La CUB has considerable skills and talent in-house and has produced much excellent work so the task of the INTA Panel was not to reinvent but to explore ideas with the CUB Team and introduce commentary on their current thinking and suggest new themes and directions which chime with their existing strategies. I was part of the international panel which included economists, planners, urbanists and architects from Japan, the United States, Netherlands, Germany, Singapore and the UK.

The background to Métropole 3.1
Consideration of the Bordeaux Metropole 3.1 takes place at an important point in time when long established approaches to urbanism, especially those principally concerned with object-based urbanism, are being superseded by new modes of practice and organisation, not only by established professions but also by citizens, communities and others involved in the transformation of territory.

The past 15 years have seen considerable positive change in the centre of Bordeaux and its riverfront. This transformation has seen the city change from an area of decline with decreasing appeal, limited transport infrastructure and a derelict waterfront into a growing city with a World Heritage Site at its core, with a contemporary tramway system reducing car usage and structuring development, together with a renaissance along the Garonne that has created popular communal spaces and attracted new development.

In contrast, the dispersed landscape of Bordeaux outside the core suggests the outcome of a long process of suburban and extra-urban development in which an easy route to building anew has been taken instead of a more considered approach. The results of this process are not wholly negative however and the complex mosaic of built and un-built that exists today provides many opportunities for positive change.

Models of change
At the same time, there is a need to define a model of change (whether growth, stasis or decline) that relies on intensification and compaction rather than perpetual horizontal expansion. Intensification and compaction suggests the retrofitting of low density suburbs and extra-urban areas with limited and governed centres where public transport is a deterrent for car usage and where walking distance is a key factor in determining development extent. This is not to say that some centres or focal points don’t exist already – they clearly do but the roles and performance of many of them – the retail parks, disconnected business parks, remote factories, and standalone university departments – are suboptimal.

It is worthwhile noting some of the design and structuring principles which are appropriate at a metropolitan scale. These include:

• settlement hierarchy, ratio of built to un-built with an emphasis on intensification around centres
• connections to landscape – natural resources and existing historical assets re-usefood production – local produce, allotments
• energy and smart grid – including live monitoring of grid and energy use
• biodiversity, habitats, productive land and the third landscape
• sustainable transport – emphasis on pedestrians, cycles and smart public transport networks
• role, function and number of centres – governance and citizen involvement, typologies of centres and their specification

Current plans describing the spatial structure of the city already refer to a number of nodes or centres relating to public transport and roads infrastructure. These in turn relate to linear corridor developments linking inwards to the city centre along transport routes. It is entirely positive to define some locations for centres but the actual specification of what these might be remains unknown or underplayed. It would be constructive to regard this specification as part of policy rather than an accidental accompaniment to real estate development.


Towards a centres strategy
It would be appropriate if the 27 municipalities that make up the CUB each had a focus around a multi-functional centre. In this way, governance could be linked to spatial identity and the local town hall. This would help to connect emerging forms of community engagement, user-led innovation and new forms of direct citizen co-investment in change to established municipal arrangements.

Of course there may well be more than 27 centres and some will not have an administrative function. So a positive area of endeavour might be to develop typologies of typical centre components. At this strategic level, the architecture itself is unimportant but local centres could and should have many different roles and characteristics. These could be positive combinations of:

• transport hubs as a basic requirement – tram stops, cycle hire and storage, car club/parking, local governance and civic administration, town hall – including places of worship, civil and humanist weddings, civic spaces
• business space, shared offices, micro-industries
• food production – shared allotments, vineyards, food markets and farm outlets
• waste – recycling points
• social spaces – play areas and sports facilities + passive greenspace and gardens
• places to live – with shops, residential, special needs housing, community centres
• existing areas – airport, business space, transport hub, shared offices, research and science
• education – schools, redefined college campus, university departments
• connection to greenspace – parks and gardens, natural areas, water-space
• digitally ready – free wi-fi zones, digital information on transport, energy use and more

