Up Close and Liveable

Reader Conference

A global review on urban strategies in Amsterdam

22.06.2018

De Kromhouthal Amsterdam the Netherlands

Project team Eric van der Kooij - projectleader Alice Driesen - overall coordination Diana Janssen - technical assistance Ellen Croes - logistics speakers Hilde Oversteeg - communication Jose Derlagen - overall logistics Thijs de Wit - finance Emilia Wójtowicz - editing Giovanni Battista Ferrarese - editing Tanja Potezica - layout Marcel Kampman - design Serge van Berkel - movie Many thanks also for the helping hands ‘on the other side’ Christina Wynsberghe - Berlin Damien Bertrand – Paris Douglas Gordon - Helsinki Mariko Matsuda - Tokyo Hunhee Lee - Seoul Kellie Chua - Singapore Marie Tritsaris - Sydney Robin Thomas - Vancouver ... for collecting, editing and arranging all information Printed by Amsterdam Press (120 copies) Copyright Dept. Of Planning and Sustainabiliy, City of Amsterdam “This publication has been prepared with the greatest possible care. The City of Amsterdam cannot, however, accept any liability for the correctness and completeness of the information it contains. In the event of credits for visual materials being incorrect of if you have any other questions, please contact the editors: info.rd@amsterdam.nl.”

oreword

Will cities lead the way to innovative solutions and how can we learn from each other? We believe that an international exchange contributes to the development of new ideas and solutions that improve the quality of life in urban environments. Up Close & Liveable is the first global international review of the urban strategies in Amsterdam. Urban professionals from Amsterdam, Barcelona, Berlin, Brussels, Helsinki, London, Paris, Seattle, Seoul, Singapore, Sydney, Tokyo and Vancouver come together to focus on the urban challenges we face in cities. What these cities have in common might not be measured in size but in the way they belong to the top ranking the Global City Power Index made of 70 indicators representing 6 functions (Education, R&D, Cultural Interaction, Livability, Environment and Accessibility). It makes them magnets for all kind of people because of their global appeal, jobs, cultural amenities and green spaces. But they also face pollution, poverty, crime and segregation. Some cities deal with rapid growth and lack of affordable housing, where others face the effects of aging and declining population and the effects of climate change or maintaining economic resilient and competitive. The question behind this global review is how do we face all these challenges from the perspective of urban development. How do we make our cities and metropoles compact? Sustainable? Resilient? Accessible? Green and blue? Mixed? Inclusive and safe? As a result the role of urban planning is getting increasingly complex. More factors and more actors to deal with. And more data telling us how city rhythms work. How can we embrace this complexity without being forced into ad hoc decision making? What strategies, plans and experiments lead the way? Even though conditions are different and the cultural embedding asks for local solutions, it seems that all cities face an increasing complexity that require new views and approaches in urban development and the act of city making. What ‘decision support tools’ do we need to reach shared understanding and how can we develop new principles for participation that incorporates citizens in the decision making progress. The act of city making is related to the overall theme of the We Make the.City festival. Its goal is to celebrate and share, discuss and learn about the contemporary urban challenges. It raises the question ‘in what kind of city do we want to live’ in five, ten of fifteen years from now. We hope this conference will contribute in the mutual understanding and inspire and enable us to improve our skills of city making in order to make cities more liveable, loveable & likeable. Eric van der Kooij - Urban Strategist Department of Urban Planning and Sustainability City of Amsterdam 5

ontent

Foreword Eric van der Kooij

City overview

Global Power City Index

Planning & Urban Design for Uncertain Futures -

City data

112

Arun Jain

Amsterdam Barcelona Berlin Brussels Helsinki London Paris Seoul Singapore Sydney Tokyo Vancouver Appendix 1

ity overview

Paris

London

Greater Paris Metropolis population 7.068.810 area 814 km2 density 8.700 / km2

Metropolitan area population 14.040.163 area 8.382 km2 density 1.675 / km2

City population 2.206.488 area 105 km2 density 21.000 / km2

Greater London population 8.787.892 area 1.572 km2 density 5.590 / km2 City population 9.401 area 2,9 km2 density 3.200 / km2

Berlin

Brussels

Capital region population 4.67 million area 3.700 km2 density 1.200 / km2

Metropolitan area population 2,120,000 Capital region population 1.191.604 area 161.38 km2 density 7.025 / km2

City population 3.710.000 area 892 km2 density 4.100 / km2

City population 176.545 area 33 km2 density 5.400 / km2

Amsterdam Metropolitan region population 2.435.220 area 2.580 km2 density 1.520 / km2 Municipality population 851.573 area 219 km2 density 5.135 / km2

Seoul Capital area population 25.514.000 area 11.704 km2 density 969 / km2 Special city population 9.838.982 area 606 km2 density 16.249 / km2

Singapore City-state population 5.610.000 area 720 km2 density 7.800 / km2

0 km 10 km

50 km

Central area population 60.520 area 18 km2 density 3.400 / km2

Tokyo Greater Tokyo Area population 37.800.000 area 13.500 km2 density 2.800 / km2 Metropolis population 13.491.000 area 2.191 km2 density 6.157 / km2 23 wards population 9.390.000 area 627 km2 density 14.981 / km2

Helsinki Greater Helsinki population 1.470.552 area 3.698 km2 density 397.7 / km2

Vancouver Metro Vancouver population 2.463.431 area 2.883 km2 density 854.6 / km2

Capital region population 1.231.595 area 672 km2 density 1.800 / km2

City population 631.486 area 115 km2 density 5.493 / km2

City population 642.045 area 214 km2 density 3.004 / km2

Sydney Greater Sydney population 4.700.000 area 10.574 km2 density 445 / km2

Barcelona

Urban area population: 4.241.484 area 2.067 km2 density 2.052 / km2

Metropolitan area population 5.355.127 area 4.268 km2 density 1.250 / km2

City population 208.374 area 25 km2 density 8.330/km2

City population 1.620.809 area 101 km2 density 16.000 / km2

Comprehensive Ranking 4

Global Power City Index “The chronological changes in score over the past 10 years of the GPCI show how cities around the world have seen their urban power affected relatively in the global context. While the largest cause of these score changes is economic, and at times scores drop due to macroeconomic conditions, there are still cities that have managed to overcome individual challenges in Livability, Environment, and Accessibility, improving their function scores. Looking back at the past ten years for Tokyo, Accessibility and Cultural Interaction which were somewhat weaker compared to the top 2 cities, have achieved higher results, while the city overtook Paris to become No. 3 in 2016. This year as well, Tokyo’s comprehensive score rose further, allowing it to close the gap and draw closer to 2nd place New York. Although the city’s No. 1 position in Economy, which it had maintained for the past 6 years, dropped to the No. 4 spot in GPCI-2017, all of Tokyo’s individual functions received high scores, showing that the city has become more balanced. Within the power relations of the coming years, it will be indispensable for cities to grasp the trends shown by benchmarked rival cities while understanding the appeal as well as challenges faced, in order to increase their urban power. It is because of this need for a comprehensive index that the GPCI exists, and we hope that it will continue to be of further use to various people in drafting urban policies and business strategies.” - Hiroo

Ichikawa

The Global Power City Index (GPCI) is published annually by the Mori Memorial Foundation’s Institute for Urban Strategies and seeks to analyze the ‘magnetism’ of global cities to attract people, business, and other resources. Taking a comprehensive approach, the GPCI uses 70 indicators representing 26 indicator groups across 6 functions (Economy, R&D, Cultural Interaction, Livability, Environment, and Accessibility) to provide a comprehensive evaluation of 44 cities. With the index reaching its 10-year anniversary in 2017, the GPCI is able to look back over a decade of urban data to reveal important trends and fluctuations. In general, top cities such as Tokyo and Amsterdam have maintained their positions, while there has been stronger movement among middle-ranked cities. Since the GPCI’s inception in 2008, major Asian cities have continued to display improvement, moving up the rankings, as seen by Hong Kong, Seoul, Beijing, and Shanghai.

Top 10 Cities by Function-Specific Ranking

Function Specific Ranking

Flow OF Function Specific Ranking

Indicator Groups Market Size Market Attractiveness Economic Vitality

Economy Human Capital

Business Environment

Ease of Doing Business

Comprehensive Ranking

Academic Resources

Research and Development

Research Background

Research Achievement

Trendsetting Potential

Cultural Resources

Cultural Interaction

Facilities for Visitors

Attractiveness to Visitors

International Interaction

No.

Functions

Indicators

Nominal GDP

GDP per Capita

GDP Growth Rate

Level of Economic Freedom

Total Market Value of Listed Shares on Stock Exchanges

World's Top 500 Companies

Total Employment

Number of Employees in Service Industry for Business Enterprises

Wage Level

Ease of Securing Human Resources

Office Space per Desk

Corporate Tax Rate

Level of Political, Economic and Business Risk

Number of Researchers

World's Top 200 Universities

Academic Performance in Mathematics and Science

Readiness for Accepting Researchers

Research and Development Expenditure

Number of Registered Industrial Property Rights (Patents)

Number of Winners of Highly-Reputed Prizes (Science and Technology-related Fields)

Interaction Opportunities between Researchers

Number of International Conferences Held

Number of World-Class Cultural Events Held

Trade Value of Audiovisual and Related Services

Environment of Creative Activities

Number of World Heritage Sites (within 100km Area)

Opportunities for Cultural, Historical and Traditional Interaction

Number of Theaters and Concert Halls

Number of Museums

Number of Stadiums

Number of Luxury Hotel Guest Rooms

Number of Hotels

Attractiveness of Shopping Options

Attractiveness of Dining Options

Number of Foreign Residents

Number of Visitors from Abroad

Number of International Students

Indicator Groups

Working Environment

Cost of Living Security and Safety Livability Well-Being

Ease of Living

Comprehensive Ranking

Functions

Ecology

Environment

Air Quality

Natural Environment

International Transportation Network Transportation Infrastructure Accessibility

Inner-City Transportation Services

Traffic Convenience

No.

Indicators

Total Unemployment Rate

Total Working Hours

Level of Satisfaction of Employees with Their Lives

Average Housing Rent

Price Level

Number of Murders per Million People

Economic Risk of Natural Disaster

Life Expectancy

Degree of Social Freedom, Fairness, and Equality

Risk to Mental Health

Number of Medical Doctors per Million People

ICT Readiness

Variety of Retail Shops

Variety of Restaurants

Number of Companies with ISO 14001 Certification

Percentage of Renewable Energy Used

Percentage of Waste Recycled

CO2 Emissions

Density of Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM)

Density of Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), Density of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)

Water Quality of Rivers

Level of Green Coverage

Comfort Level of Temperature

Number of Cities with Direct International Flights

International Freight Flows

Number of Arriving / Departing Passengers on Domestic and International Flights

Number of Runways

Density of Railway Stations

Punctuality and Coverage of Public Transportation

Travel Time between Inner-City Areas and International Airports

Commuting Convenience

Transportation Fatalities per Million People

Taxi Fare

Global Power City Index 2017

Cities through the lens of the GPCI 2017’s ranking

1st place: London London retains the No. 1 spot in the comprehensive ranking for the sixth year in a row since GPCI-2012. The UK capital maintains its lead in Cultural Interaction and continues to demonstrate growth in this function with more than 19 million people visiting the city, resulting in a strong score for Number of Visitors from Abroad (No. 1). The city also maintains high rankings from last year in Economy (No. 2), Research and Development (No. 2), and Accessibility (No. 2). In particular, the move up this year for Research and Development is due to higher scores for “Academic Resources,” notably in World's Top 200 Universities (No. 1) and Number of Researchers (No. 5). In the city’s area of weakness, Livability, it improves its standing to No. 17 thanks to strong results for Risk to Mental Health (No. 9) and ICT Readiness (No. 11), two new indicators introduced this year. In Environment, London rises to No. 7 and continues to grow as a city with even stronger comprehensive power. London tops Manager and Visitor, and following on from last year, earns strong scores in Researcher (No. 2) and Resident (No. 2). The city also demonstrates its outstanding comprehensive power in the actorspecific ranking by exceeding New York and Vienna in Artist to claim the No. 3 spot.

3rd place: Tokyo Tokyo remains at No. 3 in the comprehensive ranking and boosts its overall score to close the gap on second-placed New York. The city’s biggest strengths are in Economy (No. 4) and Research and Development (No. 3). In Economy, Tokyo falters slightly and is overtaken by New York for Nominal GDP (No. 2), but still garners strong scores in “Economic Vitality,” particularly for Total Market Value of Listed Shares on Stock Exchanges (No. 2) and World's Top 500 Companies (No. 2). In Research and Development, Tokyo slips down the list for Research and Development Expenditure (No. 3), but still earns high evaluations for Number of Researchers (No. 1) and Number of Registered Industrial Property Rights (Patents) (No. 1). Cultural Interaction is becoming one of Tokyo’s strengths – it overtakes Singapore this year and climbs to No. 4. However, the Japanese capital sees its ranking drop to No. 14 in Livability due to low scores for the newly introduced indicator of Risk to Mental Health (No. 29), and for Degree of Social Freedom, Fairness, and Equality (No. 23), which now includes data related to the advancement of women in society. There is no change in Tokyo’s ranking for Environment (No. 12), but there remains room for improvement. Tokyo delivers better scores this year in Manager (No. 5), Artist (No. 6), and Visitor (No. 4). While assessments from Researcher (No. 3) and Resident (No. 6) remain unchanged, Tokyo returns a good balance of high scores much like London.

4th place: Paris

5th place: Singapore

Paris stays at No. 4 in the comprehensive ranking from GPCI-2016, but a lower overall score means the gap with Tokyo (No. 3) has widened.

Singapore retains its No. 5 comprehensive ranking in the GPCI for the ninth straight year.

Paris performs strongly in Accessibility (No. 1) and Cultural Interaction (No. 3). In the latter, the French capital city maintains its lead for the second straight year for Number of Museums and has topped the list since 2010 for Opportunities for Cultural, Historical and Traditional Interaction. In contrast, the city slips down the rankings in Research and Development (No. 10), Livability (No. 7), and Environment (No. 28). The sharp drop from No. 1 to No. 7 in Livability owes mainly to Number of Murders per Million People (No. 39), which is impacted by the number of victims in the 2015 terrorist attacks. The widening gap with Tokyo at No. 3 is the result of Paris’ lower scores in these three functions. Paris is evaluated particularly highly in Artist (No. 1), Resident (No. 1), and Visitor (No. 3). The city remains at No. 6 in Researcher, but moves up three places to No. 8 in Manager.

