• an analysis of the performance and prospects for the town centre
• an aspirational, long-term vision for the town centre, and
• proposals for short-term action

Background

Glenrothes was constructed in 1948 under the New Towns (Scotland) Act.  It grew and developed through a strong tradition of community and public sector partnership and is now home to approximately 40,000 people. In 2009, Glenrothes town centre “won” Prospect magazine’s Carbuncle award for the most dismal place in Scotland.  Like most of our consultees we think the award was unhelpful and unjustified. The continuing, though declining, commercial vitality of Glenrothes and the high standard of management in the Kingdom Centre is in marked contrast to the depressed state of some failing town centres in Scotland. The town’s large working population, the attractive planting and floral displays, and the year-round popularity of the Rothes Halls for entertainment, community events and business meetings are all positive assets.

In reality, Glenrothes is a sizeable town without a true town centre. There is only limited out of hours activity and nothing that could reasonably be described as an evening economy. The outdoor spaces are grim and cheerless and leisure facilities such as bowling and night clubs have failed. The lack of useable, quality public space means there is no natural venue for outdoor events, farmers’ markets or community celebrations. Glenrothes is a successful place with a strong community spirit, but it is badly let down by its town centre. Many higher income residents of the town and the wider catchment area choose other centres – in Fife and beyond – to shop, and for leisure, entertainment and culture. The town centre’s most loyal customers are from lower income groups, and this is reflected in the retail offer.

The causes of the town centre’s decline are complex and deep-seated. Some are unique to the history and development of Glenrothes, while others reflect the legacy of the New Towns. Above all, the fortunes of the town centre have been shaped by powerful socio-economic forces – choice, competition and mobility – which have given rise to new forms of retail and leisure, and a new geography of consumption. No places are exempt from the pressures arising from these trends and there is no point in wishing for a return to the past.

Focus groups

Four focus groups were held in June and August 2010.  The focus groups revealed almost unanimous dissatisfaction with the condition of Glenrothes town centre. As far as many people are concerned, Glenrothes “doesn’t have a town centre”:

• the quality of the retail offer in the Kingdom Centre has been affected by the recession
• out of shopping hours the town centre is almost deserted and there is a very limited and fragmented evening economy
• the Rothes Halls complex is a valuable facility, but it could contribute more to the vitality of the town centre
• in spite of clear efforts to maintain them to a high standard, parts of the town centre are now regarded as ugly and unwelcoming
• it is a car-dominated environment.  Although pedestrian connections to surrounding neighbourhoods have been improved, these links could be stronger.

We concluded that Glenrothes is a popular, attractive and successful community that is let down in some critical aspects by its town centre. In an age of mobility and choice, only a small proportion of local people (and lower than expected from the rest of Fife) choose Glenrothes town centre.  Further that the town centre is a child of its time and the problems it faces are typical of shopping centres in other former New Towns.  At the same time, Glenrothes is arguably the best kept New Town in Scotland and has many positive attributes.

Issues and options

There are two main groups of issues facing the town centre – its environment and its history.

There is a generally held perception of a bleak and unwelcoming environment and in particular:

• the architecture of the town centre is uninspiring – only St Columba’s church and the 1950s shopping precinct at the east end of the town make a positive contribution to the townscape
• a rich landscape setting, but little public realm in the town centre – although tidy and well maintained, none of it is high quality with significant areas of surface parking and service yards
• being able to find one’s way around and read the layout of the town is particularly difficult and  the bulk of the Kingdom Centre discourages north-south pedestrian movement and is an absolute barrier when the shops are closed

The factors contributing to decline of the town centre are complex and deep-seated:

• development of the town centre lagged behind the construction of new houses: so from the beginning this established the residents’ shopping patterns of going elsewhere and it has never quite recovered
• the Kingdom Centre is an enclosed indoor mall – fashions change and in the past 10 years in particular there has been a strong push to return to traditional streets woven into the urban fabric
• small and medium-sized town centres have been severely squeezed by  profound changes in the way we shop and spend our leisure time: driven by unprecedented levels of consumer choice and personal mobility

Glenrothes town centre is therefore a product of its time and needs to adopt the approach of Harlow, Bracknell and others who are trying to re-invent themselves.  We also cautioned that town centres may not be “the heart of the community” these days due to changing lifestyles, choice, competition, mobility and the “captive” market of low income customers.