Design principles at a metropolitan scale
In addition to this, it will be useful to think about some of the design principles as well as some of the ambitions of a centres strategy. The design principles would certainly include:

• the idea of enabling process rather than fixed outcomes
• development based on performance and investment criteria
• performance rather than aesthetics, content over form
• relations rather than objects – building interfaces with the public realm, adjacencies instead of wasted space, landscape experience linked to food and energy
• embracing energy, biodiversity, food, waste and water

The benefits of expressing a new model of change through a specific centres strategy will relate to the economy, the environment and the quality of life for residents of La CUB:

• economy: innovation, talent attraction, start-ups, localisation, resilience and diversity
• environment: energy hierarchy, sustainable lifestyles, broad but light environmental footprint, food, waste, water, transport and biodiversity
• quality of life: low cost of living, landscape, heritage, community cohesion, leisure, health care and well being

Part of this definition of a new model of change should also deal with agriculture, greenspace and the third landscape.

The value of greenspace
The dispersed nature of much of Bordeaux outside the World Heritage Site means that the city already contains much greenspace in the form of agricultural land, woodland, designed landscapes (such as parks and gardens) or simple as space left over after development has taken place or is otherwise undevelopable land in flood plains. A greenspace strategy could be a critical element of planning for Bordeaux at a metropolitan scale with significant positive implications for the economy, environment and quality of life.

In terms of the economy at a metropolitan scale, greenspaces are important as they support the local economy through food production and fuel crops. They retain skills in agriculture, wine growing and production, forestry, woodland management and related countryside activities. Greenspaces are also instrumental in defining the character of the Bordeaux area.

As a conspicuous element of the environment, greenspaces are central to enhancing the diverse character of the landscape, improving opportunities for outdoor recreation close to home and therefore decreasing the need to drive. They are also critical elements in enriching biodiversity by providing, maintaining or enhancing a complex mosaic of natural and manmade habitats.

In terms of quality of life, greenspace networks encourage involvement with the landscape either actively through care and production or passively through recreation. They can provide a canvas for engagement by individuals and families through community projects and create opportunities for public occupation and a process-driven greenspace development.

For these reasons, greenspace networks should be expressed through metropolitan strategy and planned rather than occurring as the almost accidental bi-product or leftover from real estate development. Also, as development in the metropolitan area starts to intensify around centres and transport infrastructure, there will be opportunities for the creation of new elements of the greenspace network. In this way, it is possible to develop typologies of void (greenspace) as well as typologies of built (housing, business and education) which come together critically at local centres.

• green and blue networks containing
• crop areas for food, (wine) and fuel
• diverse habitats
• gardens and other designed landscapes
• open land not in agriculture or forestry use
• social spaces and their connections with built areas

The Third Landscape
This is very much in keeping with the work of the French landscape designer Gilles Clément who has asserted for years that there should be an acknowledgement of a third landscape – or areas in which nature has gradually reasserted itself. Le Tiers-Paysage is a terrain classification describing abandoned spaces such as former industrial areas or nature reserves which are prime areas for accumulating bio-diversity and because these landscapes are places of indecision, bio-diversity thrives, giving ecological value to otherwise neglected areas. This seems to be an appropriate and inclusive way of looking at the landscape of Bordeaux which allows for the creation of a range of greenspace typologies through citizen involvement and co-design.
Summary
Bordeaux has taken remarkable steps over the past fifteen years to change perceptions, especially in the historic core. Now the time is right to focus attention on the peripheral areas and bring more structure and meaning to them, creating a balance between built and un-built and optimising the city with fewer grand projets and greater attention to concentration and intensification of the peripheral fabric.

The final report and documentation of INTA’s week in Bordeaux is available in French as a pdf here.

These short film clips featuring Lewis Mumford, author of the City in History, were recently published on the Planum website.

