Better Briefs for Better Outcomes

WORKSHOP REPORT RTPI SCOTLAND Dumfries & Galloway Chapter | A+DS SNH sustainable placemaking programme

INTRODUCTION

Standalone site Larger masterplan area Wider neighbourhood

This report summarises the outcome of a workshop on a design-led approach to making better briefs that A+DS and SNH facilitated as part of their ‘sustainable placemaking programme’. The event was organised by the Dumfries & Galloway RTPI Chapter, and was held in Dumfries on 25 April 2013. The focus of the workshop was to examine how ‘intent’ is both communicated and acted upon as part of the briefing process. The 24 participants from a variety of public and private sector backgrounds considered how a brief to inform a masterplanning exercise might be prepared and subsequently interpreted across three scales of site. Whilst the sites have been identified in the proposed Local Development Plan, the exercise was intentionally run as a learning event, where lessons might be more broadly applied.

Following introductory presentations (see appendix) participants engaged in a series of discussions to consider: • the unique DNA of the area • what people need to live their lives • where people might meet This helped to establish criteria and guide debate and decision making about ‘what do you want to do?’ for the future of the area/s. A draft brief was developed by each group that set out a vision, key principles and a diagram. Briefs were subsequently exchanged and tested by a different group who attempted to interpret the messages and illustrate what was being intended.

WIDER NEIGHBOURHOOD

gggg In setting out their intentions for a masterplan that integrated with the wider neighbourhood this group set out as their briefing aims : CONTEXT: mixed quality land interspersed with landscape features and current infrastructure in an edge of town location. VISION: to provide two new urban neighbourhoods to link together existing retail parks, services, landscape features and current infrastructure. NON-NEGOTIABLES / MUST HAVES: • SUDS • Open space • Landscape features (nature reserve) • Current retail park • Existing infrastructure KEY MOVES: • Hills utilised as amenity space • Connectivity – create better linkages • Create a green network to link up

existing open space

DRAFT BRIEF: WIDER NEIGHBOURHOOD

LEARNING POINT: Certain aims may be ‘experiential’ e.g. utilising hills as amenity space may stem from impressions gained from a sequential experience of approach, a cultural memory, or a chance to appreciate broader views.

Such characteristics may not be fully or easily described in text or diagram, and may be better expressed or elaborated in some other graphic format/s that can supplement and help to explain underlying rationale.

DRAFT BRIEF: WIDER NEIGHBOURHOOD – TESTING

The test group challenged the brief and reported back two options. The first took a literal approach towards providing two new but deliberately separate urban neighbourhoods. This technically satisfied a requirement to link together existing features, but didn’t respond positively to the aim of creating an integrated neighbourhood that linked into the wider area.

The first option also located non-negotiables such as SUDS and open space either outwith the site, or as separate isolated features at the very edge of the site. The second option presented a more respectful interpretation of what was intended with SUDS and open space serving as integrating and connecting features.

OPTION 1 OPTION 2

LEARNING POINT: The use of language is extremely important in conveying ‘intent’. Successful implementation of the proposal is dependent on the actions of the receiver. Aims need to be clearly communicated in a manner that avoids misrepresentation, and guards against too literal an interpretation - which technically may satisfy a requirement but which may miss the point!

LARGER MASTERPLAN SITE

DRAFT BRIEF: LARGER MASTERPLAN SITE

In setting out their intentions for a draft brief for the larger masterplan site this group set out as their briefing aims : CONTEXT / VISION: A new integrated green heart connecting with historical Dumfries town and rural Dumfrieshire. A new visitor destination. NON-NEGOTIABLES / MUST HAVES: • Integrated green network • Mix of density and type within the

site • Connections to transport links + all

transport modes

DESIRABLES: • Link to river (pedestrian / cycle) and

to town / forest • SUDS integrated to open space as

useful facility • Quality common areas

LEARNING POINT: It was evident that there was a challenge in working at this scale of briefing to convey ambitions for both broad strategic aims and also more finer detailed considerations. The group used two diagrams in an effort to address this.

‘EXTERNAL’ STRATEGIC AIMS

‘INTERNAL’ DETAILED AIMS

DRAFT BRIEF: LARGER MASTERPLAN SITE - TESTING

LEARNING POINT: Relative weighting of intentions needs to be clearly expressed in the brief. In this instance, insufficient guidance led to selective interpretation and over emphasis of a secondary consideration at the expense of the primary aim.

The test group identified the ‘visitor destination’ as a major element in their proposition, in a manner which had not been intended. The original group had intended that the development, as a

whole, should be regarded as a ‘visitor destination’ whereby people in this area might link between the town centre and the surrounding countryside;

STANDALONE SITE

DRAFT BRIEF: STANDALONE SITE

LEARNING POINT: It seemed that more precise guidance may be more confidently expressed for a smaller scale, as aims can be concisely stated specific to the site.

