BDSM⚡Call Girls in Sector 97 Noida Escorts >༒8448380779 Escort Service
New Town Development Strategies Jan 2015 - Day 1
1. NEW TOWN DEVELOPMENTNEW TOWN DEVELOPMENT
STRATEGIESSTRATEGIES
1
What ,Why, Who & Where to DevelopWhat ,Why, Who & Where to Develop
New TownsNew Towns
Ian Butter FRICS MRTPIIan Butter FRICS MRTPI
7. What Are New Towns?What Are New Towns?
• Need to establish at the outset Who and What
a New Town is for
• Dormitories
• Economic Drivers
• Specialist Habitats
• All things to all people but master of none?
7
8. When & Why Were They Developed?When & Why Were They Developed?
• Evolution in the UK
• Decentralisation to reduce overcrowding
• Development of Industry outside of London
• A response to post war housing need
• The New Towns Act 1946
8
9. HHow Have New Towns Evolved?ow Have New Towns Evolved?
Model Village
Garden Cities
New Towns
Growth Areas
Sustainable Communities
- Including Eco Towns
- Market Town Expansion
9
17. An Urban & Rural ContextAn Urban & Rural Context
• Industrial Revolution - Rural to Urban
• Social Revolution - Urban to Rural
• Economic Revolution - Rural to Urban again
• Technological Revolution - ?
17
18. It’s Not all about the Cities thoughIt’s Not all about the Cities though
• Rural hinterland is vital
• An economic driver of its own
• Agriculture
• Water
• Nature
• Business
• Sustaining a diverse society/economy
18
19. What and Where is Rural?What and Where is Rural?
RURAL
URBAN
20. What do we mean by Rural/Countryside?What do we mean by Rural/Countryside?
• Anywhere that is not Urban?
• The UK position
• Farmland, Natural Environment or
Playground?
• The Social/Cultural divides
20
21. DefinitionsDefinitions
• ONS Definition introduced in 2004:
- Settlements over 10,000 people are urban
- Settlements under 10,000 are ‘town and fringe’,
‘villages’ or ‘hamlets and isolated
dwellings’
- settlements are further split between ‘sparse’ or
‘less sparse’
- Defining Rural England (Commission for Rural Communities – 2007)
23. Pressures on the CityPressures on the City
• Inward migration from the countryside
• Overloaded Infrastructure
• Us and Them culture
• Development positively encouraged
23
24. Pressures on the CountrysidePressures on the Countryside
• Rural De-population
• Outward Migration from Cities
• Imposition on Traditional Agricultural Society
• Us and Them culture
• Limited Infrastructure/Housing to cope
• Countryside Positively Protected from New
Development
• New Towns tried to take the strain
24
25. A Living, Working CountrysideA Living, Working Countryside
• Lord Taylor Review (2008)
• The planning system has a crucial role to play to promote and
deliver sustainable communities – ensuring development
occurs in the right place at the right time and makes a
positive contribution people’s lives, - providing homes, jobs,
opportunity and enhancing people’s quality of life.
• It must simultaneously protect and enhance the natural and
historic environment and conserve the countryside and open
spaces that are important to everyone.
• Without change we simply repeat the mistakes of recent
decades, creating unattractive developments encircling rural
towns and villages whist failing to stem the dormitory
settlement trend. This is not a sustainable future.
25
26. Partnership for Sustainable Communities -
Guiding Livability Principles
• Provide more transportation choices
• Promote equitable, affordable housing
• Enhance economic competitiveness
• Support existing communities
• Coordinate and leverage Public policies and
investment
• Value communities and neighborhoods
26
27. Jacob Zuma -
President of the Republic of South Africa
State of the Nation Report 2009
As part of social infrastructure development we will provide
suitably located and affordable housing and decent human
settlements.
We will proceed from the understanding that human
settlement is not just about building houses.
It is about transforming our cities and towns and building
cohesive, sustainable and caring communities with closer
access to work and social amenities, including sports and
recreation facilities.