Any long term plans for the future of the town centre should:

• embrace a wider area adjacent to the town centre
• make the wider town centre an attractive place to shop, work and spend leisure time
• create a new civic centre and business district
• re-investment to reposition the Kingdom Centre
• develop the non-retail and civic components and the centre and reduce the impact of cars
• improve access within the town centre and with the rest of the town
• potentially develop a new street grid of boulevards, walking and cycling networks

New directions

The problems facing Glenrothes town centre are deep-seated and systemic. The current budgetary constraints and fragility of the economy reinforce the reality that there are no easy answers and no quick fixes. Many people at the focus groups made the point that there is little point in promoting the centre when the product is poor, or in encouraging people to walk where the pedestrian environment is hostile.  At the same time, there is the need to avoid impracticable grand plans.  In current market conditions the prospects of a comprehensive re-development of the Kingdom Centre are remote.  However, Fife Council, the local community and business interests have started a process of taking a fresh look at the town centre together and of looking at more than just physical answers to the town centre’s problems and this is a positive way forward.

• the current policy context for Strathaven town centre
• our appraisal of the town centre’s physical environment
• discussions with the local community – including young people, community groups, businesses and residents – to identify local concerns, aspirations and ideas for change

The key issues relating to the physical environment of Strathaven are firstly a historic environment that is appreciated and well liked but that is in need of considerable maintenance and repair. Coupled with this, public spaces and streetscape are dominated by traffic and fall well below contemporary expectations for comfort and usability. It is a relatively heavily trafficked environment in which large goods vehicles penetrate the historic core at the expense of a comfortable pedestrian environment. Although the built environment of Strathaven town centre is attractive, interesting and largely intact, it requires some major interventions. It is dispersed over a relatively wide area and is diverse and multi-faceted but requires better social infrastructure. There is also a need to link up greenspace into a cohesive network of facilities.

From the analysis, a set of guiding principles and a programme of proposals were established which act as a framework for the action programme and act as a test for any new projects or proposals that might emerge:

• think LOCAL: Does the idea strengthen the local community and support locally-owned businesses?
• think YOUNG: Does it improve the quality of young people’s lives?
• think ENTERPRISE: Does it promote the town centre as a place to trade and exchange goods and ideas?
• think TOGETHER: Does it help local people, businesses and public services to work better together for the good of the town centre?
• think CHARACTER: Does it enhance the town centre’s charm and character?
• think OUT OF HOURS: Does it attract people to the town centre at evenings and weekends?

The programme of proposals consists of thirteen prioritised action themes. Although emerging from the local community, these have also been informed by the consultant team’s experience elsewhere. Themes which were considered to be essential by the local community included culture and heritage, the built environment, maintenance and repair, marketing and promotion, public spaces, and traffic and parking.

The recommended next steps include:

1. Identify roles and responsibilities – the Council, the Town Centre Steering Group and local organisations need to agree who will be responsible for taking forward the action themes identified in this report and then review these roles regularly
2. Input and influence strategies – successful implementation of the action programme will depend on integration with other strategies and plans, particularly future reviews of the Local Development Plan and Local Transport Strategy. We recommend that the study’s guiding themes and action programme are incorporated into supplementary planning guidance for Strathaven town centre.
3. Develop, refine and fund projects for delivery – prepare a delivery programme with outline costs, timescales and responsibilities, taking account of varying amounts of preparatory work required for different projects.
4. Ongoing promotion and PR – to ensure that the action programme takes root.
5. Further survey work – particularly on the impact of the new Sainsbury’s store on town centre businesses, we suggest around 12-18 months after its opening (i.e. mid-late 2011).
6. Monitor progress – regular review of progress using existing governance and monitoring systems.
7. Maintain dialogue – between the local community and Council officers, particularly those involved in the transport and planning functions. Successful implementation will rest upon trusting relationships and good communication between all concerned

The programme of action proposals and next steps emerging from the study will be used to inform the medium term of the local Adam’s Community Trust, as well as other stakeholders’ activities in the town including South Lanarkshire Council.