The city earns a high rank in five of the six functions: Economy (No. 8), Research and Development (No. 6), Cultural Interaction (No. 5), Environment (No. 3), and Accessibility (No. 9). Singapore moves up the list in Research and Development by boosting its scores for Academic Performance in Mathematics and Science (No. 1) and Readiness for Accepting Researchers (No. 3). In the city’s problem area of Livability (No. 28), it markedly improves its standing from last year thanks to high scores for Risk to Mental Health (No. 10) and ICT Readiness (No. 3), two new indicators introduced this year, but compared with the other functions there is still much room for improvement. Singapore’s ongoing weakness in “Cost of Living” is highlighted by its low scores for Average Housing Rent (No. 42) and Price Level (No. 42). Singapore maintains its positions for Manager (No.2) and Researcher (No. 9), but improves its standing in Visitor (No. 7). In Artist, the city slumps to No. 41 and still has issues to overcome in “Cultural Stimulation” and “Environment for Creative Activities (Studio Rent & Spaces),” reflected in poor assessments of Opportunities for Cultural, Historical and Traditional Interaction (No. 41) and Environment of Creative Activities (No. 34).

6th place: Seoul Seoul retains its No. 6 comprehensive ranking in the GPCI for the sixth straight year. The city attains high scores in Economy (No. 10), Research and Development (No. 5), and Accessibility (No. 10). Along with these three functions, Seoul’s strengths now include Cultural Interaction with an improved ranking of No. 11 this year. This owes mainly to higher scores for Number of International Conferences Held (No. 3), Number of World-Class Cultural Events Held (No. 25), and Trade Value of Audiovisual and Related Services (No. 9). Meanwhile, Seoul slips down the rankings in Livability (No. 22) and Environment (No. 27). In Environment, a considerable problem area for the city, its score is dragged down by weak assessments in “Air Quality,” including Density of Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM) (No. 37) and Density of Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), Density of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) (No. 41), despite high scores for “Ecology” such as Number of Companies with ISO 14001 Certification (No. 6) and Percentage of Waste Recycled (No. 1). Manager (No. 12) and Researcher (No. 10) evaluations of Seoul are robust. However, the city is ranked around the middle of the 44 cities in Artist (No. 24), Visitor (No. 24), and Resident (No. 27), which all receive lower evaluations compared to last year. Given the sharp drop down the list in Resident, Seoul will now need to improve its living environment.

7th place: Amsterdam Amsterdam is No. 7 this year in the comprehensive ranking, with the city continuing to improve every year, from No. 9 in 2015 and No. 8 in 2016. The city greatly improves its ranking in Livability, climbing to No. 2 this year. This owes to high evaluations of the new indicators in 2017, ICT Readiness (No. 1) and Risk to Mental Health (No. 12), as well as sustained high scores in “Working Environment” and “Cost of Living.” Amsterdam’s strength is surely its comprehensive power, ranking inside the top 20 in all functions: Economy (No. 19), Research and Development (No. 17), Cultural Interaction (No. 14), Environment (No. 13), and Accessibility (No. 7). The city greatly improves its ranking in Research and Development this year thanks to more positive evaluations for the lively research interaction taking place in the city, such as for Readiness for Accepting Researchers (No. 17) and Interaction Opportunities between Researchers (No. 20). Amsterdam is rated highly by Artist (No. 9) and Resident (No. 9). While the city earns stronger evaluations from Manager (No. 14) and Researcher (No. 17), its score in Visitor (No. 17) is down, notably for “Richness of Tourist Attractions.”

8th place: Berlin Berlin climbs one place in the comprehensive ranking from GPCI-2016 to No. 8. The city’s strength is Livability, in which it is ranked No. 1 thanks to high scores for “Working Environment,” “Cost of Living,” and “Ease of Living.” The German capital sees no major changes in ranking for Cultural Interaction (No. 6), Environment (No. 11), and Research and Development (No. 13), but its standings in both Economy (No. 21) and Accessibility (No. 29) have slipped. The former’s score is reduced by lower evaluations for Nominal GDP (No. 18), GDP per Capita (No. 28), and GDP Growth Rate (No. 25), while a weaker assessment of Number of Arriving / Departing Passengers on Domestic and International Flights (No. 32) harms the latter. Berlin is rated highly by Artist (No. 2) and Resident (No. 5), both up from last year. Despite slipping down the list from last year in Visitor (No. 12), the city receives comparatively high evaluations from Manager (No. 16) and Researcher (No. 13), which indicate that the German capital is an attractive city for all actors.

10th place: Sydney Sydney climbs four places in the comprehensive ranking from GPCI-2016 to No. 10. The city exhibits strength in Economy (No. 9), Environment (No. 9), and Cultural Interaction (No. 10). High indicator scores in Economy include Nominal GDP (No. 8) in “Market Size”, GDP Growth Rate (No. 9), and Level of Economic Freedom (No. 5) in “Market Attractiveness.” In Environment, the city is evaluated highly for “Air Quality,” particularly regarding Density of Suspended Particulate Matter (SPM) (No. 1) and Density of Sulfur Dioxide (SO2), Density of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) (No. 1). Moreover, in Cultural Interaction, Sydney earns strong scores in “International Interaction” such as Number of International Students (No. 2) and Number of Foreign Residents (No. 10). However, the city needs to improve its standing in Accessibility (No. 32), returning low scores in “International Transportation Network,” notably for Number of Cities with Direct International Flights (No. 35), and “Inner-City Transportation Services,” specifically Density of Railway Stations (No. 27) and Punctuality and Coverage of Public Transportation (No. 33). Sydney benefits from strong evaluations by Manager (No. 11), Researcher (No. 12), Visitor (No. 13), and Resident (No. 16), but struggles in Artist (No. 36). The city needs to develop the infrastructure for artists that will improve “Cultural Stimulation” and “Environment for Creative Activities (Studio Rent & Spaces).”

21st place: Brussels

24th place: Barcelona

28th place: Vancouver

Brussels climbs two places in the comprehensive ranking from GPCI-2016 to No. 21.

Barcelona slips four places in the comprehensive ranking from GPCI-2016 to No. 24.

Vancouver holds steady at No. 28 in the comprehensive ranking from GPCI-2016.

The city’s highest ranking is in Cultural Interaction (No. 15), despite slipping down the list this year. There is also a sharp boost in its ranking from last year in Research and Development (No. 20) in a sign that this function could be a potential strength. The increase owes to higher scores for Readiness for Accepting Researchers (No. 10) and Interaction Opportunities between Researchers (No. 30). Meanwhile, Brussels receives a low evaluation in Economy (No. 32), with issues including “Market Attractiveness,” such as GDP Growth Rate (No.39), “Economic Vitality,” such as World's Top 500 Companies (No. 34), and “Ease of Doing Business,” such as Corporate Tax Rate (No. 36). Except for Resident (No. 14), the city fails to be ranked in the top 20 by all other actors with Manager (No. 30), Researcher (No. 24), Artist (No. 28), and Visitor (No. 26) showing that improvement is needed across the board. In the lowest-ranked actor group of Manager, Brussels has issues to overcome in “Potential of Business Growth” and “Accumulation of Industry to Support Business.”

The city’s strength is in Livability (No. 6) with high scores for “Cost of Living,” such as Average Housing Rent (No. 4) and Price Level (No. 12) and “Well-Being,” for example Life Expectancy (No. 9) and Risk to Mental Health (No. 5). It receives comparatively good assessments in Cultural Interaction (No. 12), Accessibility (No. 16), and Environment (No. 23) but performs poorly in Economy (No. 39) and Research and Development (No. 32). In Economy, the city lacks the resources to earn a higher ranking because of low scores in “Economic Vitality,” such as World's Top 500 Companies (No. 33) and Total Employment (No. 35) and in “Human Capital,” such as Number of Employees in Service Industry for Business Enterprises (No. 38). In Research and Development, Barcelona can only manage a low ranking for Research and Development Expenditure (No. 37). The city is rated highly by Artist (No. 7) and Visitor (No. 9). Despite slipping slightly from last year in both of these categories, it still maintains its high rankings thanks to solid assessments of “Environment for Creative Activities (Studio Rent & Spaces)” and “Cultural Attractiveness & Opportunities for Interaction.” Still, the city has many issues to address from a business perspective in light of its poor rating from Manager (No. 36).

The city’s ranking in Livability (No. 9) increases and becomes an area of strength together with Environment (No. 10). This year’s improvement in Livability is due to a high score for Economic Risk of Natural Disaster (No. 11), an indicator that was revised in 2017, as well as a mid-range ranking for ICT Readiness (No. 17), an indicator newly introduced this year. In Environment, the city retains its No. 10 ranking from last year owing to high assessments in “Air Quality” and “Natural Environment.” However, Vancouver’s rankings drop in all the other functions. In Accessibility (No. 38), score declines are observed for Punctuality and Coverage of Public Transportation (No. 24) and Transportation Fatalities per Million People (No. 18). The ranking in Cultural Interaction (No. 33) is also low, which suggests Vancouver must do more to improve transportation and tourism. Vancouver is evaluated favorably by Artist (No. 14) for “Accumulation of Art Markets” and “Daily Life Environment (Ease of Living).” The city is ranked around the middle or near the bottom of the list by all other actors, especially Visitor (No. 35).

Planning & Urban Design for Uncertain Futures

Arun Jain Arun Jain is a US and Indian educated urban designer, and urban strategist with over three decades of US and international experience in practice and academia. Based in Seattle, Washington, he is an international urban development consultant and advisor to public agencies at every scales, design and engineering companies, foundations, and institutions, including the UN. In 2016, he was a Guest Professor at the Institute for City & Regional Planning (ISR), Technical University of Berlin. From 2003-09 he was Portland, Oregon’s first Chief Urban Designer. Arun has planned, designed, and directly influenced over 90 new private and public projects around the world with a combined investment capital of over $14 billion. AHe has served on several international boards, and been an advisor to the Indian State of Karnataka (Pop. 64 million). He teaches and researches at universities worldwide, with contributions across print and digital media. Arun received his Bachelor’s in Architecture from the School of Planning & Architecture, New Delhi, India, and two Masters Degree’s (City Planning & Architecture) from the then Urban Design Program, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA. Arun is a Fellow of the American Institute of Certified Planners.

Abstract In an increasingly complex world growing amounts of information and data make it all the harder to discern what is relevant. Our immediate response is to over-simplify complex conditions. In doing so we lose much of the nuance that is important to solve problems in such settings. This is even more complicated when we are faced with growing uncertainties and an increased sense of urgency, particularly when dealing with urban development. This article shares the related planning challenges we must overcome. It also provides an example of how a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Decision Support Toolâ&#x20AC;? can become a more reasonable means of shared understanding, a tool for internal priorities and external consensus. This narrative is emphatic in our need to focus on applied, and real-world tools for an increasingly uncertain future. Urban development, cities, and the world would benefit immensely from such efforts.

Keywords: Complexity, Decision Support, Urban Design, Planning, Uncertainty

Page 2 of 17

Planning & Urban Design for Uncertain Futures Planning & Urban Design for Uncertain Futures Arun Jain FAICP, Urban Designer, Urban Strategist The complexity of our world is growing, and our struggle to comprehend it promises to get only tougher as we become more data heavy. This is amplified by the demand for faster decision making and results despite time and budget constraints urging responses to stay as simple and be as quick as possible. In our rush to respond it is easy to over-simplify or look past key aspects of what makes our urban life complex, rich, and vibrant. Since our world is complex by its very nature, it follows that our success in dealing with these man-made and environmental systems is directly proportional to our ability to comprehend them. When our comprehension of complex conditions is compromised, we tend to take bigger risks. We need to understand both the nature of complex urban problems, and the “space” in which desired outcomes can be realized. Planners, urban designers, social scientists, and the development professionals are particularly challenged by these pressures. What will the world look like and need even 10 or more years from now? Will what we imagine today be relevant tomorrow? How fast can we understand and share that understanding with an impatient citizenry? This article draws upon two sources. First, my closing keynote presentation entitled: “Uncertainty, Complexity and Urgency: Applied Urban Design” at the “Cybernetics State of the Art: A Conscious City Conference” held at the Technical University of Berlin, on June 9th, 2016 1. That presentation underscored our need for more thoughtful methods to intervene in cities. This assertion is driven by the conviction that we need faster ways to apply critical thought in a fast moving and increasingly complex urban world. The second is a blog post hosted in January 2015 by “Meeting of the Minds” entitled “Decision Support Tools that Counter Uncertainty and Risk in Urban Settings” 2. That article dwelt on the changing nature of data and information and the consequences of a completely open decision-making process. Both write ups described various aspects of a “decision support tool” prepared for the Maryland National Capital Parks and Planning Commission (MNCPPC) in 2013. This tool was developed to demonstrate practical and applied ways by which we can more effectively address complex planning issues with greater confidence. It was an exploratory and concluding effort of my multi-year effort to streamline and improve the MNCPPC’s master planning processes and outcomes. The intent of this tool was to create an easy-to-understand visual means by which decision making within the planning and allied departments could be improved. The tool also sought to build widespread and quick stakeholder comprehension of the complex regulatory realities in which county wide planning problems needed to be prioritized and addressed. Although the tool was not implemented, the thought process and outcomes provide good lessons on the opportunities and practical challenges of embracing comprehensive system sensitive thinking. 1

The mentioned presentation was also written up as Chapter 7 by the author in the following publication: Jain, Arun, “Uncertainty, Complexity & Urgency: Applied Urban Design”, in Werner, Liss C. (ed.), “Cybernetics: state of the art”, TU Berlin book series 'CON-VERSATIONS', Bunschoten, R., Werner, L. C. (eds.), Vol. 1, Universitätsverlag Technische Universität Berlin, Berlin, 2017. ISBN 978-3-7983-2953-9, ISSN 2567-4633 (Print), ISBN 978-3-7983-2954-6, ISSN 2567-4641 (online). Adaption and reprint rights retained by author. 2 “Decision Support Tools that Counter Uncertainty and Risk in Urban Settings”, Meeting of the Minds Blog Post, http://meetingoftheminds.org/decision-support-tools-that-counter-uncertainty-and-risk-in-urban-settings-12619