27
50. The Philippines ContextThe Philippines Context
• Socio-Economic Drivers
• Migration Trends
• The National Land Use Act
• Comprehensive Land Use Plans
• Environmental Imperatives
50
52. Migration TrendsMigration Trends
• > 60% of Philippines population live in cities
• This figure expected to rise to 70% by 2020
• 25 million (25% of the entire Philippines population) live in
the Greater Manila area at densities on average of 700 people
per sq km
• Manila reportedly highest population density in the world
• 10 Philippine Cities are in the top 50 most densely populated
• -1.25 migrant(s)/1,000 population (2013 est.)
52
53. Pressures on the CitiesPressures on the Cities
• Paracitism
• Slum Growth
• Exceeding carrying capacity of Infrastructure
and services
• Subsequent Pollution
• Policy Vacuum
• Polarity of Self-interest groups
53
54. Urban Planning in the PhilippinesUrban Planning in the Philippines
• Decentralised Approach
• Comprehensive Development Strategy (CDS)
• Comprehensive Land Use Plans (CLUP)
• City Development Plans
• Plans Focussed on:
• Economic Development
• Environmental Sustainability
• Metropolitan Integration
54
56. National Land Use ActNational Land Use Act
• First Filed in 1992
• Aim – to introduce a National Land Use Policy
• To implement mechanisms to rationalise the management
and development of land resources
• Ensure optimum use consistent with Sustainable
Development
• Creation of Land Use Policy Council – Tasked with formulation
of ‘National Land Use Guidelines and Zoning Standards
(NLUGZS)
• To set the framework for planning and land management at
the national & sub-regional levels
56
57. The 4 Land UsesThe 4 Land Uses
• Protection Land Use
• Production Land Use
• Settlements Development
• Infrastructure Development
• Concerns over lack of flexibility
57
58. Environmental ImperativesEnvironmental Imperatives
• Protection of Agricultural Land
• Protection of Fresh Water Resources
• Protection of scarce natural habitats/environments
• Residential Locations away from Flood Risk Zones
• Adequate foul drainage provision and treatment
• Reduction in carbon generation of energy
58
59. Key Themes 1 – Evolving the strategyKey Themes 1 – Evolving the strategy
• Delivery of New Towns – Who is responsible
• How is land Ownership Established/Resolved
• Financing New Towns
• New Town Governance - Who is in Charge?
• Economic Achievement & Competitiveness
59
60. Delivery of New Towns –Delivery of New Towns –
Who is responsible?Who is responsible?
• Central Government
• Regional/Local Government
• Development Corporations
• Companies/Developers
• Which would be best?
60
61. How can land Ownership issues beHow can land Ownership issues be
Established/Resolved?Established/Resolved?
• Central Dictate / Land Expropriation
• Compulsory Purchase
• Market Acquisition and Sale
• Land Rights
• Cultural/Historic Claims
61
62. Financing New TownsFinancing New Towns
• Central Government
• Regional / Local Government
• Corporate/Private Investment
• Investment Capital Assessment
• SLIC’s
• CIL
• De-risking
62
65. New Town Governance - Who Should be inNew Town Governance - Who Should be in
Charge?Charge?
65
• From the Outset?
• During Development?
• For the Future?
66. Economic Achievement, CompetitivenessEconomic Achievement, Competitiveness
and Other Beneficial Outcomesand Other Beneficial Outcomes
• How Does This Happen
• Revenue Returns
• Health, Happiness, Security
66
69. • Creating Communities
• Physical Environment and Design
• End User Requirements
• Long Term Sustainability
69
70. Creating CommunitiesCreating Communities
• What do we mean by Community?
• The Need for Masterplanning
• Community planning or competitive
competition?
• Range and Mix of Uses
• Facilities for all
• Where will people work?
• Accessibility
70
71. Physical Environment and DesignPhysical Environment and Design
• Everyone wants high quality design?
• A strong identity
• Attractive and useful open spaces with
excellent landscaping
• Elegant and efficient buildings
• Establishing criteria for scheme assessment
71
73. Do we need Green Spaces?Do we need Green Spaces?
73
74. Build High or Stay Low?Build High or Stay Low?
74
Tin Shui Wai New Town - Japan
Low Rise – High Density
75. NeighbourhoodsNeighbourhoods
• Should there be a consistent design theme
throughout?
• Should you allow for cultural differences?
• Socially Mix or Clearly Defined
• Where do People Work?