We held workshops with the Harbour Commissioners and a range of public and private sector bodies and discussed a range of strategic propositions from which we developed some conceptual ideas for the future development of the harbour lands. The broader strategic concept is based on three principles:

a) to position Coleraine within the wider inter-regional maritime context

b) to establish a strategic vision for the Lower River Bann as a major economic and tourism driver for the region
The spatial concepts for the harbour lands themselves indicate how a range of development scenarios might be considered from a largely maritime industrial complex to a more significant reappraisal of the existing Dunne’s site as part of the development mix. The concepts are meant as tools for further consideration of the site’s future, not as development solutions and they provide the basis for further discussion and investigation. From left to right, options A to C – click to enlarge:

Option 1: Develop Marina at Cushowen

The initial site appraisal and financial appraisal looked at a 100 berth marina with the full complement of storage and maintenance facilities situated on and around the Cushowen site at the most northern end of the Harbour
lands. Further discussions, both at the workshop and the board have indicated that this may not be the most suitable location, in terms of operational viability and in commercially realising the assets of the site. (left diagram)

Option 2: Develop Marina beside existing Dunnes site
This option starts to free up more land for leisure-based activity and development options. This option would necessitate agreement on the lease with T-Met or be part of a longer term plan post 2021. This option also allows for additional pontoon berths at the Cushowen site for larger vessels and allows the storage, maintenance and boat lifting facilities to be positioned at the top end of the site, this releasing more land for re-development. It also permits a more strategic approach to the development and the ability to bring in periphery sites in public and private ownership as indicated in he centre diagram.

Option 3: Develop Marina on existing Dunnes site
Option 3 takes the principals of Option 2 another stage further and is the most ambitious of the three. It positions the marina on the existing Dunnes site. Again, this would require a partnership with Dunnes and re-location of the existing store, perhaps to one of the new retail developments in the town centre. The advantages of this option are three fold. Firstly, it further optimises the land for redevelopment, both within the existing site boundary and in the surrounding area. Secondly, it provides a possible solution to the navigation of the old bridge by incorporating a lough gate and thirdly, it goes the furthest in realising the ambition of creating a “River Town” where the harbour lands and the town centre are fully integrated. This will have positive economic benefits for the commercial viability of the harbour itself and the wider town and region. Studies have shown that the most successful marina developments are those which have the best linkages to the town they serve.

Clearly there are a number of delivery issues which the Harbour Commissioners are well aware of including clarity and certainty about future ownership of the harbour lands, the future direction of the Port’s maritime activities, future land use directions and the necessity of partnership working. Nevertheless, we hope this short strategic exercise has helped to raise awareness of the broader issues around the future of the harbour.

Theme 1: the importance of the local community

A Community Co-operative:
There is much local interest in the future prosperity of the villages, not only from local businesses and retailers but from residents in general. This is an ideal footing for the establishment of a local community co-operatives to help new projects to get off the ground. Community Co-operatives have been shown to be effective in providing local services in marginal market circumstances where local residents want better facilities than the Council might be able to provide or which cannot survive in normal market circumstances.

It is important that public agencies should gently assist and support the setting up a local co-operatives rather than dominating and micro-managing the process. To work effectively, co-ops need to be strongly community based rather than be the creation of the Council. A local co-op will need support to find, acquire or rent premises, find suppliers, pay for marketing, ordering, budgeting, logistics and recruiting of volunteers. Highlands and Islands Enterprise have considerable experience of working with local communities to establish such ventures and should be involved in the process of setting this up.

Local support and project champions:
Linked to the ethos and practice of community co-ops is the need to encourage projects to be initiated, developed and supported by local people. The force for change should come from the local community rather than being imposed by the public sector. There is a culture of high involvement of the public sector in Orkney matched by a sense of dependency by the community – an expectation that the Council will be responsible for or be involved in the majority of change in the village. Change in the villages is very driven by public sector finance and therefore subject to the same budgetary shortcomings that most local authorities have to work with.

