sources
• Estimate team inputs and prepare a programme
• Decide lines of communication
• Encourage active community participation
• Establish review process for monitoring and control
5 FOLLOWING UP
• Confirm implementation and • Formalise design review protocol • IMPLEMENTATION
management arrangements • Monitor project implementation against STRATEGY
• Formally adopt Masterplan / briefs design principles, objectives and Masterplan intentions • INDIVIDUAL
PROJECT PROPOSALS
• Promote / market proposals • Agree updating procedures
• MONITORING
• Sustain community involvement REPORTS
• Create media interest
6 implementation and delivery 6.1 managing the design process
Quality Standards
• The Department of Environment,Transport and the
Regions in association with the Housing Corporation
(1998) ‘Housing Quality Indicators’.
• The Housing Corporation (1998) ‘Scheme Development
Standards’
Economic Feasibility
• Bentley et al (1987) ‘Responsive Environments’
summarises how to undertake an economic feasibility
check (Chapter 2).
• HM Treasury (1997) ‘Appraisal and Evaluation in Central
Government’– “The Green Book”‘The Green Book’-
Government Treasury
• Urban Villages Forum (1998) ‘Economics of Urban
Villages’.
Pointers on Tendering for Urban Design Consultants Identify the main driving force behind the project, whether this is
• Use pre-qualification procedures to select short list community-led, private partnership, local or other public authority.This will
(4–6 teams maximum)
inform the composition of a steering group or committee of local
• Give adequate time for bidding (4 weeks for pre-qualification;
4 for tendering). stakeholders, which may include residents, local government, businesses,
• With pre-qualified teams, concentrate on the assessment of institutions, community and special interest groups. Once formed, this
the team and approach for the assignment in hand.
group oversees the core client team, which has executive authority for
• Consider assessment systems prior to calling for
pre-qualification and bidding – and make them explicit. taking the project forward. A project manager, (or team leader/project
• Consider how to get best value for money.The idea ‘best is sponsor), is identified with the prime responsibility for co-ordinating and
cheapest’in this type of work is not appropriate. A two
delivering the project.
envelope system (Technical and Financial proposals), with the
financial proposals only considered between once the best
technical consideration has been agreed upon (covered by An initial appraisal undertaken by the client to define the key issues in a
Treasury Procurement Guidance Notes).
comprehensive, if preliminary, way is essential. An early seminar/think
• Subject to the European Services Directive 92/50/EEC
session of a multi-professional team and the client bodies can help
enormously in getting the basics in place. Project objectives are set, together
with an outline strategy as to how these are to be achieved and the resource
requirements, taking account of funding and resource constraints. Design
development considerations must be properly in place from the outset.This
information forms the basis of a project brief, which should be set out in a
formal document as part of the project execution plan, stating clearly:
• the people involved in the project, names and contact addresses;
• team inputs, responsibilities and authority-delegations;
• the overall terms of reference, objectives, scope of work and
deliverables;
• defined budgets and funding sources;
• any procurement constraints, lines of communication and
reporting mechanisms;
• estimates of the programme and review process for monitoring
and control.
Contextual studies for Granton Waterfront Such analysis may be carried out as part of a ‘Planning for Real’, or Design
Charette / Workshop programme, for instance, which provide useful ways of
brainstorming, consensus building and focussing community involvement.
The SWOT analysis provides the underlying rationale for the preparation of
design principles and objectives to aim towards. Before moving to the
next stage, the overall “vision”should be agreed, mutual benefits reached
between participants and initial concept ideas discussed, which will help
to focus Masterplan development.
Proposals now come more sharply into focus as to how the existing place
can be improved, new urban forms created and activities added. Advice
contained in Chapters 3 and 4 is fused together as the scheme takes shape.
For the project and client teams to evaluate the best way forward, it is first
necessary to agree on the assessment criteria .Typically this will combine
the design principles with community need, economic viability and
engineering feasibility. It is important that a land remediation strategy, if
necessary, follows the design intentions and not vice versa.Where a site is
heavily contaminated it will be necessary to revisit the design layout to
achieve the highest quality and most economic solution.The way
contamination is dealt with should be part of the creative design process.
Design development is an iterative process and will involve constant and
frequent reviews of all the issues as more information is obtained.