75
82. Strategic Aims and Objectives -Strategic Aims and Objectives -
for the Philippinesfor the Philippines
• Who Should Initiate the New Town
Programme
• Where Should New Towns be Built
• Key Development Criteria
• Living/Working/Playing
• Opportunities & Constraints
• Marginalisation and Exclusion
• Identifying & Resolving Conflicts
82
86. Barriers to ProgressBarriers to Progress
• Constrained demand from cities for smart initiatives
• Business models for rolling out smart technologies
are still underdeveloped
• Cities lack technology-related skills and capacity
• Cities find it difficult to work across departments and
boundaries
• Cities have limited influence over some basic services
• Concerns about data privacy, security and value
• Increasing citizen take up and participation is difficult
86
Even more importantly, the creation of smart communities acts as a “honey pot”, as new firms and young professionals are drawn to the area and create growth dynamics based on new clusters of expertise, which spill over into property refurbishment, leisure and entertainment.
This, in turn, provides employment opportunities for a much wider segment of the population.
Thus, it is not only major cities, such as Boston, Chicago, Stockholm, Barcelona, Copenhagen, Amsterdam, Berlin, London and Manchester which have benefitted from giving a focus to “smart”.
Smaller communities, such as Friedrichshafen, Aarhus, Santander, Paredes, Peterborough and Bristol are attracting start ups and generating growth on the back of a firm commitment to Smart City concepts.
The multifaceted nature of the challenges and the wide range of factors determining success make it difficult to predict policy outcomes.
However, it is clear that an increasing number of cities around the world consider that innovation in the urban environment and in the delivery of public services are central to wider economic growth. The scale of investment, particularly in the medium size range of cities worldwide is significant.
Chicago has been active in the smart city space since the election of Mayor Emanuel in 2011.
Despite this relatively short period, strong political leadership and well aligned governance structures have allowed the City to take significant steps in achieving their goals.
Investment in open superfast broadband infrastructure, community engagement and inclusion projects, as well as projects specifically aimed at fostering technology innovation, are all part of the City’s aspiration to create the ‘City-as-a-Platform’ where products and services can be built on city owned resources.
With a population of 2.7 million, Chicago is the third most populous city in the US.
Its challenges include economic development, education, crime and transport.
In the last decade, the economy has been performing poorly. Between 2000 and 2010, the Chicago region lost 7.1% of its jobs, the worst performance of any of the top ten largest metropolitan areas in the US 1. Furthermore, the budget deficit stands at approximately $600 million and it has been stated that the City is financially broke.
Chicago is a national transport hub and has many transport-related challenges.
It hosts two large airports, is the hub of the freight rail network, and also has a well-used bicycle network. “Chicago is first in the nation for regional traffic congestion; bottlenecks disrupt and delay freight and passenger rail services; roadway crashes cost time, money, and lives”.
Schools have their own $720 million deficit and the high school dropout rate is about 50 per cent. The city has been operating with as many as 2,000 vacant police positions in a city with a high homicide rate.
Mayor Emanuel brought a strong mandate for smart city investment with him. His experience at the White House had also given him an understanding of how organisational structures can influence the success of smart cities programmes.
The data policy in Chicago is mandated as part of executive order, and as such is a long term Government commitment.
The Smart Chicago Collaborative is a partnership between the City, the MacArthur Foundation (one of America’s largest philanthropic foundations) and the Chicago Community Trust. It is a civic organization that focuses on using technology to improve quality of life in the city.
http://www.smartchicagocollaborative.org/
Smart Chicago Collaborative (SCC) supports development of innovative civic applications in many ways. In some projects, such as We Connect Chicago and Chicago Early Learning, SCC acts as a fiscal agent, managing development and funding sources. This arrangement allows Smart Chicago to hire top development talent to tackle challenging civic problems. In other projects, SCC supports development by donating infrastructure resources.
Procurement
The city is keen to work with a variety of companies on their smart city projects, not just the big players.
They see this as important because open data is creating a wealth of expertise across the city that has not previously been possible. For example, the Ethics Database publishes their lobbyist data (i.e. who lobbies whom for what). Some companies have been set up around this data, and have approached the City about bidding on their official ‘behind the firewall’ ethics database.
In this case there is benefit to the City in regards to delivering a better service as well as for the local economy and the creation of jobs.