Page 3 of 17

Traditionally planning (urban and regional), synthesizes many allied professional disciplines including urban design, architecture, landscape architecture, environmental science, real estate development, urban economics, management, and social theory. There is growing recognition that the profession also needs to also embrace an even wider spectrum of complex systems that include soft (social), and hard (physical) infrastructure, but also, adding the role of technology, cognition, and behavior. In my view, an understanding of systems thinking, and complexity would help as well. Hyper Change In its 2010 evaluation, The Institute of The Future 3 suggested four global trajectories: 1. Growth (but staying just one step ahead of disasters), 2. Constraint (i.e. sustainable paths in a low capital world), 3. Collapse (i.e. local disasters, regional conflicts) and 4. Transformation (a change towards super structured systems). Eight years later I am convinced trajectories 1 and 3 remain the dominant global trend. In this context it is increasingly evident that our methods to deal with complex man-made and natural conditions are inadequate. This is underscored by our persistent inability to develop appropriate responses to climate change and growing global social and economic inequities. It is unreasonable to assume we can create proper responses to situations requiring complex trade-offs without understanding each issue in all its complexity first. To do that we need better methods. To begin we must overcome the following eight impediments to effective urban development. They tend transcend geography, context, and scale. • • • • • • • •

The inability to comprehend complexity and the nature of complex problems The failure to understand that responses to complex or “wicked” problems 4 are better thought of in terms of trade-offs (i.e. better or worse), not right or wrong Our inability to transcend siloed thinking Our inability to work across different skill sets and competencies to understand the issues Our struggle to fully exploit and work with our inherited governance and fiscal constraints The collective inability to look beyond the short term Our inability to plan adaptively for uncertain futures (without needing to predict them) Our inability to deal with problems that dynamically morph as we attempt to address them

These are not small challenges and we need be sympathetic to how hard it is to fix them. It is not the focus of most urban dwellers to concern themselves with the long term needs of complex urban situations. It is therefore the responsibility of urban designers and planners to develop methodologies that help every actor in the development process comprehend the relevant realities and issues better. Individualized responses tailored to satisfy a bunch of single issue advocacies do not usually add up to a

2010 Map of the Decade, Institute of the Future http://www.iftf.org/our-work/global-landscape/ten-yearforecast/2010-ten-year-forecast/2010-map-of-the-decade/ 4 Horst W. J. Rittel, Melvin M. Webber, “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning”, https://archive.epa.gov/reg3esd1/data/web/pdf/rittel%2bwebber%2bdilemmas%2bgeneral_theory_of_planning.p df

Page 4 of 17

nuanced, and comprehensive response to a complicated problem 5. As our world becomes more data driven and complex, our responses and systems must be of proportional consideration 6. To be adequately strategic, it would be helpful if urban design and planning can be thought of as an act of developing an explainable set of actions to achieve a desirable set of urban development outcomes. This means there must be an adequate mix of thought, technique, creativity and expertise. It also means that everyone involved must acknowledge that for complex urban conditions, there cannot be one ideal strategy to achieve desired outcomes. It also means that every urban challenge’s “strategy bundle” of solutions will have its own unique mix of risks and uncertainties. But each will also have its own mix of opportunities and potential as well. When successful, the resulting strategies may use, or be used to: coordinate public and private efforts, channel civic energy and resources, adapt to new circumstances, create new contexts and settings and finally, integrate. The ongoing dilemmas in accomplishing such robust outcomes are that: • It is difficult to bring involved parties together • We have inadequate tools to build collective comprehension • We have entrenched and difficult governance structures • Open processes often allow the original purpose of gathering to be hi-jacked • It is hard to predict dynamically changing external influences • It is tough to give up decision making authority and truly democratize information and related processes These are not intractable problems, but addressing them does require creativity that vigorously challenges the existing paradigms in which decisions are routinely made. Theory is necessary for us to be more thoughtful, but real world problems in complex conditions are constrained by personalities, governance structures and other operational constraints that require applied approaches. To be truly adaptive and contextually relevant, urban problems cannot blindly rely on theory. In every instance the understanding of, and the approach to the problem must be tested, and made adaptive to its context. A Decision Support Tool for Planning and Urban Development So how might we think and do better to address these concerns? The following is a real-world attempt in the US to provide a better basis for planning strategies and activity. The original engagement with the MNCPPC (Maryland National Capital Parks and Planning Commission) was to help their in-house planning teams refine their Montgomery County wide master planning process. The then director felt that the plans being developed by staff were not only poorly conceived, but inconsistent in quality and intent when seen collectively across the entire county. The prevalent and persistent planning approach (common in most settings) was an abiding belief that more entitlements (zoned development permissions) were always better, and that more development would increase revenues and economic activity, which in turn would somehow improve the prospects for paying for public amenities (such as parks, libraries, schools, transit, bike trails etc.). It is an unfortunate reality that this trickle-down approach to obtain all the community needs that fall within the realm of the “public 5 6

Alfred E. Kahn, “The Tyranny of Small Decisions,” 1966 W. Ross Ashby, “Introduction to Cybernetics,” 1956

Page 5 of 17

good” is erratic and uncertain at best. This uneven distribution is most evident when urban settlements have large variation in the quality and distribution of their public spaces and social services. At the time of this effort there was no collective comprehension of the total permitted development capacity within Montgomery County. Each master plan was independently seeking to add as much development entitlement as possible, without regard of whether it was “stealing” development potential from an adjacent master plan area, or the entire county. As in many places, master planning in the county was a “me first” game, with each master plan taking advantage of their timing to formally entitle (permit) as much future development as possible. This would likely increase the risk for imbalanced conditions that would skew regional resources and service infrastructure. Clearly a mechanism to understand the larger consequences of local master plan formulation (and entitlement change) was needed. Further, due to budget constraints, the MNCPPC staff could only undertake a limited number of master plans each year. The basis for selecting which areas needed master plans seemed driven more by procedural urgencies, and expediencies rather than from technical comprehension and a broader consensus of both the county’s environmental limits (expressed in part as existing regulations) and its development potential (i.e. available capacity). The director’s office agreed with this broad assessment and supported the creation of this tool, which is now described. Development Management Assessment Tool (DMAT)

Figure 1: Role of DMAT in the MNCPPC Planning Process Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

Page 6 of 17

Most planning activities in the US take the guidance of an overall policy document that is usually known as the planning jurisdiction’s “General Plan” (the actual term may vary). This document is only periodically updated (usually at 5 - 10 year intervals), which means that most ongoing planning activities are mandated to work inside its directives. Figure 1 shows the relationship of how periodic and ongoing activity interact with each other with only infrequent impacts on the General Plan. The DMAT (Decision Management Assessment Tool) created in this effort was conceived to assist both periodic and ongoing activity. In this specific setting, this tool was designed to spatially map existing regulations relating to both environmental sensitivities and manmade development controls. The intent of DMAT was to create a GIS mapping methodology that would provide spatial insights on what was “fixed” (or regulated), and also identify what was “flexible” (i.e. less constrained) and to do so over the entire county’s land area. The outcomes would easily show which lands had the most unconstrained development potential. Such knowledge could in turn, help clarify internal planning priorities (i.e. within the planning department), and permit more clear discussions with the community, technical experts and decision makers (including elected officials).

Figure 2: DMAT Intent Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

Page 7 of 17

Figure 3: DMAT Data Methodology (regulatory constraints) Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

DMAT Methodology To accomplish this, careful decisions were made on the relevant data sets that would best represent the most comprehensive information on environmental and man-made regulations. The GIS representations of these data sets were then consistently represented as land areas colored from dark (regulated area) to light (less, or no regulation for that category). Figure 3 shows how these layers were assembled. A third category of â&#x20AC;&#x153;qualifiersâ&#x20AC;? was added to include areas that did not fall within either the environmental, or man-made regulatory categories, but would render land undesirable, or unlikely to develop. Process The mapping of each GIS layer was done by spatially mapping the regulations as progressive overlays of each layer on the other to cumulatively build up a consolidated spatial map of regulated lands. Figure 4 shows a map of the planning area for which this mapping was undertaken (Montgomery County, Maryland).

Total DMAT Land Area: 324,319 Acres (MontgomeryPage County) 8 of 17 Figure 4: DMAT Area Boundaries Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

The DMAT process progressively subtracts the regulated lands to show the remaining percentages of relatively unconstrained land. The final amount and distribution of unconstrained land is easy to see and quantify. Environmental Regulatory Layers Figure 5 conveys the environmental layers mapped in the form of a spreadsheet. This also indicates the mapping method of how regulated lands would be graphically represented on each GIS layer. The selection of these layers (and their mapping order) was the outcome of discussions with staff that comprised of planners and GIS technical experts. The departments and agencies that provided the GIS mapping data were also consulted.

Figure 5: Existing Environmental Constraints (regulatory) Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

The composite mapping of these layers is shown in Figure 6. The darkest areas are the most constrained indicating one or more regulations that limit that land. The final map shows that when all the environmental regulations are spatially consolidated, they cumulatively consume 60% of the total planning area or land in the county.

Figure 6: Composite of Environmental Regulatory Constraints Layers Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

Page 9 of 17

Man-Made Regulatory Layers A similar exercise was done for regulations covering man-made elements in the county. Here also, the darkest mapped areas are those with the greatest regulatory restrictions. Interestingly, each man-made regulatory layer requires detailed criteria. Clearly stating such criteria is an important and transparent way of keeping every actor in the planning process honest, and comfortable.

Figure 7: Existing Man-Made Constraints (regulatory) Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

For example, Figure 7 indicates that utility corridor regulations require a 50â&#x20AC;&#x2122; protection buffer area on either side of the utility pipeline or electric power line. Normally a developer would likely protest the buffer to be too excessive, and an environmentalist would claim it to be too small. As the mapping is simply a reflection of current regulation, both distracting voices could be easily silenced on practical and technical grounds. Often, not having an uncomplicated way to know, or see the relevant regulatory considerations clearly (expressed here as GIS layers) creates confusion. This, as experienced planners know, distracts from the planning issues that need to be collectively understood and decided upon.

Page 10 of 17

Figure 8: Composite of Man-Made Regulatory Constraints Layers Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

The resulting GIS composite map (Figure 8) of only the man-made regulations shows that 62% of the total planning area of the county is constrained by them. Figure 9 shows a combination of the environmental and man-made composite maps. Because there are area overlaps, the combined constrained area is 81% of the total land area in the county. To underscore the dramatic progression of how this final result emerged, the tool was visually organized by placing each individual GIS layer over the previous layer, thereby cumulatively adding up the restricted areas with each new layer. This transparency allowed each data layer to be critically assessed by stakeholders (individually and collectively). This method had the added impact of building progressive credibility and faith in the outcome.

Figure 9: Environmental & Man-Made Constraints Combined Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

Qualifiers The spatial mapping of existing environment and man-made regulations did not offer the full picture of the real “playing field” identifying which areas are least constrained for development. To stay realistic, new layers of land and development constraints were added under the broad heading of “qualifiers”. In this list (Figure 10), properties that had multiple owners were added. This is because such properties were considered too difficult and time consuming to assemble for meaningful development. Also, another layer indicating sites where the building value was more than twice its land value was mapped. It was considered unlikely such sites would be economically viable for development. Sustainability considerations were also factored in. Office buildings that were less than 50 years old and retail buildings that were less than 15 years old, were also mapped as constrained locations. This was to acknowledge it was unlikely and undesirable for them to be torn down during their reasonable lifespans.

Page 12 of 17

Figure 10: Additional Qualifiers Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

These additional constraints removed another 4% of the land area from availability reducing unconstrained land to 15% of the total land in the county (Figure 11). Impact and Applications Sharing the visual progression of regulatory constraints adding up to 85% of regulated land to a diverse audience of stakeholders, elected officials and technical staff had a very sobering impact. Everyone felt better after understanding that the remaining 15% of relatively unconstrained land still added up to a considerable amount of development potential.

Figure 11: Environmental, Man-Made & Qualifier Constraints Combined Source: Arun Jain developed for the MNCPPC, June 2013

Page 13 of 17

The distribution of constrained and unconstrained land was also revealing. The finer grain of detail revealed which areas would benefit from more planning attention. This also helped determine which areas might be given priority for master plans. This had the potential to help staff budget and prioritize their agency workload. When a separately prepared county wide rapid bus transit plan was applied on top of this analysis, it was clear some proposed stations were in highly constrained areas, while others were not. This provided another basis for phasing the implementation of the rapid bus transit system design and determining the different conditions around each proposed bus station. Despite its acknowledged value, this tool was not adopted by the MNCCPC as a formal mechanism. There were multiple reasons for this. A big barrier was the lack of institutional capacity (and will) to create, and implement all the necessary protocols to ensure a fully updated open data platform across all relevant county departments. This would have been no small undertaking. Another was the potential loss of retaining decision making authority by appointed individuals. And finally, the full vetting and comprehension of the tool itself was hampered by a change in leadership which brought in different priorities, and perspective. Conclusions This narrative began by asserting a need for better mechanisms to help comprehend complex environments without over-simplification. It points out how conventional urban design practice is increasingly inadequate to comprehend and address complex urban problems. To develop good decision support tools, we need to not only understand the larger context in which they apply, but also, the role of relevant institutional structures, and the way decisions are administered in them. We must combine all this with a good understanding of the built and natural environment in which interventions are needed. The development of this tool was a unique opportunity to test appropriate responses in the professional world free from the need to simulate real conditions. It sought to address several re-occurring planning problems. And, although it was designed for the MNCPPC, most planning environments could benefit from at least some aspects of its conception. Not only did DMAT provide a fast and open way to understand the complex regulatory conditions on MNCPPC territory, but it also helped prioritize the planning departmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s workload, with a clearer sense of planning urgencies and future development potential. This would also help in the forecasting and capital improvement program allocation and budgeting for the county. The DMAT tool also provided a good reality check by verifying where change is possible and helping confirm which areas were likely to experience the most change (i.e. the least regulated areas). It also supported better flexibility and adaptability by its users, providing a clear basis for scenario generation and being a reliable bench mark for competing development alternatives. Finally, DMAT also helped improve community processes by allowing more focused debate and encouraging more informed and thoughtful choices by those in both leadership and stakeholder positions. The unfortunate side effect of such tools, is that the more successful they are in becoming open platforms for public comprehension, discussion, decision making, and governance, the more they tend to threaten existing decision making authority. It is not human nature to give up such authority, and

Page 14 of 17

from that perspective alone it becomes clear that the will to deploy completely open information systems are reason for pause by many who have the authority to decide, and prevail. When successful, such tools help us make better decisions on how to cope with uncertain futures with a greater sense of urgency. Regardless of our respective professional expertise, we need more deliberate approaches that are sensitive to their realities and applied in their orientation and purpose. Our cities and urban settlements could certainly use the help.