What is required is for local champions and groups to take responsibility for projects rather than relying on the public sector to do so. Community based projects or initiatives by local companies can be far more effective than the public sector in obtaining finance and promoting proposals and schemes that work for the town and with which the local community feel a sense of ownership.

Theme 2: the appreciation of place

These villages and the surrounding landscapes are worthy of the highest standards of maintenance and enhancement. Having a diverse economy contributes to securing a better sense of place. A committed and involved business and residential community is equally valuable. An understanding of the physical assets of the town and its setting is the foundation of place and placemaking.

The specific areas that have to be addressed are education, awareness and appreciation of local circumstances and context – forming a sense of what makes Orkney special and ensuring that this is not watered down by inappropriate, out of context or rootless interventions. Improving place awareness in the local community is a major project but some of the tools which can be used to achieve better standards of placemaking and design are readily available. They are:

• the introduction of compulsory design statements for all development in and around the villages
• the production of guides for a range of different subjects and/or for specific areas of the town such as the new ribbon or linear housing development areas
• the introduction of specific briefs for important, large or prominent sites or for the creation of new greenspace and its integration in settlement form
• new approaches to the design of roads infrastructure which adopts the Designing Streets standards and 20 mph limits within these settlements

But one of the most important conclusions from undertaking this work, and it is reflected in many other projects in 2010, has been around the issues and blockages created by conflicts between the different historical professions of architecture, planning, landscape, housing and roads engineering which translates into disagreements and lack of shared objectives between different Council departments and ensure that the outcomes are sub-optimal. This results in frustration for local communities and confusion about overall objectives.

So the focus of this commission was on key issues and priorities for the town centre, including:

• the adequacy of the current retail and service offer for the catchment population
• the prospects for developing a national, regional or local role for the town as a tourist destination
• opportunities for priorities for softer regeneration activity, including any latent tourism assets
  the relationship between the linked dimensions of heritage and tourism – including whether the relationship with New Lanark has been adequately embraced
• transport and movement – especially the impact of parking on commercial vitality and viability, and the impact of heavy commercial vehicles
• the physical qualities of the town centre, particularly assessing whether the positive impacts of the High Street/North Vennel townscape improvements on the High Street and North Vennel can be extended and connected to draw people and activity into the wider town centre

Our methodology consisted of three stages based on Inquiry and Survey, Analysis and Action Projects developed through workshops with representatives of the local business and residential communities as well as the public sector.
click to enlarge diagram

High priorities for action were parking, streetscape works and building facelifts, information on businesses, signage and legibility, and communication. Medium and longer term priorities included strategic connections to Edinburgh, tourist accommodation and destination marketing, cleanliness and image, developing the evening economy, and showcasing hidden gems such as the historical connections with William Wallace, a higher profile for parks and gardens, and links to new Lanark.

As a community development trust, the client group is in an ideal position to bring some of these ideas to fruition. It has a particular combination of having roots in the local community, the credibility of a properly constituted trust, a facilitative and enabling role to support local projects, and the ability to access to external funding sources. Armed with the strategy provided by this report, the trust is in a strong position to promote the kind of softer, locally based improvement activity which complements physical investment.

• baseline information on current developments in the town together with the aspirations of the business and residential communities
• public and voluntary sector aspirations and resources
• design options addressing technical constraints and local planning policy
• an appraisal of local market conditions and commercial viability together with an assessment of public and third sector funding
• an appraisal of local community aspirations for the site and building these into the final design proposals
• visual presentations of what could be possible on the site, how this will fit with the town and consideration of sustainability, access and energy use in the design process

It was envisaged by the Forum that the Shared Vision would be a framework for regeneration of the site, providing a blueprint for future development and a context for the consideration of planning applications. It was anticipated that there would have to be a careful balance between the interests of local residents, the aspirations of the business community and the expectations of visitors.

The findings of the workshops held in August and October pointed towards a number of preferred approaches to Harbour Square ranging from adopting a town wide strategic approach to improvements, through a range of expensive and hard to achieve options to a more measured and prosaic approach to the treatment of the square.

