Town and Country Planning in the UK

Cullingworth, Barry

doi:10.4324/9780203462560

Cited by 59 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Initially, an anti-urban narrative coupled a more dirigiste approach to planning with the need to protect the countryside from the city. 'Overspill' of housing and other development from existing settlements was to be accommodated in planned new towns or town extensions (Cullingworth et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Under the radar? ‘Soft’ residential densification in England, 2001–2011

Bibby

Henneberry

Halleux

2018

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban compaction policies have been widely adopted in developed countries in pursuit of more sustainable cities. Compactness is achieved through a process of 'densification', of developing and using land and buildings more intensively. However, empirical evidence on the processes and outcomes of urban densification is lacking. The paper addresses this lacuna. It considers densification in England, a country that has long experience of applying policies of urban containment and consolidation; and one where new data sources allow the analysis of recent land use change at a level of detail not hitherto possible. In England between 2001 and 2011, the bulk of additional dwellings were accommodated within urban areas, increasing their density. Yet, there were wide inter-and intra-regional variations in the pattern of densification: for example, in the contributions of large scale, formal development and of small scale, informal, gradual change -of 'hard' and 'soft' densification -to the process. The significant differences in local experiences of densification that result raise major issues for policy.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Under the radar? ‘Soft’ residential densification in England, 2001–2011

Bibby

Henneberry

Halleux

2018

Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To deal with these issues, a deep city planning reform is necessary, like those adopted since the 1970s in France, Germany, and Great Britain [30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37]. These European countries removed some decision-making prerogatives from municipal autonomy on the sizing and localisation of residential, industrial, and service areas.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning Tool Mosaic (PTM): A Platform for Italy, a Country Without a Strategic Framework

Fiorini

Zullo

Marucci

et al. 2021

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The following work proposes the utilisation of a technical device named “Planning Tool Mosaic” (PTM), defined as a total homogeneous and standardised framework for the principles contained in municipal regulatory plans: the assignment of zoning, legends, and technical rules. The 300,000 km2-broad national territory is divided into nearly 8000 municipalities. Each of them refers to a distinct regulatory plan and then to a distinct regulation on local buildings, infrastructure, and social services. This level of planning tool is the one that has most impact on the territory. This highly fragmented scenario should be driven by upper-level regulation. Although protocols and guidelines are in force, they are almost irrelevant compared to the impact of regulation at the local level. This process is a European example of city planning mismanagement that needs to be brought to the broader attention of the European technical/scientific context. The PTM, though intervening when municipal plans are already in effect, introduces an element of social and political transparency to planning before transformative events occur. It also provides a continuous framework on the probable future of territories, thereby overcoming the current opacity with regard to public cognition of future arrangements.

show abstract

“…Adjudging an intervention to be successful is relative to our disposition and perspective, for policies, plans or programmes might deliver benefits to some and increase hardship to others (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2006). While Wildavsky (1973) notoriously argued an all or nothing assessment in defining successful implementation, policies, plans or programmes will typically achieve some but not all intended outcomes; neither an entire success nor outright failure (Alexander and Faludi, 1989;Talen, 1996).…”

Section: Development Of Implementation Theory In Urban Planningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Such theories have been categorised as either substantive or procedural; while the former paints an overarching picture of practice, the latter offer something of a road map for improving practice (Sandercock, 1998). The relationship between theory and practice in urban planning has been somewhat fractious, with practitioners often deriding scholarly insight as too academic and insufficiently applied (Cullingworth and Nadin, 2006;Taylor, 1998). This problem of theoretical representation is perhaps hindered by urban planning practice being a somewhat ill-defined and schizophrenic spatial place making activity which resists definition (we reference it here broadly; encompassing strategy development and ensuing regulatory exercises).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting implementation theory: An interdisciplinary comparison between urban planning and healthcare implementation research

Smith¹

2017

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementation remains a somewhat neglected dimension within urban planning research after a surge of interest during the 1960s and 1970s in contrast to related cognitive disciplines, particularly healthcare research which has seemingly grappled with the phenomenon with more gusto. Here, we assess the state of urban planning implementation science and compare these efforts with healthcare frameworks explaining implementation to ascertain what new insights can be gleaned on how we investigate the phenomenon.

show abstract

Town and Country Planning in the UK

Cited by 59 publications

References 0 publications

Under the radar? ‘Soft’ residential densification in England, 2001–2011

Under the radar? ‘Soft’ residential densification in England, 2001–2011

Planning Tool Mosaic (PTM): A Platform for Italy, a Country Without a Strategic Framework

Revisiting implementation theory: An interdisciplinary comparison between urban planning and healthcare implementation research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About