References Ackoff, R. (1987). “The Art of Problem Solving”. New York: Wiley Ackoff R. (1986). “Redesigning the Future: Systems Approach to Societal Problems”. New York: John Wiley & Sons Ashby, W. Ross (1956). “Introduction to Cybernetics”. London: Chapman & Hall Friedman, Yona,(1975). “Toward a Scientific Architecture” Boston: MIT Press Jain, Arun, Haas, T. (Ed.) (2008). “Urban Design & The Future of Cities: Integrated Approaches and Dynamic Processes”, “New Urbanism & Beyond: Designing Cities for the Future”, New York: Rizzoli Jain, Arun (2012), “Ramy projektowania urbanistycznego – podstawa startegurbanistyczne jako podstawa stategii rozwoju (Portland, USA) “ p59-78, (Przyklady z praktyki planistycznej), Zarys Metodyki –Ed. Kozalowski, Jerzy, “Zintegrowane Planowanie Zrównoważonego Rozwoju” - Krakow: Instytut Rozwoju Miast (IRM) English: Jain Arun (2012), “Urban Design Frameworks as a Basis for Development Strategies: A Portland Case Study”, p59-78, Ed. Kozalowski Jerzy, “Integrated Planning for Sustainable Development - An Outline Of The Methodology”. Krakow: Institute of Urban Development (IRM) Kahn, Alfred E. (1966). “The Tyranny of Small Decisions: Market Failures, Imperfections, and the Limits of Economics”. Kyklos vol 19, p 23-46. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Kaplan, S. and Kaplan, R. (1989), “Cognition and Environment: Functioning in and Uncertain World”. Shropshire: Ulrich Publishing Kaplan, S. Kaplan, R. (1977 ).”Humanscape: Environments for People”. Shropshire: Ulrich Publishing Koberg, D., Bagnall, J. (1974). “The Universal Traveler: A Soft-Systems Guide to Creativity, Problem Solving and the Process of Reaching Goals”. Los Altos: W. Kaufmann Houghton Mifflin. Kuhn, Thomas S. (1970)., “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions” 2nd Ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press Lang, J. (1987). “Creating Architectural Theory: The Role of the Behavioral Sciences in Environmental Design”. Boston: Van Nostrand Reinhold Lang, J. (1980). “Designing for Human Behavior”. Boston: Van Nostrand Reinhold Rittel, Horst W.J., Webber Melvin M., “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning”. Policy Sciences 4 (1973), p155-169. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company. Wiener, Norbert (1950). “The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society”. Boston: Houghton Mifflin

List of Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11

Role of DMAT in the MNCPPC Planning Process DMAT Intent DMAT Data Methodology (regulatory constraints) DMAT Area Boundaries Existing Environmental Constraints (regulatory) Composite of Environmental Regulatory Constraints Layers Existing Man-Made Constraints (regulatory) Composite of Man-Made Regulatory Constraints Layers Environmental & Man-Made Constraints Combined Additional Qualifiers Environmental, Man-Made & Qualifier Constraints Combined

6 7 8 9 9 10 10 11 12 13 13

Page 16 of 17

Page 15 of 17

ity profiles

32 38 46 52 58 66 72 80 86 92 100 106

Amsterdam Barcelona Berlin Brussels Helsinki London Paris Seoul Singapore Sydney Tokyo Vancouver

hematic blocks

Paris vs Barcelona – Collective intelligence & Integrated solutions How to address spatial quality with or without a long term vision

London vs Brussels – Productivity & Inclusiveness How to make our cities economically vibrant and inclusive for all

Sydney vs Singapore – Resilience & Sustainability How to keep our cities green, liveable and compact

Seoul vs Berlin – Public involvement in city making How to organize public participation in times of growth and stagnation

Vancouver vs Helsinki – Densification and Affordability How to address spatial quality with or without a long term vision

Amsterdam Pieter Klomp

“Amsterdam is experiencing strong growth again on many fronts simultaneously. This time it is not about further expansion but about densification, within the framework of the metropolitan area at large. Not only are highly urban environments essential to its metropolitan attractiveness, it is also essential to reduce society’s ecological footprint. Some say Amsterdam has entered a third golden age. Others fear current qualities of life might change with it. Important issues are inclusiveness and affordability, retaining a mixed productive environment, mobility, and the incorporation of public facilities in an ever denser city. The ultimate challenge is to balance Amsterdam’s international position with local characteristics and qualities in a sustainable way: towards a human scale metropolis.”

Pieter Klomp is deputy director of the department of Urban Planning and Sustainability of the city of Amsterdam. He is leading the program “Koers 2025”, which aims to accommodate the strong growth of Amsterdam, aiming towards strengthening a human scale metropolis. As supervisor at the Northern IJbanks he has been actively involved in the current transformation of the Amsterdam waterfront. Pieter is trained as a landscape architect at Wageningen University, and holds an MBA degree from TiasNimbas/Bradford University.

Amsterdam a human scale metropolis

Amsterdam is facing the challenge of a prolonged and rapid growth both in number of inhabitants as in business and tourism. This is no novelty in the history of the city. In the 17th century Golden Age Amsterdam doubled in size several times over within one or two generations, profoundly changing the dynamics of the urban society. At the end of the 19th century an equally stormy development set in, expanding and modernizing the city, sometimes referred to as the second golden age. In both cases there was no all encompassing masterplan; even the crescent shaped canal zone developed in incremental steps rather than out of a preconceived grand design. Only the outlines,

On course 2025

literally, of the future ramparts were drawn at first. The scope of change was simply too large, with too many unforeseeable events ahead. As our late mayor Van der Laan stated, we now might have entered the third golden age in the development of the city. And again, the question arises which shape and strategy fits best. Urban growth now offers opportunities in strengthening interactive, productive and rewarding urban environments. These attribute largely to Amsterdamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s position in the international network of metropolitan areas, crucial to the prospects of current and future prosperity. At the same time urbanity offers sustainability opportunities, reducing societyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ecological footprint, in a relative or even absolute sense. For a metropolitan area around or even below sea level the urgency of mitigating climate change impact might be no more than obvious.

This implies that this time, growth should not be found in further expansion into the landscape, but in in physical densification and the intensification of social and economic tissues. And this time, the resulting intensive urbanity can not be regarded on its own, but can only function reciprocal complementary to a larger and varied metropolitan system. Although no masterplan in the traditional sense, a shape and strategy for Amsterdamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s growth emerges. The unique qualities of the canal zone, valued by its UNESCO-listing, imply a very careful handling. This includes a two-mile buffer zone for high rise. The zone between the traditional and the modern city on the contrary offers a high potential for densification. Characterized in many places by a relative low density, while at the same benefitting from an already largely available network of public transport facilities. Moreover, through redevelopment and densification the boundary might be bridged between the socio-economically successful urban core and the sometimes less successful post-war extensions. At the same time new typologies of urbanity can be offered, including high rise development, taking into account the massive cry for affordable space plus the changing preferences of a developing urban population. This might result in new types of urbanity, while continuing typical Amsterdam streetscape qualities. With these densification opportunities, challenges arise. How to combine rapid growth with the lessons learned from the past crisis, where initiatives of citizens and new development strategies strengthened specific local 35

community characteristics? How to retain a mixed urban environment, where both high-end office space and productive facilities find a place. How to finance or even physically fit in the mobility needs resulting from densification and intensification? Which new mobility concepts offer solutions? What guidelines and incentives are required to speed up the sustainability impact of densification, where and how benefitting from its economies of scale? How to strengthen the green-blue networks, not just to help mitigate the local effects of climate change, but also just to accommodate the growing number of inhabitants looking for recreational amenities? The interaction between these aspects create both complexities and opportunities. In this sense, the bicycle might be considered a typical Amsterdam token. Sustainable, affordable, healthy, interactive and space-

Structural vision 2040

efficient, it contributes to a wide range of issues. With a share in the modal split of around 60% in the central area, and 40% citywide, the impact is quite substantial. Yet its very success creates the next challenges, as bike-jams show the current outlays of streets has reached growth limits in the competition for space. And its multiple benefits do not diminish the need for an integral mobility approach, as still 60% of the traffic between city and region is covered by car. What then is the overall strategic outlook in which to operate? On the one hand Amsterdam figures in listings of world cities with high impact in the global economy, among giants like London, New York or Tokyo. The importance should not be underestimated. General expectations are that future innovation potential and economic growth will concentrate around maybe one or two dozen of worldwide metropolitan areas. Exchanging ideas and experiences among international peer cities will be extremely valuable in addressing the resulting challenges. On the other hand Amsterdam shows up in rankings of livability, often headed by middle sized cities like Vancouver or Vienna. Here local qualities play a decisive role, and should be recognized in the specific urban strategies. It is this double characteristic, of a world city in atmosphere and opportunities, while distance can still be expressed in bike-minutes, that might be Amsterdamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s biggest asset and quality to build upon: a human scale metropolis.

Imagination of future urban morphology

Barcelona Albert Arias Sans

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Combining the prosperity of Barcelona as a global city with the improvement of the quality of life of the population through mechanisms of urban redistribution, guaranteeing the right to decent housing, a healthy environment and overseeing the social and economic balance of the metropolitan region.â&#x20AC;?

Albert Arias Sans is the Head of the Strategic Plan for Tourism 2020 Barcelona since October 2015. Since 2004 he has worked as a consultant, project manager, researcher, and teacher in different companies, universities and research centers. Active member of the Research Group on Territorial Analysis and Tourism Studies at the Universitat Rovira i Virgili, he is working on his dissertation on tourism assemblages and the enactment of tourism as a political issue. He got a B.A. degree in Geography from the Autonomous University of Barcelona and a M.A. degree in Urban Management from the Erasmus University of Rotterdam. 39

Barcelona Today and Important Trends

Barcelona is the capital of Catalonia (Spain) and the second-largest city in Spain. Barcelona had an estimated population of 1.6 million in 2017, but it stands at the centre of a 2,500 km2 metropolitan area with around 5 million people which makes it the one of the most populous urban area in Europe.

between 15 and 64 years and 21.6% of 65 and over. In terms of economic and transport infrastructure the city boasts an international airport, the port trade fair facilities, the Zona Franca free trade zone, and a major logistics platform all within an area of five kilometres. These facilities offer the potential of making the city a Key logistics centre in the Mediterranean.

The physical characteristics of Barcelona make it one of Europeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most densely populated cities. Its dimensions (101.3 km2), and the volume of resident population, result in a high population density of 16,000 people per square kilometres. As a compact and dense city, mobility is an important issue. In inner mobility, people follow a sustainable behaviour: 52.1% of the trips are made by non-motorized modes (walking, bikeâ&#x20AC;Ś), 32,5% of the trips are made with public transport, and 15,5% are made with private transport.

Housing

The trends began to change at the start of 2014, notably regarding rents, which rose by 6.8% between 2014 and 2015. Among the cities with the biggest populations in the Spanish State, Barcelona is the one with the highest rents and the highest average rent. It is also the one where residents allocate the highest proportion of their income towards paying rent. At the same time, Barcelona is one of the Spanish cities with the emptiest rental properties (30% of main residences in the city). Despite that, the property sector noted this rental stock was not enough to meet existing demand in 2015. That was due to several internal and external factors putting upward pressure

The cosmopolitan, diverse and intercultural nature of Barcelona is shown by the fact that 16.6% of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s residents are foreigners, while in 2000 they accounted for 1,9%. The age structure reflects a mature society with 12.6% of the population between 0 and 14 years, 65.8%

Key Challenges

on prices, resulting in tenants on average salaries being replaced by others on high salaries and registered city residents by outsiders.

Social Inequalities

The social policies of the last decade have been marked by the economic crisis. Policies of austerity and the erosion of social protection mechanisms have forced a wide variety of social agents to seek solutions to everyday problems of citizenship. Today, the effects of the change of trend in the macroeconomic indicators are distributed very unevenly among the population of Barcelona. The announced economic recovery is coexisting with the persistence of serious problems that have grown alarmingly over the last ten years and they will not disappear unless decided actions to combat inequalities are carried out. • The challenges for the development of the social model of city are: • Guarantee incomes and cover essential needs • Guarantee quality employment and the social economy • Coverage of the basic rights of citizenship • Substantial reduction of residential expulsion, both in the form of evictions and loss of housing as well as the inaccessibility of large social sectors • Improvement and dignification of neighbourhoods • Increase in investment in children to overcome reproduction of inequalities • The promotion of gender equality • The guarantee of a Barcelona free from violence to all people

Promotion of biodiversity and urban greenery

Greenery is present in the whole urban plot, but often forms isolated spots, without continuity, and the objective of the city is to increase urban green infrastructure and put it at the service of citizens and improve the current green infrastructure for more services. All this, with the aim of a change of model, not only in the management of urban nature but also in the city itself. Green is intended to have much more prominence, and becomes the central element of other urban policies on which green may have an impact such as urban planning, mobility, public health, sustainability, social rights or culture.

Sustainable mobility and cycling

Bicycles have become more popular in Barcelona in recent years, in line with what is happening in many European capitals. The city’s mild climate and relief are ideal for everyday bicycle use. 80% of the city has a gradient of less than 2% and you can get around comfortably. The perception and use of the bicycle has changed a great deal over recent years, especially in the way people have come to understand its value and usefulness as a means of urban transport, and the network of bicycle lanes and adapted services has been extended. The implementation of Biking in 2007 was also important in this change, as it led to a rapid increase in the number of users.

Housing

Current problems with housing are people’s difficulties in meeting rent payments or the need to increase the public housing stock, whereas others have more to do with chronic problems such as young people’s difficulties in finding a flat or main homes being replaced by tourist accommodation. The main housing challenges are: • Boosting mediation and help with rent payments, to enable housing access and maintenance • Preventing the replacement of housing and protecting residents • Increasing the public housing stock: • Mobilising the private stock towards affordable housing to be made available throughout the neighbourhoods, in areas where there is scarce housing available with official protection, while preventing concentrations of populations in vulnerable situations. • Developing an active redevelopment policy that boosts the city’s more vulnerable environments

Tourism

In a few short years, Barcelona has become a tourist city. The sustained increase in visitors has transformed the city’s urban fabric, mobility and economic activities, as well as the daily life of many neighbourhoods. Tourism has become an inherent and integral part of the city, and that requires a change in perspective regarding tourism policy, which can no longer be merely a strategy for that sector; it must become a collective project. The latest studies estimate that Barcelona receives 23 million people year for leisure purposes, 75% correspond to tourists and 25% to one day excursion. 41

• •

•

Helping to ensure the social function of housing and to prevent anomalies in its uses The Authority must ensure housing meets its social function, in other words, that it provides the people residing in it with the necessary space, facilities and material means to satisfy their housing needs. Preparing the city for an ageing population

Tourism Management

Tourism has become a central issue, not just in political forums but also in the media and public opinion. The steady increase in visitor numbers and evidence of their effects has given rise to a visible and pluralistic debate, possible largely from broadcasting on social media networks. Today’s challenge is not just how to manage tourism in the city but also how to manage the city with tourism.