Before the end of 1961 the New York publishing company Harcourt, Brace and Co. had the first edition of Lewis Mumford’s highly successful book The City In History ready for publication. Two years later, in 1963, the National Film Board of Canada funded the production of six documentaries, each lasting 27 minutes, for a series entitled Mumford On The City. The material for the films, based on the book, was prepared by Mumford himself. The director Ian MacNeill wrote the film script and produced the various parts: The City: Heaven and Hell, The City: Cars Or People, The City And Its Region, The Heart of the city, The City As Man’s Home and The City and the Future. In 1963 Mumford was 68 years old and agreed to appear as the presenter of the six films, expressing his personal view about the future of the western city, interspersed with pictures of places, cities, archaeological documents, works of art and architecture.

The City in History remains a classic text of urban design. Mumford urged that technology achieves a balance with nature and hoped for a rediscovery of urban principles that emphasised humanity’s organic relationship to its environment. Forty-five years on, the film clips look incredibly old and the message delivered in a rather morbid and factious manner (to quote Jane Jacobs), with a slightly ‘Outer Limits’ or ‘Twilight Zone’ ambience. Yet some of the key ideas promoted by Mumford have increasing resonance with the sustainability and green agenda of the early 21st century. In the increasingly praxis orientated and commodified world of urban design, whether anyone is listening or not is another matter.

It has become fashionable to talk of networks of organisations, people, computers, transport and so on. In organisations there is talk of being more “networky” and getting away from the older more hierarchical ways of doing things. Conferences are organised around “networking” both formal and informal.

Yet, the more that you listen to this network talk the more you realise that people mean very different things by the term “network”. The purpose of this paper is to explore what network thinking means and how networks can be mapped and analysed.

Why is this important and useful? The structure of a network will affect how influence and information is distributed. Certain members will be potentially more influential because of their position in the network. Mapping the network can give guidance on the easiest ways to distribute information, the links that
should be there to improve the network and how to avoid bottlenecking. It is used by commercial and
government organisations to plot situations as diverse as:

• structures of trust, advice and communication within an organisation or group of organisation
• planning the development of network
• improving the functioning of project teams
• mapping communities of interest or expertise
• identify centres of expertise
• indicate key organisations and links to encourage community cohesion

What is a network?

The first thing to be said is that a network is not just a list. The term implies a set of connections between its members. These connections may consist of the flows of information , power, money or whatever but the implication is that an influence of some sort is passing from one to the other.

Networks can be dense or sparse – meaning that the number of connections is great or small. The total number of connections possible in any group of members where n is the number of members in the group is given by the formula:

Thus, a network of 10 members has a total of 45 possible connections. The density of a network is measured by comparing the number of actual links with the number of possible links and expressing this as a percentage. For all members of a network to be connected to it the number of links must be at least n-1. A well connected organisation will have a density of around 15% to 20%. Research shows that the best connected organisations allow its members to connect within two steps – ie that influence drops off sharply if it has to exert itself through more than two connectors. The exception to this is a strongly hierarchical organisation with well defined chains of command.

The following examples show the “kite” diagram developed by David Krackhardt of Carnegie Mellon University and used to illustrate the properties of a network. Ten people make up the network and they are related in different ways shown by the linking lines. The shading indicates how various members
perform according to a number of different measures.

Fig 1 – Numbers of Connections (Degree centrality)

This shows an assessment of how many connections members have. This is known as “Degree centrality”.
Diane has more connections to other members. Garth and Fernando are also well connected. Jane is the worst connected person in the network with only 1 connection.

But:

Influence over a network is not just a matter of how many connections you have. You may be connected to many people who have few connections to anybody else. Although degree centrality is easy to calculate it doesn’t tell the whole story.

Fig 2 – Shortest Pathways (Closeness centrality)

This shows how close various members are to all the others. This is measure of how central a person is to the workings of the network. Both Fernando and Garth are within 3 connections of all other people in the net. Diane is still central but is 4 connectors away from Jane.

This measure is important because research in organisations shows that influence fades if you need more than 2 links to get to another member.

It also indicates which members will have general influence over the network because of their position. If you want information spread fast, feed it to the most central members.