Restating general points or broad policy aims, and/or offering too much background description, can divert attention from and cloud emphasis.

This group set out as their briefing aims : CONTEXT / VISION: • The site is predominantly housing • Support neighbourhood assets • Limit car access inside site but create

road enhancements at the edge • Permeable site which is safe, variable

in character and green spaces NON-NEGOTIABLES / MUST HAVES: • Well connected, permeable; focus on

pedestrian + cycle links; shared surfaces within housing areas

• key open spaces – informal western hill and village green in east - multifunctional recreational and SUDS corridor connection

• Sense of place created by the layout + style of development; a variety of housing types, size and density .

DESIRABLES: • Tree lined boulevard to the east. • SUDS integrated with parks and open

space; no standalone backland SUDS • Housing/streets with passive solar gain.

DRAFT BRIEF: STANDALONE SITE – TESTING

LEARNING POINT: Each of the groups appeared to be more at ease describing intentions in text or basic diagram format; however, there may be a requirement or necessity to represent the experience of being in a place in other ways, e.g. through 3D sketches, section drawings or free hand doodles. These methods can also be helpful in describing the sorts of performance standards that are desired for the future development.

The test group was able to reasonably closely follow and represent the messages that had been intended by the briefing group.

Aims were expressed through 2D illustrations of land use, that also indicated where linkages might be achieved with surrounding areas.

BETTER BRIEFS FOR BETTER PLACES - KEY LEARNING POINTS FROM THE DAY

• If something is important, then say it! Things should not be implied or left to chance; important issues must not be left open to interpretation or someone else’s imagination.

• Successful implementation of whatever is being proposed is dependent on the response of the receiver. Early and continued dialogue are essential.

• Careful choice of words, and precise use of language and terminology are extremely important in describing aims and conveying ‘intent’.

• Aims need to be concisely stated and

clearly communicated to avoid the possibility of incorrect interpretation or misrepresentation.

• Primary (non-negotiables) aims must be clearly stated, so they are not lost to secondary considerations. It may be advisable to distinguish between more and less important factors.

• It is important to guard against the possibility that points may be interpreted too literally - which may technically satisfy a requirement but which may miss the point!

• Saying too much may be harmful. Too much background description, or restating general points or broad policy aims, can divert attention from and cloud emphasis.

• It may be necessary to express

points which are more ‘experiential’ or qualitative. In these instances consideration could be given to how ideas can be represented in different graphic formats such as annotated aerial photographs or 3D sketches.

• Ideas and information may best be revealed when those who really know a place tell their own story in their own words; the challenge is then to capture and make clear the things that should, and should not, be done.

• It may be challenging to convey ambitions across a series of scales. However, recognising the "bigger picture" is key to developing a good brief. It can sometimes be helpful to use different diagrams to address broader strategic aims and more finer detailed considerations.

30 minutes – 3 x 10 minutes to discuss: • the unique DNA of the area • what people need to live their lives • where people might meet

WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO? IDENTIFY EVALUATION CRITERIA

DEVELOP DRAFT BRIEF ARTICULATE & CONVEY ‘INTENT’

TEST DRAFT BRIEF HOW IS ‘INTENT’ RECEIVED AND

ACTED UPON?

FEEDBACK, REVIEW & REFINE BRIEF

EVALUATE AGAINST CRITERIA

A

DEVELOP DRAFT BRIEF – CONVEY ‘INTENT’

TEST DRAFT BRIEF – HOW IS ‘INTENT’ RECEIVED AND ACTED

UPON?

REFINE BRIEF

EVALUATE AGAINST CRITERIA

45 minutes – working in groups, set out: • Vision • Key principles • Strategic diagram

45 minutes – interrogate the draft brief: • upon receipt, is the intention clear? • draw and interpret what is meant • explain your interpretation or rationale

45 minutes – feedback • was the original ‘intent’ met? • what was communicated well? • could aspects be improved?

30 minutes – test against criteria • is a unique sense of place conveyed? • does the brief guard against formulaic? • are strategic & detailed aims covered?