Sustainability

Air pollution is a serious health problem in European cities. It is imperative that the city of Barcelona urgently tackle a package of measures that ensure a decrease in the average levels of NO2 and PM10, to face this situation. Also, in certain weather conditions, occasional episodes of high pollution occur and specific emergency measures are required, therefore, it is necessary to establish a protocol for action in these exceptional pollution spots. The main challenges are: • Reducing emissions from road traffic by promoting public transportation and non-polluting transport • Keep and improve your ecological infrastructure because nature in the city configures an authentic green network that benefits all citizens.

The first challenge: the importance of governing tourism to guarantee the city’s general interests, is the one that is at stake. Governing by designing shared strategies and consulting with the plurality of players that have a voice and wish to use it, as we are building on a daily basis with the Tourism and City Council. Governing by building new action frameworks which enable, among other things, visits and tourist practices to be reconciled with everyday life in the city. Governing tourism, in short, means laying down rules of the game that allow a balance to be found in the city, by promoting certain practices and restricting others. The second challenge is to ensure the destination’s inalienable sustainability and to do so by adopting a broad approach, incorporating other fundamental criteria into environmental issues such as job quality and the strength of business relations with the local economic fabric. That means we need to think of sustainability not just as a brand attribute but also as a desired effect for the whole value chain, as a landmark to achieve within the entire destination.

Metropolitan Balance

Less than a century ago, the boundary lines of the city of Barcelona were defined. Just over five decades ago, we started to think about the management of the territory beyond the lines fixed on the map where Barcelona begins and ends. Thanks to that, to this reflection and this way of transforming the territory and of “building a city”, today we have a new institutional reality of a territorial area, which covers the city of Barcelona and its thirty-five surrounding municipalities.

The third challenge is working to ensure the best social return on the economic activity generated from being a leading destination. A social return which, while keeping to sustainability, is generated from multiple redistributive mechanisms, through shared value generation in the city, but also by activating knock-on effects to promote strategic sector business cooperation. In short, a true challenge, accompanied by an unequivocal political aim to turn tourism into a lever of change for launching other non-extractive activities that benefit from the constant influx of people visiting Barcelona every year.

The main challenges of the metropolis of Barcelona in this field are as follows: • How to cope with diversity in the metropolitan society, bearing in mind the increase in inequalities and, consequentially, the risks of segregation and vulnerability of specific social sectors or the work on new parameters of co-existence. • How to open a debate on the problems of housing (accessibility, improvements, etc.), on proximity facilities, or on the redefinition of the model and use of public space in the light of social changes in the territory. 42

General Vision

Topics and Themes

Barcelona’s vision and main purposes in the short and medium term fulfils to combine the prosperity of being a global city with the improvement of the quality of life of its population through diverse, plural and innovative mechanisms such as the urban redistribution, the right to decent housing, the encouragement of a healthy environment and the overseeing of the social and economic balance of the metropolitan region. In short, a city with high rates of attractiveness, innovation and talent but which above all seeks to strengthen its social values of cohesion, richness, diversity and integration.

The Neighbourhood Plan and the Economic Development Plans

•

• •

•

Trying to achieve a better territorial balance, the Neighbourhood Plan which acts in sixteen neighbourhoods, coinciding with those whose income is the lowest, is addressed to reverse the inequalities between the different territories of the city with an integral approach composed by measures in the fields of education, social rights, economic activation and urban planning measures. At the same scope, through the Economic Development Plans, Barcelona is looking for reverting some of the negative dynamics that several districts suffer in the socio-economic area, as well as committing to economic sectors that facilitate the transition to a new type of production model.

A city more equilibrated with a better territorial balance where social and economic inequalities are reduced and where the equal opportunities and rights are guaranteed. A city where the access to decent housing is a right for everyone and is guaranteed by authorities. A liveable, green, accessible, connected and healthy city where public space is recovered by citizens and where cars are being taken back from streets, fostering a walkable city in where pedestrians are in the core of urban planning. A city with a better preservation and an increasing and improvement of its natural heritage. A city that in turn does not reject to the strengthening of its local dynamics, preserving and enhancing its values, cultural heritage and territorial identity. A city fully integrated with its Metropolitan Area that constitutes one of the urban regions of the Mediterranean Arch with greater talent, prosperity and innovation; which has become in a space of social cohesion and harmony, synergies and economic relations and a model for proximity services, solidarity and a common project for a sustainable environment A city advancing towards a plural, innovative and socially inclusive economic model, based on sustainability at all levels. An economic model based in high rates of innovation and internationalisation but which promotes the local industry, fosters the development of talent and combines all with the territory’s home-grown potential of the entrepreneurial and creative ecosystem. A city with sustainable and responsible tourism which guaranties the destination’s sustainability, promoting, fostering and demanding responsibility for the actions, practices and activities that make up the city today, shaping the city of the future.

2016 – 2025 Right to Housing Plan With the purpose of guarantee the access to decent housing to everyone, Barcelona has launching 2016-2025 Right to Housing Plan. The aim behind this is to ensure the social function of housing and that the building of a public housing service goes ahead on a par with the best practices of other European cities. The Plan sets out seven major challenges: some are linked to current problems, such as people’s difficulties in meeting rent payments or the need to increase the public housing stock, whereas others have more to do with chronic problems such as young people’s difficulties in finding a flat or main homes being replaced by tourists.

Urban Mobility Plan, Super-Blocks and Greenery and Biodiversity Plan 2012 -2020

long-term actions to achieve ecological infrastructure producing benefits for people and constituting not only an environmental service but also a social one to meet the challenges of the future.

Seeking for a more liveable, greener and more connected city, Barcelona is carrying out several strategies. The Urban Mobility Plan (2013 – 2018) is created with the main aim of promoting a sustainable mobility in Barcelona and pursues the following milestones: improvement of the public transport, decrease of 21% of private vehicle mobility and increase in 308 km bicycle networks.

Also “Super-blocks” arise to give response to the scarcity of public or green spaces, high levels of pollution, environmental noise, accident rates or sedentarism. They pursue 6 objectives: more sustainable mobility (integrating new bus and bicycle lanes, promoting cycling and walking…), revitalization of public spaces (slowing down the pace of streets, increasing the spaces to stay and promoting new uses in the public space), promotion of biodiversity and urban green, promotion of urban social fabric and social cohesion (ensuring adequate facilities nearby, promoting productive activities…), promotion of the self-sufficiency in the use of resource (reducing energy consumption, making energy from renewable sources in situ, etc.) and integration of governance processes (involving citizens in the definition of projects).

Barcelona Metropolitan Strategic Plan (PEMB)

In addition, looking for a more integrated management with its metropolitan area, Barcelona are working in multiple fields such as the Barcelona Metropolitan Strategic Plan (PEMB), which it is an instrument for identifying the needs and potential of the territory in the medium term, for foreseeing tendencies and threats and for making proposals to tackle the future in the best conditions.

Strategy for Economic Promotion 2016 – 2019

With the purpose of achieve a plural, innovative and socially inclusive economic model and create quality jobs as the best mechanism for reducing inequalities, the strategy for economic promotion during the 20162019 term of office, led by Barcelona Activa leadership, prioritises the impetus of six strategic sectors which form the backbone of the entire municipal policy and the transformation of the productive model: The manufacturing industry, the digital economy, creative sectors, the green and circular economy, health and quality of life and the Social and Solidarity Economy. In this sense, there are also several strategic and transversal projects which are aligned with this purpose, such as 22@ or la Marina del Prat Vermell, which both seek to become in innovative districts, concentrating intensive knowledge-based activities but also being an example of urban refurbishment and a new model of city that provides a response to the challenges posed by the knowledge-based society.

As well, and pursuing the main aim to improve the natural heritage of Barcelona, the Greenery and Biodiversity Plan for 2012 – 2020 has been boosted. It contains 44

Strategic Plan for Tourism 2020

12 action proposals: 1. Incorporate tourist mobility into infrastructures and services planning of the different administrations and operators; 2. Develop specific mobility plans for crowded spaces; 3. Prioritize the movement of visitors on foot; 4. Encourage a more efficient allocation of tourist demand in public transport; 5. Design specific solutions adapted to the congestion problems of the public transport network; 6. Review of the public transport system fare policy; 7. Advance in a model of regulation and improvement of the touristic discretionary transport; 8. Rationalize the Tourist Bus Service; 9. Minimize the impacts of the tourist use of the bicycle and VMP; 10. Improve the network management of the city access transport system; 11. Reinforce the quality of the taxi service in tourist use; 12. Monitor the tourist mobility and generate information.

The Strategic Plan for Tourism 2020 has initiated an intense process of reflection and generation of shared knowledge about tourism in the city and its effects. It has addressed the key challenge of managing tourism in the city by making it compatible with the other needs of the multiple, complex and heterogeneous city that is Barcelona.

Territorial Strategy of Tourism Management and Overcrowding Spaces Management. On the one hand, the Territorial Strategy of Tourism Management (ETGT) deploys 261 measures in the 10 districts of Barcelona with three objectives: i. Maximize the social return of tourism activities in the neighbourhoods, ii. Boost an integrated management of the tourism (understanding tourism beyond promotion, guaranteeing the coherence of the conjunction of sectoral policies in the territories, coordinating the available tools and the shared challenges among districts and enhancing the public, private and community cooperation in tourist projects), and finally, iii. Building different strategies from the territory through a bottom-up process. All this considering the three territorial scales that affect the city: district, city and metropolitan area. On the other hand, Barcelona is also working in a specific management of overcrowding spaces due to the intensity of uses and the overpopulation that they put up with, that generate impacts such as large volume of mobility, overload of public services and infrastructures, etc.

Economic Development Strategy: As a part of the economic development strategy from tourist perspective, Barcelona is working in: strengthen the productive bases of the city, fostering endogenous resources, facilitating investments and innovative and responsible business tourism projects and promoting quality employment. Several initiatives have been carried out to boost the multiplier effect of tourism, fostering the economic development of the city, through the improvement of the living conditions of citizens and workers, the promotion of new business forms and the enhancement of the links between strategic sectors that guarantee the territorial balance and the social return of these activities. Accommodation Strategy: The Special Tourist Accommodation Plan (PEUAT) regulates the introduction of tourist accommodation establishments, as well as youth hostels, collective residences with temporary accommodation and tourist apartments. This regulation is in response to the need to make tourist accommodation compatible with a sustainable urban model based on guaranteeing fundamental rights and improving the quality of life for city residents.

Marketing Strategy: The Tourist Marketing Plan of the Destination is one of the central actions proposed in the Strategic Tourism Plan 2020. The main goals to which the Marketing strategy must respond are: Guarantee the sustainability of the destination, Promote the competitiveness of the tourist activity ensuring the greatest social return possible, Boost the multiplier effect of tourism in strategic economic sectors, Promote the integrated management of the destination, Integrate the different voices that make up the destination.

Tourist Mobility Strategy (EMT) provides a wide approach of the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tourist mobility to integrate it with the urban mobility strategies. These are summarized by 45

Berlin Manfred Kühne

“A century of disruption shaped Berlin as an urban laboratory, now trying to balance its drivers of urban development: a civil society, deeply rooted in 1968(West) and 1989-movements (East); a local economy, reshaped from scratch by start-up companies; a public sector, in demand of empowerment urgently.”

Manfred Kühne is Head of the department Urban Planning and Projects for the Senate’s Administration of Urban Development in Berlin. He’s an expert on spatial planning. He’s a member of the Association of urban, regional and national planning (SRL), a network of experts on spatial planning, and also of the German Academy of Urban and National Planning (DASL). Before, he was responsible for historic preservation in Berlin and Head Urban Planning for the city of Stralsund. He studied architecture in Berlin. 47

Current Situation and Key Challenges

Important Trends • • • • • •

Growth (Population, Economy, Visitors) 13 million Visitors p.A., Europe’s Top 3 destination, 500.000 visitors each day Tight housing market – rising rents, demand for 194.000 housing units by 2030 (projection) Climate Mitigation and Reduction of Energy Consumption Knowledge and Innovation (Research Facilities, Start-ups, Industries) New Forms of Mobility

Key Challenges • • • • • • •

Cope with city growth and its impacts Provide sufficient and affordable housing Improve competitiveness and economic development Ensure municipal services of public welfare including education Become climate neutral until 2050 Enable sustainable and barrier-free mobility Ensure public security

Challenge Housing:

Affordable housing has to be secured and provided respectively in the inner city as well as in the outskirts Aim: The social and functional mix of the European City

Key Tasks and Challenges here: • • • • • • • •

Limited potential for as well as opposition to interior development Activation of land Limited amount of publicly owned land Conflict: consolidation vs. urban climate Partial capacity overload of infrastructure Acceptance of new housing projects in neighbourhoods both in the city centre and the periphery Limits to urban consolidation Social overload, intensification of social conflicts

Vision Berlin 2030

General Vision

BerlinStrategy | Urban Concept Berlin 2030

Development Transformation Areas The BerlinStrategy describes the direction of development for 10 transformation areas. These are regions • that are undergoing many changes, • that need intervention from the public sector, • that are suitable for location profiling, or • that play a special role in the fabric of the city.

The BerlinStrategy was passed in the fall of 2014 as the general Leitbild for the growing City Berlin. It sets the framework for Berlin’s current and future development as an economically prosperous metropolis, livable capital and sustainable city, and answers the question: where does Berlin want to be in 2030? The strategy emphasizes solutions to handle growth and highlights the most important long term aims and strategies for Berlin.

They focus on the issues of population growth, economic structure, the function of the capital city, social cohesion, climate change, and energy transition. Thus, the transformation areas offer urban development planning the advantages of steering important development impulses in the right direction and setting priorities. This also allows public and private stakeholders to design and engage in coordinated group actions.

Vision Berlin 2030: With six qualities that define Berlin and are the driver for its growth and the base for its future development: • a dynamic capital with global reach • a place for everyone to explore their creativity • a green and compact city • an innovative economic and scientific hub • a caring, inclusive and socially responsible global city • a metropolis with enormous untapped land potential Berlin tries to use eight strategies to provide approaches to the major challenges that will face the city in terms of sustainable development between now and 2030. Both individually and together, they form the basis of an integrated approach to urban development. They promote quality of life and strengthen the city’s position as a competitive and attractive urban destination.