The need to take a strategic approach to proposals for the square and this matched the team’s preferred strategic and structural approach to urban design. The idea that the Harbour Square consisted solely of the existing car park and the depot buildings and TIC was not considered to be taking an appropriately comprehensive view of the issues. Harbour Square is in many ways the centre of the town – it is obviously a car park and an events space but it is also a place for the community, part of the town centre, a place for business and work and a place for art and culture. In addition to this, Harbour Square is also the hub of a network of footpaths that link to music and arts venues, to shops, museums, countryside and monuments as well as along the waterfront. Many of these are within five minutes walking distance of the Square, emphasising the walkability of the town. Broadening the immediate study area to include the harbour itself, Mote Brae and critically, the full width of the streets and pavements of St Cuthbert’s Street and St Cuthbert’s Place opens up many possibilities for more comprehensive change.

This study is currently ongoing and we are finalising the proposals with the Steering Group.

KEY ISSUES AND FINDINGS

We noted in our proposal for this work that there was a striking contrast between the centre of the town and its peripheral areas – almost as if the centre mattered but the rest didn’t. We had a strong feeling in Stromness that there was a need to re-learn how to build places – not so much in terms of architecture but in relation to the basic components of the external environment, the siting of development and the overall form of settlement. Our anticipated headline issues were:

• the presence of the past
• a distinctive sense of place
• learning how to build anew
• localising urban design
• traffic by design
• sustainability – a fundamental theme

These are the basic foundations of the urban design framework. If anything the contrast between the old town and the surrounding areas was more marked than we thought. There is a strong sense that the old town is regarded, like the library, as unfit for purpose in the 21st century. The decanting of uses to Hamnavoe and Garson is evidence of this while the Pier Arts Centre seems to represent the very opposite view – a well received triumph of careful design and function in constrained circumstances.

At the same time, the quality of the old town deteriorates in a myriad of small ways – vinyl street signs replacing old painted versions, unnecessary parking restrictions, inappropriate ‘heritage’ street lighting, vacant property and insensitive repairs to buildings and the public realm.

In parallel with this is the sense that Garson is used as a convenient place to site things that can no longer be accommodated in the old centre. So the town has no real structure or cohesion. This was recognised in the brief for this work which stated that the purpose of the study ‘is to establish a strategic framework and vision which would direct future proposals towards a coordinated and legible urban form’.

While preserving and enhancing the historic core has been an objective of the Council for some time, changes in land use patterns, changes in the type and location of housing, the relocation of important community institutions and the growing rate of vacancies in the historic core suggest a need to ask some very basic questions about the future of the town. Some of these are:

• What is the purpose and role of the town?
• What is the future of the historic core and what function might it perform?
• What are the roles of the various other parts of the town and can these areas work in an integrated and holistic manner?
• Are there too many proposals competing for scarce resources and might fewer stronger proposals help to fulfil more integrated spatial objectives?
• Should the unrelenting drift to the north be channelled into a new spatial structure for North Hamnavoe?
• Is there a positive future for Garson other than as a home for things that can’t be accommodated elsewhere?
• What can be done about the low quality of design of new buildings on the edges of the town and in the surrounding countryside?
• What size should Stromness be? Is building 140 houses by 2010 (as per the Local Plan) sensible or just very un-ambitious?
• How do we build urban form in such a low demand environment – is low density a realistic option?
• Each of the character areas described needs attention of some kind – the 4th and 5th tier areas have the most potential for change but how should these be improved?
• Can the town put its energy and sustainability research credentials to work for the Stromness environment?

These questions are answered to a greater or lesser degree in the report below. The culture of Orkney and Stromness is very project orientated and there was significantly more interest in implementing these rather than addressing strategy and policy which would in turn produce more appropriate projects than the current batch. There is also enormous resistance to change on the part of the local community and widely differing opinions about what should actually happen in the town.