PROCESS DIAGRAM - A HALF DAY D.I.Y. EVENT

Note: timings are based on the D+G event which involved three groups of 8 people

APPENDIX

CASE STUDY 1

Context A heavily engineered infrastructure barrier on the edge of Dundee; large areas of countryside and a golf course Concept Overcome the barrier of the Kingsway Non-negotiables Working with the public open space and landscape; break down the barrier presented by the Kingsway Streets and structure • A street pattern that builds on existing infrastructure • The new hierarchy of streets is proposed in which the

primary streets relate to public transport proposals. • Existing green belts are enhanced,

Public open space • Create a new network of large public open spaces

ranging from formal spaces to natural green belt • More formal public open space will relate directly to the

neighbourhood • Development will define the proposed open spaces Blocks and buildings • Identifiable development blocks • The block structure will be easy to subdivide • The most important buildings sited at key points in

relation to the urban structure and open spaces

CONTEXT

MAKE CONNECTIONS

PRIMARY ROUTES

WALK BANDS

URBAN STRUCTURE

STREETS & BLOCKS

DESIGN SKILLS SYMPOSIUM

CASE STUDY 2

PRINCIPAL ELEMENTS OF SPATIAL STRUCTURE 1. An activity spine in the form of a

boulevard axis, extending from the Malahide Road to the proposed railway station, as the primary community focus

2. A series of ‘green links’ running north-south terminating in recreational or other community facilities with high space requirements

3. A redesigned and significantly enhanced central park (Father Collins Park) with improved sports and recreational facilities

4. Strong links back to existing developments at Clarehall estate and Donaghmede Shopping Centre

5. A new perimeter road defining the northern development limit

6. The landscape features of the Mayne River and its associated tree belt protected as an ecological nabitat and linear amenity area

7. A series of residential squares linked by a network of pedestrian / cycle routes

8. Malahide road realignment option

DUBLIN NORTH FRINGE

Diarmaid Lawlor from A+DS led the facilitated group working, and introduced the event by questioning what a brief should achieve: what must it say in order to maximise the wider benefit of any development? He described the important role that planning has in creating conditions that enable better lives and better outcomes for people.

PRESENTATION SUMMARY – 1 of 3

He also spoke of a need to think of streets as places where people are able to connect, and where the social fabric of everyday lives can occur. He suggested there are trade-offs and judgements to be made in situations where there is intrinsic value in inherited context. New development should work with existing assets and help to support and promote services that people require in their daily lives.

“ a key challenge is to reclaim streets as an element of social

capital”

Colin Mair, Improvement Services

The context for future developments should not be guided by poor decision making of the past that has resulted in segregated land uses of housing estates, retail or business parks.

Frazer McNaughton of SNH provided a national policy overview, to highlight the important role of natural heritage in planning for places. He identified how (soon to be revised) SPP and other documents set a positive policy agenda for Place Design. The policy on Green Infrastructure and SNH’s ‘Better Places for People and Nature’ offer particularly important principles to help realise the multiple benefits that are derived from inter-connected and multi-functional open space. 5 key principles to help guide delivery of better natural heritage outcomes: 1. work with natural assets 2. Integrate the natural heritage

vision with the place vision 3. Plan for multi-functionality/

multiple benefits 4. Plan for a hierarchy of spaces (and

structural landscape elements) 5. Plan for inter-connectivity

Green infrastructure is the physical environment within and between our cities, towns and villages. It is a network of multi-functional open spaces, including formal parks, gardens, woodlands, green corridors, waterways, street trees and open countryside. It comprises all environmental resources, and thus a green infrastructure approach also contributes towards sustainable resource management.” Green Network: The linking together of natural , semi-natural and man-made open spaces (which may include leisure or recreational facilities) to create an interconnected network that provides opportunities for physical activity, increases accessibility within settlements and to the surrounding countryside while enhancing bio-diversity and the quality of the external environment

“The planning system should proactively support development that

will contribute to sustainable economic growth and to high quality

sustainable places.

Achieving sustainable economic growth requires a planning system that enables the development of

growth enhancing activities across Scotland and protects and enhances the quality of the natural and built environment as an asset for that

growth.” SPP para 33

PRESENTATION SUMMARY – 2 of 3

Eric Dawson from A+DS described how the joint A+DS/SNH Sustainable Place-making Programme has been assisting in developing better briefing by asking ‘What do you want to do?’ In his presentation he challenged the notion of ‘masterplan by others’ and noted that the public sector has an important role in informing the briefing for developing masterplans. Scottish Government policy such as SPP, Designing Places and the Masterplan PAN identify issues of leadership, being clear and certain about outcomes, and the ability to promote sustainable development through influencing the form, layout and design of new development. Reference was made to A+DS’s ‘lessons learned on Masterplans’ as a helpful resource, which identifies that masterplans have an ability to lever influence across a number of scales.

“development plans should guide what goes where and

why …

planning authorities should be clear about their

expectations … [and] commit to the creation and

maintenance of high quality places …” SPP

Masterplanning can:

• unlocking potential of what exists

• Integrate with context

• Stimulate what might happen beyond the site boundary

through considering:

1. Internal

2. Adjacent

3. Outwith

4. Strategic

5. Whole place

6. Time: S, M, L

1

2

3 4

5

PRESENTATION SUMMARY – 3 of 3