“star-pattern” – spatial guideline for regional development

City Forum The BerlinStrategy was developed in a Participation Process that involved relevant stakeholders: experts, citizens, politicians, and administrators. The City Forum 2030 - which took place during the process at least five times – informed and actively integrated partners from research, finance and civil society into the process.

Topics and Themes

Dialogue with the Urban Society

Housing

The participation of the urban society plays a crucial role in the development of Berlin. Creation of “Guidelines of Public Participation” (in progress) • Creation of transparency Expansion and elaboration of “www.mein.berlin.de” with interactive map management on information and with possibilities for participation (list of projects) • Creation of liability Transparent decision-making processes on whether and how participation takes place • Development of principles for participation easily recognizable formats Clear structure during implementation of participation processes

New Housing policies – some instruments: • Key player: six municipal housing companies - A rent alliance - Expanding the supply of housing by means of new building, including increasing publicly owned housing stock by means of new building and acquisitions. • Stronger involvement for the development of affordable housing by housing cooperatives and by public utility housing companies. • Building sites for public tasks - no privatisation of land suitable for housing construction or infrastructure. • Standardized agreements on the construction of social infrastructure and 30% affordable housing

• •

in land-use planning processes (“Berlin Model of Cooperative Development of Construction Sites”). Law against inappropriate use of residential housing for commercial purposes. (“Zweckentfremdungsverbot”) Protection of tenants from displacement as a result of extensive modernization or transformation of rented flats into owner-occupied flats – subject to prior permission of the borough authorities in certain areas under “social preservation statutes”.

Currently four of those Urban Development Plans (Economy, Centres, Housing, Mobility and Transport) are undergoing a simultaneous revision. The aims of this concurrence are to • • •

achieve an integrated development of both settlement areas and its mobility demands increase land use efficiency and to attain a long term provision of precautionary areas.

Berlin Energy and Climate Protection Programme 2030 Berlin is serious about climate protection and has an ambitious goal: to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. The central instrument of Berlin’s energy and climate protection policy is the Berlin Energy and Climate Protection Programme 2030 (BEK 2030). This was based on scientific recommendations and the results of largescale public consultation. It contains the actual strategies and measures that need to be implemented in the short and medium term to deliver the climate goals, and represents the “roadmap” on route to climate neutrality. Since climate protection is an interdisciplinary task, the BEK 2030 includes measures in all spheres of urban life: energy, business, buildings and urban development, private households and consumption as well as transport. Further measures relate to adaptation. The implementation of the BEK 2030 is being coordinated by the Senate Department responsible for climate protection. Additional funding will be made available for the measures in the coming years.

Simultaneous Revision of the Urban Development Plans “Economy”, “Centres”, and “Housing”, and “Mobility and Transport” For the challenges and opportunities described above Berlin uses (as one strategic tool among others) a range of Urban Development Plans (Economy, Centres, Housing, Mobility and Transport and Climate). They solidify the Land Use Plan by defining spatial and temporal priorities and point out the necessary measures to be taken. Each is designed for the whole city as the basis for all future planning. The task assigned to the urban development planning process is to identify social, economic and spatial challenges at an early stage and to develop strategies to deal with these issues. 51

Brussels Kristiaan Borret

“Brussels is a city that is really about multiplicity. Because of its multiple identity, Brussels can be considered as a laboratory for the future condition of many European cities, that will become more and more diverse. The major issue in Brussel today is about developing a coherent scale of urban planning that allows to tackle major challenges at the level of the Capital Region, rather than at the level of the municipalities.“

Kristiaan Borret is Bouwmeester – Maître Architecte of Brussels Capital Region. The Bouwmeester is an independent government official who stimulates and supervises the design quality of urban development projects. From 2006 to 2014 Kristiaan was Bouwmeester of Antwerp (Belgium). He is a professor of Urban Design at Ghent University since 2005. In his professional career, Kristiaan has been alternating between theory and practice, between design and policy, between architecture and urbanism. He participated in interdisciplinary research on contemporary transformations of the city and public space, and contributed to various urban design projects in Belgium, Netherlands and France. He is a member of the International Scientific Committee of Europan and of the Cercle de Qualité for the project of Ile de Nantes (France). He is Supervisor of Oostenburg for the City of Amsterdam (Netherlands). In 2013 he was awarded the Flemish Culture Award for Architecture 2012-2013. 53

Current Situation and key challanges

The Brussels Capital Region is a growing city (since 10 years a steady growth of +1,5% or 15.000 new inhabitants per year) and is becoming more than ever diverse (currently only 1 of 3 inhabitants in Brussels has both parents born in Belgium). The city is on the political-institutional level organised in a very complicated way. The cityscape is not very harmonious but much fragmented and varied. For all these reasons, Brussels is a city that is really about multiplicity. Because of its multiple identity, Brussels can be considered as a laboratory for the future condition of many European cities, that will become more and more diverse. The major issue in Brussels today is about developing a coherent scale of urban planning that allows to tackle major challenges at the level of the Capital Region, rather than at the level of the municipalities. Thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s why the Canal Plan is of great importance. The Canal area crosses the entire territory of Brussels and is the major strategic urban development project. It should respond to the need for new housing and amenities and want to shape a new centrality in the city, transforming the canal from a barrier of separation into an urban figure of connectivity. Very particularly, the Canal Plan distinguishes itself from many other waterfront regeneration projects by the explicit wish to keep and integrate productive economic activities within the city, as one of the elements of a truly mixed city. In Brussels the idea of a â&#x20AC;&#x153;productive cityâ&#x20AC;? is an ambition that is being put in realisation.

The Regional Plan for Sustainable Development

The Canal Plan ambitions

In the GPDO (Regional Plan for Sustainable Development), the Brussels Government proposes a number of very concrete projects related to housing, mobility, economy and the living environment.

We have suggested a philosophy, a vision of urban planning, of a project based on the canal and its surrounding area. The Canal Zone is a section of the city that was once dominated by bustling industrial and commercial activity. Based on the traces of these old activities, which themselves will be reinvented and redefined to create new workplaces, activity clusters. It is necessary to build a network of service spaces, made up of housing, schools, sports and leisure facilities, cultural places, parks and gardens that guarantee social cohesion and allow new forms of support and solidarity to be expressed.

The Brussels-Capital Region has been experiencing strong population growth for 15 years. The increasing number of people living in Brussels must be able to live, work, learn, relax, move quietly and enjoy green spaces. In addition, Brussels is very diverse on the social, economic and cultural level. The Regional Plan for Sustainable Development prepares the future of Brussels. It meets the requirements of efficient policy: comprehensive thinking, looking ahead and planning. The GPDO is the territorial instrument with which it must be possible to lead the compaction in the right direction by 2025 and then by 2040, and to guarantee the Brussels mix. It aims to provide an answer to 4 major challenges by ensuring: adapted housing, a pleasant living environment, improved mobility, the development of jobs, the economy and education. At the same time, it wants to safeguard equality between the different areas in Brussels and promote sustainable development of the capital. The GPDO covers the COMPLETE Brussels territory and is based on a twofold dynamic:

The Canal Plan initiated by the Government of the Brussels-Capital Region is a response to the following objectives: • to keep economic activity in the city, and to bring people’s workplaces and homes closer together; • to create housing that meets the needs associated with population growth and is suited to the means of all household profiles; • to create pleasant, unifying public spaces, promoting the Canal axis, the reopening of the Senne and the Canal crossings as links between neighbourhoods; • to create the conditions for a city that is open (to different functions, to different populations, etc.) in an area characterised as one that receives the new populations of the Brussels Region.

•

Achieving these objectives involves:

•

Strategic and priority poles. The government focuses a special part of its policy efforts in disadvantaged areas. New neighbourhoods are being created. A ‘star-shaped’ organization for our Region. Every neighbourhood or local identity centre has highquality services, facilities, public and green spaces. The neighbourhood city must also make it possible to reduce car use and ensure a more pleasant living environment.

• • •

The GPDO’s ambition is to make Brussels a region that is more attractive, more socially inclusive, more economically competitive, more creative in its research, greener and more efficient in the use of energy and raw materials. All these elements form the basis of living together harmoniously and in solidarity.

creating and promoting functional diversity by working on urban forms and planning programmes that enable different functions to co-exist; rationalising land occupancy and looking for ways to use it intensively; using public spaces as the starting point for determining the form of the city

Topics and Themes

A geographical location

indeed become a priority in a contemporary metropolis. The city is not a new construction on a virgin territory. It is an idea in constant renewal, building itself on past investments and the inheritance of its past industrial activity that used to develop on both sides of the canal, along the waterway. Today, it is while revisiting the traces of its former occupations that the Canal Plan’s city can give an answer to the major preoccupations of our time: the ones of economy and solidarity.

The canal, the canals, sketch out an area that crosses the country between Antwerp and Charleroi. The remarkable thing about the canal is the way it provides territorial roots. The Canal Zone is part of a geographical entity. It is in this sense a unique part of the Region that is unlike any other. The map shows and highlights the territorial nature of the Canal Zone, helping to give the whole region a geographical situation. It all happens as though this place, which is also the birthplace of the city of Brussels, was made up of urban landscapes that do not belong specifically to traditional urban scenes, changing the way in which they are viewed and the way their transformation might beconsidered. This map must be kept in mind each time we analyse a specific situation or undertake a particular action, so as to remember that this area is related to a set of landscapes further away to which the Canal Zone is associated. As we walk along the banks of the Biestebroeck basin, imagining how they could become, we understand how the implementation of the Canal Plan could change the way the city is transformed. A major project is starting. We can do better, and we must do better with fewer spending. Creating working places associated to other vital functions, must

An urban alternative When looking closely at the projects, like a port platform, a bridge, a singlestorey warehouse, a business or housing building, or the development of a public space, it is important to place each of these proposals in its urban, historical, geographical and political context, before undertaking them. It is also necessary to start asking ourselves the right questions. Are we really at the geographical centre of the Brussels Capital Region, at the heart of a major European city? Are we in the Rue de Birmingham, on the edge of Biestebroeck basin, on the quaysides of Beco basin and Vergote basin? Are we inside these former industrial districts, characterized by their

paYs-bas nederland

Zone-canal kanaalzone anvers antwerpen

belgique belgië

bruxelles brussels région de bruxelles-capitale brussels hoofdstedelijk gewest ring

région de bruxelles-capitale brussels hoofdstedelijk gewest

charleroi

france frankrijk

ring

unique aesthetic appearance of brick and steel, blending as they do practicality with constructive rationality? Are we working to transform what is presently an urban barrier land plots into a link between both banks of the canal, to turn a division into a connection? Are we looking forward to make the most of both public and private resources, to build affordable housing, schools, nurseries, workshops, warehouses, retail businesses in sufficient quantities? Finally, are we really building, from the foundations of a former industrial town, the heart of a city faithful to its past and which chooses to offer a sustainable future? Far too often, the answer to all of these questions is ‘no’. Yet the situations we have before us are rich in potential and offer many possibilities, concerning both the public and private.

localized from the center to the periphery, whether it is to a business park in the outskirts of town or to another end of the globalized world. The urban development that we have implemented under the motto of the urban mix is less mixed than we believe ourselves to be. A mental shift is really needed. Do we in our mentality discuss what works in the city is, not only to include white collars but also “dirty” jobs? The creative manufacturing industry is now hip with millennials. Handicraft manufacture of jewellery or design bicycles, fablabs and craft breweries; they are certainly welcome in the city but they are not everything. There are also “ordinary” professions that we have to give a place like the auto repairer, the building materials supplier or the proverbial plumber. They do renovations and repairs that will always be needed, Next Economy or not. They often do not need more than a small depot, workshop or garage, so they are in any case well-integrated in an urban environment in terms of scale. In the urban fun of bars, shopping routes and beautiful building projects, does it not also include a shadow world of logistics, recycling and construction? We must learn to view the back-end activities of the city as urban as the consumer front. They are two sides of the same coin.

A Productive City Over the past twenty years, cities have become much more attractive in Europe. There has been a great effort to put the city back on the market as a preferred location for both living and services, shopping and leisure. The urban planning motto was the so-called typical urban mixing of functions. But how mixed is that new city?

Production belongs to the city. Production must be encouraged in the city and considered an integral part of the urban fabric. It must be able to show itself, in connection with daily life. We feed and celebrate production in the truly mixed city. The future city is a Productive City.

Usually these were mainly new housing units. We have occasionally added offices and public facilities, but we were mainly focused on shops, cafés and restaurants because every new project had to become a “real buzzing city district”. If we look back now, we can see that we have systematically excluded one function: (semi-) industrial economy. Producing activity in our cities has been de-

Helsinki Christina Suomi

“Helsinki’s Vision 2050 sees a compact city and regional structure, a network city of high quality metro, trams and rail, climate neutral, socially and spatially cohesive with a world class Nordic welfare society and low levels of inequality and segregation, and a strong emphasis on public involvement for a city that believes that it is the ‘driver of change.”

Christina Suomi is Head of the Unit, Spatial Planning Unit, Urban Environment Division and Architect at the City of Helsinki. Experienced architect and leader in strategic and spatial planning. Focuses on achieving City’s strategic goals of climate neutral 2035 through spatial land management and land practices; develops strong – easy to understand - visions for compact city structure and ways to achieve a world class Nordic welfare city, high quality public transport and low levels of inequality/segregation. Strong emphasis on public involvement and believes that cities can be the ‘driver of change’. 59

Current Situation and Key Challenges

The City of Helsinki has grown in the past decade by some 90,000 inhabitants to around 643,000 (2018), an increase of 15%. It is essentially a maritime city with a particularly rich shoreline and different spaces linking the city and the water. The Capital region has 1.440 million. There are 350,000 dwellings and some 322,000 households. There is a small surplus of dwellings over households, with around 43% of people owning their own house and some 46% in rented accommodation, with a large segment being social rented. Nearly half the population live alone and 80% are either single or two person households. Families of four persons or more account for only 10.5%. Around 86% of people live in apartment blocks, the rest spread between terraced, single family houses and semi-detached. There are no slums in Helsinki. The vast majority of the stock is less than 40 years old and sits amongst woodland and parks. Helsinki is located on a narrow peninsula, limiting development northwards. Today, Helsinki is Finlandâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s administrative, economic and cultural city, where 1 in 10 people work for the City Council. It is a bilingual city - all the street signs are in Finnish and Swedish. The capital city has a highly efficient public transport system. Helsinki has 10 tramlines, a metro to the East with feeder bus

General Vision

services, a new western metro that opened in late 2017 and a railway network of 3 commuter lines that operates like an over-ground metro. Some 73% of commuters use public transport to downtown daily. More than two-thirds of people in the EU live in urban areas. Cities are Europeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s core hubs for growth, innovation and employment. In Helsinki, there are some 412,000 work places, over 80% in the service sectors, with telecommunications, high-tech and bio-diversity companies representing the growth areas. About 42% of Helsinki is green open spaces, mainly natural parks, with over 320 kilometres of shoreline, 1.000 kilometres of cycle paths and 320 kilometres of an underground tunnel network that includes the district central heating network that serves the entire city. The district heating network covers 94% of all buildings in the city including, commercial and residential. Smart waste management has been introduced in the inner city, with an automated vacuum waste collection system. There are trap doors for mixed waste, biodegradable waste and paper and carton, with sorted waste automatically suctioned into the pipe work, greatly improving the convenience of waste transportation.