The inevitable result of this is compromise and our report reflects that. However it has opened up wide ranging discussions about the form and function of the town and set out some new thinking, especially in relation to the form of peripheral development in the stunning Orkney landscape. The final report is shown below:

The study team comprised WMUD (lead), Yellow Book (economic strategy), Drew Mackie Associates (consultation), Hamilton-Baillie Associates (traffic and movement), Jacobs (Strategic Environmental Assessment and Strategic Flood Risk Assessment) and Leslie Burgher(architecture).

The Outline Planning Application was approved in December 2009. WMUD coordinated a team including Jacobs (EIA), WSP (traffic and movement), HG Planning (planning support) and Nick Wright Planning (consultation).

Our starting point is that the Castle has the potential to be:

• an area which can be enjoyed by as broad a spectrum of people as possible – young and old, local residents and visitors
• a space which enhances the social and economic life of the town – including its place competitiveness in the modern global economy, contributing to Castlederg’s economic health and its ability to attract and retain residents, businesses and visitors
• an important public space in Castlederg – and is, or has the potential to be, the focus of the local community’s aspirations for the future of their town
• an important part of the much bigger reconciliation process which lies at the heart of Peace III funding for Castlederg

Developing a shared vision for the Castle has a significance which goes beyond creating a new shared space – it should be pivotal for the town as a whole by contributing to economic competitiveness, attracting and retaining skilled people, bringing about a blossoming of civic pride, presenting an enhanced image of the town to visitors, and reinforcing the town’s distinctive sense of place for decades to come. Of course, a shared space at the Castle cannot achieve all these things alone – but it can make an important contribution to each of them.

These outcomes all come on the back of tangible, physical improvements to the Castle. There are also equally important intangible reconciliation benefits which could accrue if the right approach is used for this study. To put it another way, we believe that the way in which this commission is carried out is absolutely fundamental to enable progress towards the brief’s ultimate objectives of developing a more peaceful society.

Sensitivity to the history and sense of a place is an integral part of all our projects. Castlederg’s origins as an early Plantation town, the symbolism of the Castle as a visual reminder of that history, the trauma of the Troubles, and changes in recent years have all shaped both the place and the people of the town.

Planning and designing the future of any part of the town, including the Castle, must also reflect Castlederg’s position in the geography and economy of modern Northern Ireland. The town is an important rural service centre, although many of its residents are likely to feel relatively isolated from larger urban centres and the opportunities and facilities that they provide. That reality will shape how the local economy operates and how people live their lives in the town. Whilst the design outputs from this commission may focus on the Castle, they must be prepared in the context of the town as a whole, its contemporary role, and how it is changing.

Our team for this study comprise WMUD, Nick Wright Planning and Derry based RPD. We will update this post as the work progresses.

The Scottish Government has clearly taken urbanism issues seriously with a slew of publications aimed at increasing the standard of new development, a curiosity about how high standards are attained in other countries and initiatives such as Design Awareness Training for Council officers and elected members through the Improvement Service and the recent Scottish Sustainable Communities Initiative. The alignment with traditional urbanism and sustainability is aimed at improving the quality of development in new communities and in extensions to existing settlements although some of the ideas spill over into the consideration of new interventions in established urban areas.

The reasons for this adoption of traditional urbanism are fairly obvious. Firstly, volume builder residential developments are not improving and there is little sign that they will. Planners are usually unable to make significant positive changes to these developments despite a plethora of conditions, design briefs and codes. Many are wrong from the outset. Secondly, a proportion of sites allocated in Local Plans for housing are often ill-chosen in relation to their potential impact on the town, transport, intrusion in the landscape and on habitats and a standard product residential development will usually exacerbate these difficulties. Traditional urbanism is potentially more sensitive to context and place and has principles and methods of practice that create developments embodying much of what is regarded today as best practice in planning and urban design so even on a poor site, it may create a more sensitive response. Thirdly, experience from around the world says that traditional urbanism sells. The VINEX urban extensions in Netherlands such as Brandevoort, Leidsche Rijn and Haverlij designed by Rob Krier, Mulleners + Mulleners, Schippers Architects and others are all incredibly popular despite the country’s reputation as being ‘the most appreciative of modern architecture in the world’. It is the same story in the United States where New Urbanism is a major factor in selling new homes.