Fig 3 – Gatekeepers (betweenness centrality)

This shows a different sort of centrality. There are people who are the sole or main connectors to parts of the network. Links from the rest of the network to Ike or Jane all have to pass through Heather. She is a gatekeeper to a subsection of the network. This is known as “betweenness” centrality. People or
organisations in this position can have great influence on the flow of information.

This is good in that they ensure that the network is fully connected – but potentially harmful in that they can filter that information according to their own agenda or make the network vulnerable to their departure.

Practical uses

So how can we use network mapping and analysis to help our regeneration activities? We have been involved in a number of projects that have used such mapping.

• a study of community cohesion in Pendle, Lancashire
• organising a conference on links between organisations involved in environmental projects in North Lanarkshire
• working with Government Departments in England to encourage mutual learning in methods of Public Involvement
• comparing the organisational structure of the Crown Street project in Glasgow’s Gorbals at various stages of its development

The same procedure was used in each:

• interview or survey organisations with a common interest and get them to specify their working links to each other. This is either done by getting them to list these links or to draw them on a constantly developing map
• draw the simplest possible map of these relationships
• analyse the various forms of centrality and identify potential links that could improve patterns of Advice, Trust or Communication within the network and advise on key organisations that are central to the operation of the network

More examples
Fig 4 – Government Departments and Public Involvement

As part of a learning programme for Departments involved in Public Engagement, we asked participants to list the three organisations that they worked with most. These had to be operational links – sitting on the same committee didn’t count. This map is now being extended to show a wider range of organisations and to provide a “road map” for those concerned with public involvement. Shading shows organisations with the greatest betweenness centrality.

Fig 5 – Map of Organisations involved in Environmental Projects in North Lanarkshire

The map below was developed for a conference on development of a network based on environmental projects. This version was developed before the conference through a short questionnaire. A session in the conference further developed the map and this was used as a the basis for analysis that showed the existing and potential centrality of the local authority in developing the network – but also the shortcomings of links within the authority itself (yellow nodes).

Fig 6 – Map of Organisations involved in Community Cohesion in Pendle

This map was prepared using a series of interviews and leaving a basic map for completion by the interviewees. The subsequent analysis revealed a series of local “broker” organisations that acted as intermediaries between regional organisations and local projects. These are shown against a blue background and are totally connected – ie all brokers link with all other brokers. The network is particularly well connected compared to some other community cohesion networks in Lancashire.

Conclusions

1. As can be seen from the above examples, mapping can be a practical tool in defining a network and making some assessment of its likely performance. It is a well recognised technique that can uncover some unexpected issues and opportunities.
2. Simple networks can be analysed visually. Networks of any size will need computer support in drawing the simplest diagram and in analysing the various forms of centrality.
3. Maps can be used as “clickable” way finders on the internet. Each node can contain a web address that leads to an organisation’s website.

This post was contributed by Drew Mackie of Drew Mackie Associates

Willie Miller is a member of a number of teams chosen by the Improvement Service to deliver Design Awareness Training to Scottish local authorities.

As part of the team led by Drew Mackie, we delivered a well attended two day introduction to urban design to an enthusiastic and well informed group of planners and roads engineers from Scottish Borders Council. The team also included Matt Lally from the Matrix Partnership.

This was an enjoyable couple of days spent with a very interested group of officers who already have a strong grasp of urban design principles. Much of the discussion focused on the issues associated with trying to fit new development into the beautiful Borders landscape.

We subsequently undertook a similar training exercise for the staff and Councillors of Western Isles Council – Comhairle nan Eilean Siar – in Stornoway.

We have been commissioned by the States of Jersey to carry out an Urban Character Appraisal of St Helier. This appraisal of the urban character and townscape of the town of St. Helier is intended to be an aid to the process of preserving and enhancing the character of the town and a guide for policy formulation and the assessment of planning applications.

In particular, the study will identify key factors which contribute to character, and use these to provide an appropriately sophisticated and objective assessment of the character of the town, and the various character areas within the town. Our co-consultants are Drew Mackie Associates, Glasgow West Conservation Trust, yellow book and Malcolm Fraser Architects.