The base case then needs to be confirmed, which will include ‘do nothing’,
and options generated for comparison.These, ideally, offer no more than
three different strategic directions - even for a large site. Sometimes the
preferred way forward will be so apparent to the team that structured
options may be unnecessary. However, even in this scenario a management
decision making process must be documented to give a clear audit trail, and
facilitate a ‘best practice review’.
The client weighs the social and economic considerations (existing and new
markets, local and regional impact, costs, values, gap funding and funding
availability) against the design specifications and project objectives.This
forms the basis of an iterative dialogue between the client group and design
team, which leads to refinement of the scheme.
As designs are elaborated, ideas for development form, content and mix,
require more rigorous research and testing. Plan assessments may take
the form of environmental, community and/or traffic impact studies. A
financial appraisal will certainly be necessary to ensure proposals are
grounded in economic reality. Designs also need to be considered in
relation to:
• economic and financial parameters - using Cost Benefit Analysis and
cash flow projections;
• an appropriate delivery structure - whether a partnership, developer,
joint venture company or trust;
• management and maintenance responsibilities, particularly of open
spaces and shared access.
Publicising the draft Masterplan
A Development Framework or Masterplan is the likely output of this
References stage - which is still in draft form until more detailed proposals are worked
Community involvement up - but this may be enriched with more detailed urban design guidelines
• English Partnershps (1998) ‘Brick by Brick: How to develop a and indicative ideas for individual schemes.This ‘package’may form the
community building’.
• Groundwork Hackney (1999) ‘Changing Estates’(community basis for a discussion with the planning authority in relation to an outline
involvement in landscape projects on council estates:
020 8985 1755) planning application or development agreement.
• Mayo, E. et al (1997) ‘Taking power: an agenda for community
economic renewal’, New Economic Foundation, explains
different community collaboration techniques. Parkes, M A period of review will follow within the project team, client body and also,
(1995) ‘Guide to Community Planning and Development’
(LPAC) more widely, as community feedback is encouraged via the use of
• Parkes, M. (1995) ‘Guide to Community Planning and
Development’, LPAC exhibitions, workshops and focussed meetings as necessary.
• Urban Design Group (1998) ‘Involving Local Communities in
Urban Design - Promoting Good Practice’(a special report
provided in the Urban Design Quarterly, Issue 67, July)
provides a good source-list on ways of organising design
management.
• Wates, N. (2000) ‘The Community Planning Handbook’,
Earthscan
Design competitions
• Nasar, J.L. (1999) ‘Design by Competition: making design
competition work’, Cambridge University Press
Design rationales
• Hayward, R. (1993) Rationales and the Practice of Everyday
Urban Design in ‘Making Better Places - Urban Design Now’
(Eds. Hayward, R. and McGlynn, S.) explains the use of urban
design rationales.
Masterplan briefing
• English Partnerships (1999) ‘Allerton Bywater Development
Brief’(Stage One and Two) provide good references for
comprehensive Masterplan briefing documents.
• Urban Task Force (1999) ‘Towards an Urban Renaissance’
provides a checklist of design issues to be covered in a
Masterplan (see Figure 2.10 (p.74).
Development trusts
• Department of Environment (1988) ‘Creating Development
Trusts: Good Practice in Regeneration’provides an
explanation of different development trust models and a
series of case studies.
As designs become more detailed, priorities are identified for short, medium
and long term implementation.These may be formalised into an
Action Plan or form part of the revised Project Execution Plan, with detailed
design development and feasibility studies focussed on priority sections of
the overall project - targeting realistic ideas for helping communities to
achieve the vision of their future. Masterplan proposals are given further
definition with the use of sectoral plans (‘layering’ transport routes,
landscaping and building form, for instance) and three-dimensional
imagery including perspectives, computer or physical modelling and
axonometrics, as appropriate.
Formalising design review protocol ensures that the client body keeps its
‘eye on the ball’when it comes to safeguarding design quality as defined in
the project objectives. It may be appropriate to retain the Masterplanner in
an advisory capacity when the client is considering development of the
individual plots or phasing of the overall project. Design Review Panels,
initiated from the project outset and comprising multi-disciplinary
professionals and community representatives, can help to make sure
everyone is pulling in the same direction. Project implementation is
monitored against Masterplan intentions, design principles, objectives,
agreed outputs and targets. Updating procedures are then agreed upon
so that designs remain up-to-date. As individual projects are implemented,
periodic reviews are carried out, assessed against best practice, using
perhaps for example the Compendium as a point of reference.