Looking at Tornagrain in more detail, it is remarkable for a number of reasons. The basic statistics are for a town of 10,000 people set out as three distinct neighbourhoods each with local centres, a town centre, central park area, green belts between neighbourhoods and a realignment of the A96. The basic plan form was created over an intensive ten day programme of public meetings and design sessions in a completely open process and incorporates all of the New Urbanism principles. These sessions dealt with regional context, business, transport issues, infrastructure, ecology, landscape, housing, social and economic issues. The plan has proved to be resilient and has only changed in minor ways between the charette process and the submission of the planning application to reflect new issues raised by the community such as the provision of allotments and other factors emerging during the preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment. The plan includes a supermarket, primary and secondary schools, police fire and ambulance services, hotel, community leisure and sports facilities, a park, health centre and railway station set in a mixed use framework. The future development of the town is controlled using a design code and transect which regulates almost all aspects of development. One of the keys to creating this plan is that Moray Estates has been in the area for hundreds of years and intend remaining there and so can afford to take a long term view of the development. The current estimate is that it might take 20 years to complete so this is no short term business like most of the house building industry.

The parallels with Poundbury will not have gone unnoticed. Duany and the local communities around Tornagrain have produced a structured proposal for a mixed use settlement encompassing principles of walkability, variety of dwelling types, local shopping, schools and traffic attenuation. These are also attributes of Poundbury which has been successful in establishing a mixed use urban extension with successful businesses, employment and community facilities within a pedestrian orientated environment.

Of course the issue of most concern to planners and architects alike will be the architecture of the settlement and the chocolate box images which accompany the masterplan document. In the case of Tornagrain, like the parallel plans for Ellon, Cumnock and Poundbury, the landowner has set out to acquire a traditional settlement with buildings of a traditional appearance. Moray Estates maintain that over the twenty year development period for the town, it is inevitable that there will be variations in style but for now they are content for now to let the code produce a range of traditional buildings for the town.

What distinguishes this recent urbanism in Scotland is the emphasis on the principles of town making and urban structure, the inclusiveness of the plan making process involving local communities, the elevation of sustainability to the status of core issue and the de-emphasis of architecture as end product. Another factor common to all these developments is that they are all being promoted by major landowners who are in the developments for the long term.

These are all critical components of an urbanism approach. Getting the structure of the town right is the main objective and if that is done, planners shouldn’t need to interfere in design and the architecture debate can continue unimpeded in its bubble. It’s not about what things look like but how they work.

Architects may rail against New Urbanism for its association with the past and its chocolate box aesthetics, its perceived lack of radicalism, betrayal of modernism and a host of other reasons but for now, traditional urbanism seems to be the only game in town, in Scotland at least, and the work of DPZ, UDA and the Prince’s Foundation together with a few other practices are setting the pace in the design of new settlements and urban extensions.
Architects may consider urbanism to be an integral part of architecture – and it probably was once – but from the late 70s and early 80s in the UK, urbanism started to branch off and has become an established discipline in its own right while architecture has increasingly focused on the single building. Of course this doesn’t mean that architects and planners can’t or shouldn’t practice urbanism – they obviously do – but what it does mean is that a different agenda is being established in which the shape-making and form-giving that once passed for urban design or the underwhelming architectural masterplans for the property development industry wrapped up in elemental philosophy about space, sunlight and openness just don’t cut it anymore.

Love them or hate them, traditional urbanism plans like Tornagrain represent a quantum leap forward for the practice of urbanism in Scotland over what has taken place in the last twenty years but the sound principles of urban structure expressed in these plans need to be evolved by all those involved in building towns and cities. There is a danger that this strong foundation will lose direction through early institutional acceptance and become ossified, like planning and urban design, in statutory box ticking and standard solutions. Traditional urbanism should certainly not be the only urbanism practiced in Scotland. Instead, Scottish urbanism should be a broad movement that accepts that the production of the built environment should not just be the domain of the increasingly irrelevant historic professions, the landed gentry or the property development industry but should embrace communities in a wider social, economic and political agenda.

This post was previously published in Prospect (Architecture Scotland) magazine Issue 135 in Summer 2009. It has been updated.