Scottish Enterprise Ayrshire have appointed us to carry out an assessment of the economic impact that has been achieved by the Ayrshire Paths project, focusing specifically on the village of Straiton in South Ayrshire.

Scottish Enterprise Ayrshire, with the support of local Councils, Scottish Natural Heritage and other bodies has proved a network of seemingly successful footpaths around Straiton, and other villages, but to undertake further work on footpath development, it is considered necessary to quantify the economic benefits of the work undertaken so far.

We will carry out a Baseline Review to consider the impact of tourism upon Straiton prior to the initiative through consultation with lead agencies, community representatives and tourism operators in and around the village.

A Benchmark Review will then examine the economic impact of walking in towns within Scotland. Finally a Current Use Survey should examine the behaviour, attitudes and spending patterns of walkers in and around Straiton using two questionnaire surveys of representative samples of visitors and locals during mid-April 2003 and mid-August 2003.

A study for RUDI and SCRAN, with Drew Mackie Associates as lead consultant, which examines some of the important characteristics of urban design in Scotland including resumes of major projects in Leith, Edinburgh, the Merchant City and Crown Street in Glasgow. The completed study has been published on the internet.

Viewed in this way Urban Design is not the design of whole areas by the one hand (‘Big Architecture’), the mere allocation of land uses, the landscaping of hard areas or the prettification of streets. Without a coherent framework, none of these things can be successful. The structure of an area determines what is possible. Whether it is the grid of streets or the patterns of plots, the structure will allow some processes and building types to take place and deny others. The Urban Designer is primarily an interpreter and designer of coherent structures: of the relationships of streets, squares and blocks of development rather than of these elements themselves. As Jonathan Barnett, the Urban Designer in charge of Manhattan in the 60s and 70s said, “Urban Design is about designing the city without designing the buildings”.

Viewed in this way Urban Design is not the design of whole areas by the one hand (‘Big Architecture’), the mere allocation of land uses, the landscaping of hard areas or the prettification of streets. Without a coherent framework, none of these things can be successful. The structure of an area determines what is possible. Whether it is the grid of streets or the patterns of plots, the structure will allow some processes and building types to take place and deny others. The Urban Designer is primarily an interpreter and designer of coherent structures: of the relationships of streets, squares and blocks of development rather than of these elements themselves. As Jonathan Barnett, the Urban Designer in charge of Manhattan in the 60s and 70s said, “Urban Design is about designing the city without designing the buildings”.

The key role of the Urban Designer is to recognise existing patterns, to enhance these or change them and to provide new patterns if needed. It is often the job of others such as Landscape Architects, Engineers, and Architects to design and provide the artifacts that make up the city. The structures that the Urban Designer manipulates must be coherent and robust, able to provide the framework for development over a long period of time and capable of interpretation by those who will control or design the physical fabric. People know when a place is not structured. Older towns have a sense of structure derived from the gradual development of patterns over many years: areas changed only bit by bit and the old patterns could still be discerned in new development. In the modern, city structure has often been lost as whole areas together with their street patterns have been swept away. The architect has generally lost the capacity for relating new development to the older matrix that surrounds it. The settlements therefore become disjointed, fragmented and incoherent.

Structure is intimately concerned with character. A well-structured place develops its own personality and encourages designers and developers to recognise and enhance this. This emphasis on developing coherent structures for areas is an approach to Urban Design that allows the development of quick clear solutions. It is not concerned with developing the detail of groundscape, wallscape or landscape. It is concerned with creating sequences of places, connections between new places and existing elements, and the methods required to implement these such as plans and design briefs.

A study for Enterprise Ayrshire of improvements which have been carried out in the village over the last ten years. The study focused on the relationship between environmental improvements, economic support for local companies and the community’s impressions of how the village had changed as a result of this work. We also carried out an assessment of best practice in village improvements throughout Scotland. We also used workshops to develop a methodology which could be applied to future work in other village.