City Plan 2050

hold a near-monop¬oly over land-use transactions and allows it to play a strong role in the development of new residential areas from the initial conception plans right through to construction.

Helsinki has a new City Plan 2050. The Plan is based on a clear Vision of being a worldclass functional city, one that has social cohesion based upon a Nordic welfare society with major investment in educa¬tion, high quality public transport network, carbon neutral by 2035 and low levels of inequality that mitigate against spatial segregation.

Most of the new development is concentrated around the waterfront project-areas. The Plan promotes the integration of spatial planning and transport, where mobility helps define the city structure and that new rail infra¬structure creates a ‘network city’ to meet the needs of new development and a rapidly growing city and region. Helsinki believes that spatial planning can impact upon climate change and there are a number of key policies devoted to mitigation against this huge challenge.

City of Helsinki

Helsinki City Plan

The City Plan also involves working closely with Helsinki’s neighbours, including the cities of Espoo and Vantaa, together with the municipali¬ties of Kauniainen and Sipoo to prepare an integrated Strategic Spatial Plan for the City-region. http://www.yleiskaava.fi/en/

Helsinki is growing sustainably

The City Plan consists of a set of scenarios and a Vision for the city in 2050. The Vision translates into a set of strategies and a legally binding Map. The written statement (Selostus) contains the Plan’s objectives, reasons why and policies. The Implementation Schedule and Map ex¬plain what is going to be built, where, how much and when. The fifth and final element is the Resource Allocation Plan which provides an estimate of probable new investment levels over the period of the Plan (nearly €50 billion) and an estimate of infrastructure costs of new metro and trams (approximately €12 billion). The Plan manages the growth of the City and its structure. It provides a clear understanding of what kind of city its citizens want it to be in the future. It tells where new developments should be located. It is ‘plan-led’, not ‘developer-led’ and a long-term strategic tool that aims to ensure there are sufficient new homes and workplaces in the future, with a balance between private and social rented tenure.

Involving the Public The City Planning department involves the public in decision-making. It opened the first ‘Laituri’ (meaning, ‘platform’) exhibition space in the Nordic countries in the heart of the city-centre in Kamppi. This is the department’s ‘living-room’.

Helsinki’s uniqueness Helsinki’s uniqueness in the EU today is based on the belief that city planning can deliver the necessary conditions to make the city a healthy and pleasant place to live in and work. Helsinki owns 65% of the land whilst the State owns 13.6%, making for nearly 80% of land in public ownership. Land ownership and land practices make the City of Helsinki to be the ‘driver of change’. Indeed, this special relationship between land practices and spatial planning is a key component as to why Helsinki is growing fast. The City of Helsinki works hand in hand with the private sector. This partnership creates the conditions for the private sector to succeed.

The Plan defines the urban pattern of the future and channels all new development into special ‘areas of change’. These project-areas are controlled by the City of Helsinki, for the key component of the new development plan is that the City, together with the State, own most of the land within the city boundary. It enables the City to 62

The City Plan has created 15 new development areas, the smallest being the Arabia Waterfront for 10,000 people and 8,000 jobs, and the largest in Vuosaari to the east, for 40,000 new residents and a high-tech goods harbour, although a new area, Östersundom in the northeast, is planned for 80,000 people and due to be built after 2025. Some 80 per cent of all construction - houses and offices - takes place on public owned land, mainly the City of Helsinki’s land, and 35% of all new housing is built by Helsinki’s own housing company, ATT.

Plan-led and Added Value Helsinki is Plan-Led, meaning the development plan leads strategic plan¬ning for the next 35 years, and helps make Helsinki one of the EU’s most dynamic growing regions. New rail metro and tram infrastructure will be a major cost but also creates significant development potential for the City. In turn, the City achieves more added value to its land.

City Planning, Traffic and Transport are integrated. This ensures that when large new development areas are built the metro, rail and tram network are connected to these areas. Public transport accounts for 73% of all journeys during rush hours; the reverse is true in the cityregion.

A new city-regional wide initiative, called MAL, involves 14 municipalities and cities that make the metropolitan area working together to create a future vision for the growing city-region. The level of cooperation integrates spatial planning, public transport infrastructure and future housing needs under one umbrella into an agreed set of policies to tack¬le urban sprawl and extend the rail network.

Helsinki’s Nordic Welfare culture aims to have social justice and social cohesion as much as spatial cohesion for its citizens. Education is world class and makes the city a world leader in development.

Urban Planning Vision 2050

Future Challenges

Helsinki’s new City-wide Plan for 2050 is based on a Vision for 2050 of a fast-growing polycentric cityregion that is a network city of public rail transport, both radial and transversal, urban and dynamic that sees an expansion of the city centre through greater densification of the suburbs, interconnected by new rail links. The Plan’s Vision is to strengthen Helsinki’s international competitiveness as a spatially balanced city-region in order to promote greater wellbeing and make Helsinki an attractive place to work and live.

Helsinki is a world-class business and innovation centre and Finland’s capital. There are over 400,000 jobs within the city boundaries and nearly 700,000 within the cityregion. City Planning is also about creating the needs for the private sector to succeed in a competitive world. The City is aiming to be more energy efficient. It already has 94% of all homes and offices connected to the district central heating network. Some 55% of energy is created from natural gas. More needs to be done, and the City Council has agreed to make Helsinki carbon neutral by 2035. Today, it is well on its way to meet a 30% reduction by 2020.

The aim is to strengthen Helsinki’s urban identity by extending the city-centre and making it a ‘Network City’. The metro and tram network will expand, particularly two new transversal cross-town high-speed trams connecting east to west into Espoo and changing the outer suburban motorways into boulevards.

A possible rise in sea level along with unusual weather conditions due to climate change have been taken into consideration in planning for new areas.

The outer-motorways are to be replaced with boulevards for living and working. There will be seven boulevards, each with their own hispeed tram to the centre or transversally linking up with the metro and other trams.

Metropolitan Governance matters: Helsinki is involved in consensus and cooperation with its city-regional neighbours and the EU.

Helsinki aims to create â&#x20AC;&#x2122;car-freeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; quarters in the new district of Kalasatama. Car-sharing is being expanded together with the creation of a recharging system for electric cars of the future.

Transnational & Metropolitan Future Helsinki is working with its Transnational neighbours and the EU to reduce regional disparities. The City Plan 2050 aims to build an HST high-speed rail connection to St Petersburg and a rail tunnel to Tallinn connecting Finland with mainland Europe.

London Gwyn Richards

“The City of London’s challenge is managing rapid development and increase in working population resulting in increased pressures on infrastructure and public realm. The City is seeking to manage this rapid growth to achieve a more economically inclusive, greener, cleaner, vibrant, culturally enriching pedestrian and cycling friendly City for all.”

Gwyn Richards is an Assistant Director in the Department of the Built Environment in the City of London. As the City’s Head of Design, he negotiates the height, bulk, massing and urban design of new developments in the City. He also leads the award-winning Future City Modelling initiative involving the 3-Dimensional modelling of the City to ascertain future development capacity while respecting all aspects of the city. Before, he was a Senior planner at Westminster City Council and prior to this, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. Richards represents the City of London in national and international conferences. 67

The City of London’s Vision and challenges

Goals • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Ensure the Square Mile is accessible to all and an easy, attractive and healthy place to work, live, learn and visit. To facilitate the growth of the economy, maintaining the City’s position as the best place in the world to do business and enhancing its role as a destination for world class creativity and culture. To contribute to the development of a flourishing society where people are safe and feel safe, enjoy good health and wellbeing, have access to suitable employment opportunities and housing in cohesive communities and live enriched lives, achieving their full potential. Delivering Inclusive and sustainable economic growth that benefit all communities Ensure the City remains competitive and promotes opportunity Delivering a thriving, vibrant socially and culturally enriching City including the “Culture Mile” initiative Delivering a safe place to work, live and visit addressing wider security issues such as terrorism and Cyber Crime Ensure infrastructure and utilities keep pace and anticipate growing business needs by maximizing connectivity Ensuring that transport is sustainable, efficient and clean Promoting the construction of high quality, inspiring, sustainable buildings which attract diverse uses and users and contribute to wider public benefit Develop the evening economy and a seven day a week City Improvements to the City’s Public Realm Protect and enhance the City’s rich architectural and archaeological character including the setting of St Paul’s Cathedral and the Tower of London Delivering rich and vibrant retail and leisure uses Delivering public transport improvement Creating an accessible city which is stimulating, safe and easy to move around in Developing a smarter approach through use of data and technology Prioritizing safe, convenient and comfortable pedestrian movement Creating a safe cycling environment Supporting the City’s communities Reducing air pollution Managing freight, servicing and deliveries to minimize conflict with pedestrian movement

Key challenges • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Maintaining economic resilience especially at a time of post Brexit uncertainty Climate Change resilience Terrorism Prevention and resilience Cyber-Crime resilience Air Pollution Delivering Affordable Housing Rising Cost of Living Reductions in Public Sector Spending Road Safety Freight and Servicing management Ensuring Pedestrian priority and capacity Accommodating the growth in cycling Improving digital connectivity and utilities 68

Key themes

3D Growth Capacity modelling

all viewpoints modelled as well as from street level views within the 3D model to assess local townscape impacts. The conclusion enables the City to establish an aspirational vision of the profile of the future Eastern Cluster to respond to the various constraints and a road map for future growth and intensification.

A defined policy area, the Eastern Cluster of tall buildings forms part of the City of London Local Plan. The Eastern Cluster anticipates a significant growth of commercial floor space which is likely to absorb over half the City’s new floor space. This will result in a further intensification of the cluster of tall buildings. This policy area has existed for many years, but the precise form and profile of the tall building cluster has historically evolved somewhat incrementally as development proposals came forward. The City is keen to adopt a more proactive planning role rather than a reactive approach to individual development proposals.

Microclimatic City Modelling This strategy is intended to develop a holistic understanding of the complex microclimatic issues involved in developing the City’s Eastern Cluster of tall buildings. A cluster of tall buildings raise issues at street level such as wind conditions, impacts on sunlight levels to the public realm and residents as well as issues such as air pollution and noise levels.

The strategy involves achieving a detailed 3-Dimensional interactive, holistic understanding of the existing cluster and cumulative impact of consented schemes not only to inform individual development schemes but also for strategic reasons. In particular, to define and sculpt the future cluster’s profile and identify opportunities for increasing the capacity and intensifying the cluster to achieve the commercial floor space necessary to both maintain the City’s international status whilst ensuring maximum wider public benefits, protection of key views and “Good”, sustainable growth.

There is growing concern over unforeseen wind issues within the Cluster from new towers. Although all major development schemes are required to submit Wind Assessments, this piecemeal approach failed to give a holistic idea of the collective impact of towers on wind. The area-based study can be compared with filling in the gaps between the individual jigsaw pieces of various existing wind studies accompanying individual schemes to give a complete picture on wider wind patterns. An area-based study of Wind patterns was commissioned covering not only the City Cluster but also the entire City. It was intended that this would allow for a holistic view of the macro level wind patterns within and around the cluster as well as identifying localized wind impacts. The consultants brief was to employ both a Wind Tunnel test as well as Computer Fluid Dynamics methodology to give as accurate picture of the wider and localised wind issues in the Cluster and wider City. The initiative develops wind mitigation scenarios informing negotiations on development schemes and future massing studies. This work has been developed to understand the implications of the wind patterns on dispersing particulate air pollution as well as impacts on cyclist comfort and safety.

A 3-Dimensional computer model of the City was commissioned with all consented schemes inputted. A phased process of inputting the complex constraints and considerations followed, from London wide strategic views to local constraints.

In addition, sunlight modelling of the City assesses potential future over shadowing of areas from new tall buildings using 3-Dimensional modelling to map the entire unbuilt surface of the City to gain a holistic

From this model, the City can visualize various scenarios of intensifying development within the Eastern Cluster policy area. These scenarios were assessed from 69

understanding of the duration of sunlight reaching these areas throughout a year. This mapping exercise will be used to inform negotiating the height and massing of new buildings and the location of new pocket parks and new public realm as well as the location of al fresco dining uses, children’s play areas and areas to dwell and sit. This work complements the Wind modelling project as the combination of wind and sunlight (or lack of) is key in defining the comfort level experienced by pedestrians within the public realm.

of existing routes, or the creation of new trip generators/ attractors, such as office buildings or public transport stations. Models were built representing the morning and lunchtime peak hours for a base year. By compiling a list of known and anticipated future building developments as well as notional scenarios and incorporating known transport infrastructure changes (such as Crossrail and Tube improvements), forecast year models have been created which predict likely pedestrian movements in the year 2026. using the model to assess areas where footway congestion is likely to be lowest/highest, it will be possible to assess which areas of the City have the capacity to absorb higher development densities, and which are at capacity so cannot accommodate further development (without significant pedestrian infrastructure improvement).

The City has developed this initiative by modelling the impact on sunlight and daylight to residential amenity as well as noise levels throughout the City to gain a holistic insight in to the experienced quality of the public realm. The intention of the various modelling initiatives is to combine the results of the Wind, Sunlight, Air Pollution and Noise modelling to achieve new “Comfort Criteria” to grade the City’s streets and public realm which will become a key part of the planning toolkit to inform area wide strategies, masterplans, policies and in negotiating development schemes not only in the City.