The city has taken some initial action on this, and following the example of the White House has made two key changes:
1) Set a threshold of $100,000 for the instigation of the official procurement process, this means that procurement for smaller projects can be a little more flexible.
2) Created a translator for legal boilerplates. The city often has the problem that they don’t speak the same language as the small companies they are trying to work with. This boilerplate translation tool supports those companies by reducing the overhead associated with procurement.
Key Barriers
Financial Capital
The city has had to be creative about how it found funding to undertake projects, which was a key initial challenge.
Human Capital
A key challenge was in re-tooling the IT department in the city to be able to respond to these new challenges. Previously the IT department contracted development work, but now the city has a development and design resource, and a director of data analytics.
What are the barriers to progress?
Most smart initiatives involve the use of new and disruptive technologies that allow things to be done that weren’t possible before. As a result, smart technologies require the creation of new markets with new ways of working and new financial and governance models. These markets also need the right conditions to emerge: a new innovation and entrepreneurial ecosystem where stakeholders interact effectively and where new business models and ways of working can be created so that new technologies can be adapted. Without this ecosystem, the smart technologies industry is unlikely to grow and mature.
In particular there appear to be seven barriers that need to be overcome if the market is to
mature and grow.
1. Constrained demand from cities for smart initiatives. Recent cuts to budgets are forcing most cities
to concentrate on providing statutory services rather than ‘thinking outside the box’ and testing high-risk
smart initiatives, even if these might actually save money.30
2. Business models for rolling out smart technologies are still underdeveloped. Even if money was available
for investment, most of the smart technologies are still in their pre-commercial stage of development and the
risk-sharing mechanisms and business models needed to take them forward are yet to be tested and developed.
These mechanisms need to be available before smart technologies can be publicly procured, mainly because they
represent a higher-risk investment for the cash-strapped public sector. The lack of business models also restricts the
availability of private sector financing, since the uncertain financial returns and long payback periods of many smart
initiatives makes capital markets and traditional commercial financing rather inaccessible.31
3. Cities lack technology-related skills and capacity. Cities need to understand which technologies are
available and how they might benefit their places in order to be effective co-designers, commissioners and
clients of smart city projects. This requires specific ICT and technology-related skills and expertise which are
often scarce within cities.32
4. Cities find it difficult to work across departments and boundaries. Many of the smart cities
initiatives include integrating different policies and information systems such as linking cycling with carbon
reduction or integrating data relating to unemployed individuals from different departments onto a single
platform. This requires breaking down silos and joint working between departments and across boundaries.
At present, budgets and strategies are seldom coordinated across departments and data is rarely shared.
For example, funding for roads, rail, and sustainable transport is set separately.
5. Cities have limited influence over some basic services. Utilities such as gas, electricity, water as well
as bus services, are privatised which makes it challenging for cities to implement city-wide smart strategies
that need the commitment of private utility companies. In Greater Manchester for example, the combined
authority would have to get the consent of 66 bus operators to introduce an integrated ticketing system.
6. Concerns about data privacy, security and value. Data needed for initiatives such as open data
platforms and the integration of health services is not always accessible. This is mainly due to privacy and
security issues or other difficulties such as the lack of technical knowledge to generate or manipulate data. For
example, the launch of care.data, a database which integrates data gathered from GPs with hospital medical files was postponed due to concerns over data privacy and possible breaches. Moreover, the techniques to analyse data, communicate it and use it are yet to be fully developed and its monetary value is yet to be
understood.36 As a result, councils, businesses and other involved parties do not fully understand the value and
benefits that data can generate, which makes the business case for releasing it hard to establish.37
7. Increasing citizen take up and participation is difficult. Currently, cities and the private sector are
finding it difficult to increase citizen participation in the smart agenda beyond the committed few. This is
due to some people having limited access to broadband or not having the skills and confidence to use the
internet – especially in low income communities and among older people.38 With e-services and online
consultations becoming more popular, this creates the risk of social and political exclusion among these
groups. Moreover, people might not have enough information on how the technology (such as smart
meters) can be used39 or see it as irrelevant to their daily lives.40 Issues around what kind of data citizens
value, whether they understand the privacy and security implications of sharing their data and how smart
technologies can benefit them are yet to be fully explored and understood.41