Pedestrian Modelling With the working population of the City forecast to rise from some 400,000 to close to 600,000 in twenty years’ time the City has undertaking a City-Wide pedestrian forecasting model comprising computer simulation model (using complex algorithms) which contains every footway in the City of London. The model uses observed behavioural relationships between route length and angularity to determine which routes pedestrians are most likely to use when walking through the City. By applying these relationships across the City street network, it is possible to replicate current walking patterns across the entire City. Using the model, it is possible to test how pedestrian movements will change in reaction to the addition of new walk routes, the removal 70

This work creates a proactive planning framework to manage future pedestrian pressures resulting from development schemes. Consequently, the work enables planners to require new pedestrian routes in the appropriate alignment in new developments, the provision of wider pavements as well as new public realm. It also informs the City’s future public realm enhancement works to be future proofed to accommodate increased pedestrian flows.

be many especially as most are exclusive high end residential or corporate. Incorporating upper level free viewing galleries for the public ensures that these tall buildings become public assets, delivering unique new public realm for all. The strategy is intended to transform how the public regard new tall buildings and major developments, from being viewed as a corporate or exclusive residential imposition on the skyline, the public will have a stake in the buildings and they will be viewed as a public asset for all with a sense of ownership.

Free Public Viewing Galleries / Inclusive Growth

In recent years 8 free public viewing galleries have been negotiated on the City’s tall buildings and major developments (completed, under construction and consented) with others in the planning pipeline.

The As the Square Mile continues to prosper, the City is determined that the opportunities and benefits of the City is shared with all regardless of economic, cultural or social factors. Delivering free public viewing galleries on the City’s tall buildings and other major schemes maximizes wider inclusive public benefits of these schemes. Many communities, for economic, social and cultural reasons feel excluded from the City. Historically, the City it is seen by the wider public as a place for the business community with resultant high end, expensive assets and recreational offers. The contrast between the wealth of the City and the relative economic deprivation of neighbouring areas remains stark and the City is determined to ensure that Londoners as a whole, as well as visitors feel welcomed in a transformed inclusive City. Historically, the uppermost storeys of buildings, particularly tall buildings were exclusively reserved for corporate boardrooms, penthouses and high-end bars and restaurants and other privileged users to look down upon the City, epitomizing economic privilege and inequality. There was a sense of the haves looking down at the have nots and this vertical hierarchy and inequality conflicts with the City and the Mayor’s aspirations for an egalitarian and inclusive City. The City is determined to re-define how planning exploits elevated views by ensuring these outstanding views are freed up for all and not just the reserved for the wealthy and privileged. Free public viewing galleries puts the wider public first. Tall buildings polarize opinions in London and their presence on the skyline is often viewed with unease 71

Paris Dominique Alba

“A vision for Paris: A city that relies on its residents, adapts its infrastructure, mobilises its collective intelligence and the territories that surround it to turn the challenges of the century into opportunities, building integrated solutions at in which all are involved: private agents, associations, citizens and with a focus on the interest of children.”

Dominique Alba became Director General of APUR (Paris Urban Planning Agency) in 2012, after having served four years as the agency’s vice director. Prior to her work at APUR, Alba was Director General of the Pavillon de l’Arsenal, the information centre on architecture and city planning in Paris. She has also served as an advisor to Paris Mayor Bertrand Delanoë on urban renewal and architecture, and as a co-creator of the Roux-Alba architecture agency. As an architect, she has worked on building renovation and city planning operations in France, Europe and Africa.

Current Situation

2016 Creation of the Greater Paris Metropolis • • • • • • •

Governance based on a metropolitan council: 209 members elected according to the weight of the municipalities: 115 municipalities have a representative 13 municipalities have 2 representatives 2 municipalities have 3 representatives Paris has 62 representatives Election by direct universal suffrage in 2020

A two levels intermunicipality: • The Metropolis to plan • Territories to manage The Paris Urbanism Agency (Apur), is an association regulated by the 1901 Law and was created on 3rd July 1967 by Paris City Council.

General Vision

Paris 2050 Vision Air quality is the main target Road traffic, the primary source of air pollutant emissions in the Metropolitan area 53% of NOx (94% from diesel vehicles) 25% of fine particles (PM10, PM2.5) 15% volatile hydrocarbons, 32% GHG 6600 deaths per year in the MGP, 2400 in Paris (2015 Public health) 1.5 6 M from Ile-de-France, 75% of Parisians exposed to critical levels of NO2

Topics and Themes

Working toward a more inclusive, liveable city

Environment Creating a clean, environmentally friendly city • Increasing selective waste collection • Providing water of impeccable quality • Creating more green spaces in the city centre • Implementing an environmental & sustainable development policy • Preventing and combating rude behaviour • Monitoring and protecting municipal property.

The City of Paris focuses on the following priorities: providing ongoing services, being attentive to the needs of Parisians, and building an equitable, inclusive, appealing, forward-looking city.

Housing and Urban Planning

Creating gardens at La Cour du Maroc, Batignolles and Grands Moulins • Developing waste-reduction and noise-abatement plans and Agenda 21.

Carrying out an innovative housing policy • Funding lowincome housing • Eliminating housing that is unfit for habitation • Improving the quality of existing housing • Facilitating homeownership • Building Paris' future by carrying out urban development projects and creating a local urban development plan.

Two wooded areas, 400 gardens • 5,434acres of green space open to the public • 3,000 tons of waste collected every day • 1,221,696 tons of waste collected annually, including 51,007 tons of recyclables and 48,089 tons of glass.

Creating a local urban development plan • Developing new neighbourhoods within the framework of the master plan for urban redevelopment • Redeveloping the Les Halles neighbourhood • Developing a mixeddevelopment zone on Paris' Left Bank.

Economy and Employment Boosting economic growth • Supporting business start-ups and small-scale industries • Protecting local commerce and outdoor markets • Providing a warmer welcome to tourists and improve tourist information • Expanding cooperation with neighbouring communities • Promoting Paris' image abroad • Creating links with capitals and large cities in other countries • Developing programmes to promote good citizenship and solidarity • Creating a capital city that symbolizes respect for human rights.

More than 4,000 low-income housing units funded every year • 22 development zones • 8,558 annual requests for urban development authorization.

Transport Reducing auto pollution • Diversifying transport methods • Building a road sys-tem that minimizes traffic and fosters public transport, including tramways, bus lanes and bike paths • Redeveloping residential parking • Increasing transport security • Creating parking zones for deliveries and motorcycles.

Launching the Paris Biopark project • Developing business incubators • Job placement programme for those receiving public assistance • Supporting innovative companies.

Soundproofing the Paris ring road • Developing a master transport plan for Paris • Constructing the Bercy Tolbiac foot-bridge • New public transport project: tramways • Developing bus and car lanes to better use public space.

Paris' employment picture in 2004: 5,000 new jobs o 53,000 retail establishments • 26 million visitors • 49.6 million jobs in Ile-de-France, including 1.675 million in Paris • 15 million sq. m of office space • 68 outdoor markets.

25,000 parking spaces created for motor-cycles • 5,971 public and private roads(outside of wooded areas), totalling some1,700 km • A35.04-km ring road • Bicycles account for 11% of road travel.

Solidarity And Citizenship

Renovating school buildings classrooms and school facilities.

Creating more day-care and preschool spaces for young children • Offering a variety of child-care options • Providing job re-entry programmes for unemployed and marginalized Parisians • Making life easier for those with disabilities • Improving living conditions for senior citizens • Developing health-related prevention and information programmes (tuberculosis, drug addiction, AIDS) • Fighting all forms of discrimination, including violence against women • Improving the quality of life in dilapidated neighbourhoods • Encouraging social integration and employment by facilitating access to social benefits.

•Constructing

new

134,000 students registered in the public schools, with 100,000 eating lunch at school • 22,000 participants in Wednesday recreational and day-care programmes • 31 classes for mainstreaming disabled children.

Sport Improving and promoting access to sporting activities for enthusiasts and top athletes alike •Building new facilities •Renovating existing facilities •Adjusting opening hours as needed •Participating in major events.

Developing master plans for senior and disability services • Expanding day-care and preschool programmes…

Constructing and opening new facilities, including the Pailleron swimming pool/skating rink, a swimming pool on the Seine and the Belleville sport complex •Hosting major national and international sporting competitions.

26,472 day-care and preschool spaces(city-run and nonprofit) • Objective: creating 4,500 additional spaces (2,366created between 2001 and 2005) •20,350 elderly beneficiaries of services offered by APA (agency on aging).

380 sport facilities, including 37 stadiums, 35 swimming pools and 142 tennis courts.

Cultural Heritage and Assets Expanding and improving public access to all cultural assets • Supporting the arts• Preserving and upgrading city property• Encouraging artistic expression •Preserving the collective memory •Transforming 104 Rue d'Aubervilliers into an international venue for artistic expression • Renovating the Gaîté Lyrique theatre and the Petit Palais… Nuit Blanche: an all-night cultural festival attracting 1.5 million visitors • 134 museums, 143 theatres, and 1,203 film shoots per year.

Education And Youth Services Supporting academic success • Managing student admissions and orientation • Improving the quality of school life • Offering quality educational and leisure activities • Helping young people become more independent • Supporting student life • Operating the city's secondary schools • Promoting Paris' intellectual heritage and supporting research. 77

New methods to redesign 7 plazas La Bastille

L’Arc de l’Innovation – a new way about improving city places 3000 startups / 36 incubators

Seoul Tae Hyung Kim

“Seoul experienced very rapid urbanization through the last half century. In recent years, Seoul has entered into the era of low growth. Consequently, our existing urban development and management methods in the past growth period, have faced many side-effects and limitations. In this situation, a small-scale urban planning could play a big role in transformation of the urban space that carries citizen’s daily life. Now, Seoul’s public architects redesigned and constructed the public space with residents.”

Tae Hyung Kim currently works as Director-General of Urban Space improvement Bureau in Seoul Metropolitan Government from 2015. After graduating from Seoul National University in business administration and architecture, he got his Master in architecture from Columbia University in New York. He has worked as an architect, urban development strategist and an adjunct professor of architecture in Korean National University of Arts. As a Director General of urban space improvement bureau he has focused on planning and managing key urban projects of Seoul metropolitan government, such as Seoullo, Sewon sky walkways and reaching out community center. 81

Current Situation and Key Challenges

Seoul, the Gateway to Asia and Europe. The Korean Peninsula lies in the center of Northeast Asia. The coordinates of its capital, Seoul, are 37.34° N and 126.59° E, putting it in close proximity to the Yellow Sea. Seoul is within a three-hour flight from 43 cities with populations of over one million people. Korea’s location between China and Japan has been a great geographical advantage for the nation. The Hangang (River) flows horizontally across Seoul, dividing the city into two sections lying north and south of the river. Seoul is confronted with new social problems.

Aging society

Korea’s population is aging rapidly and will start to fall from 2030 after peaking at 52 million. In 2040, more than half of Koreans will be older than 52.

Weakening local communities

The rapid industrialization and urbanization of the Republic of Korea resulted in low life satisfaction among Koreans. Among the 34 OECD member countries, Korea ranked 26th in this category in 2013 and 25th in 2014, while ranking the lowest, at 34th, in the Community Index for two consecutive years in 2013 and 2014.

Growing welfare demands

The Economic development has led to an increase in the gap between the rich and the poor. The number of low-income citizens not receiving welfare benefits has reached nearly 290,000, and the number of households defaulting on their electricity bills for periods of three months or longer has reached 75,000.

Individualism

Disconnection between people due to changing technologies

General Vision

Vision of Seoul 2030

lack of public involvement and actionability, and to reflect the changes in values felt by society. To help overcome the limitations of existing urban master plans, the Seoul Plan placed a priority on ‘people’ and was implemented as follows:

Seoul 2030 as Envisioned by Citizens: “A Friendly City Based on Mutual Communication & Care” The most notable difference of the Seoul Plan from existing urban master plans is that the vision and actionable plans are developed and proposed by the citizens. Citizens were recruited to form a group that would represent the 10 million residents of Seoul. Three workshops were held to discuss the strengths, weaknesses, and major issues of Seoul as a city, as well as to deliberate on a vision for the city. As a result, the following vision was developed:

“A Friendly City Based Communication & Care”.

First, the planning stage was designed so as to allow both citizens and experts to review and make changes to the plan in an open and transparent manner from start to finish. Second, the plan was revised to reflect the defining characteristics of Seoul, with input from citizens, and prepared in a way that is easy to understand. Third, the relationship between the Seoul Plan and the plans from the Seoul government offices was reviewed to prioritize the policies and raise the status of the umbrella plan. Fourth, the foundation was built upon so as to ensure that the abstract concepts of the Urban Master Plan are implemented and applicable in fact, thereby helping to improve the quality of life. Fifth, plans were developed for the living spheres and CBD, for all practical purposes, to explicate the followup measures, monitoring systems, governance between autonomous districts and the capital city, financing principles, etc.

Mutual

Characteristics & Execution of the 2030 Seoul Plan

2030 Seoul Plan - Another Name for the Citizen-involved Urban Master Plan. Citizens, experts, and other interested parties were involved in formulation of the 2030 Seoul Plan, the process of which was carried on in an open, transparent manner. Key issues were incorporated into the Plan to complement the strategic nature of the Urban Master Plan. The Urban Planning Bureau and the Management & Planning Office led the way in raising the status of the plan.

Features of the Seoul Plan Citizen Involvement from the Planning Stage In order to have public consensus, the Seoul Plan involved the citizens from the very beginning of planning so as to come up with the appropriate vision and tasks to perform. The public worked with administrators and experts in developing the plans for key issues.

Background to the 2030 Seoul Plan Demands for Citizen Participation & Sharing to Realize Current Values The Urban Master Plan of Seoul needed to incorporate the values of the time and changes in the environment. To do this, Seoul needed to consider the following: i) more stringent democratic procedures that do not exclude the citizens, as opposed to the old habit of relying on administrators and experts; ii) more focus on future values, such as sharing innovation, co-existence, and convergence; and iii) urban restoration and urban planning that reflects the actual lifestyle of the city and considers demographic changes and regional characteristics. Direction of the Seoul Plan The Seoul Plan was revised substantially to overcome the limitations of the existing Urban Master Plan, such as the 83

Issue- & Goal-oriented Strategic Plans The existing urban master plans had 12 different subplans by section, which made it more challenging to ensure consistency between those plans. Moreover, their scope was so broad and their content so technical that it was difficult for the citizens to read and understand. To address these issues, the 2030 Seoul Plan identified the major issues that would affect Seoul and was shortened and made easier to understand.

For balanced regional development, the plan also pursued spatial restructuring and promoted the roles and functions of the living sphere plans. Full-time Monitoring & Evaluation Systems for Effectiveness The 2030 Seoul Plan instituted the continued monitoring and evaluation of the Plan to measure progress. Indices are available for key issues and goals that indicate the level of achievement, and the outcome is shared with the citizens. The public is encouraged to participate and evaluate so their input is incorporated in follow-up plans.

Composition of the Seoul Plan Vision, Key Issues, & Spatial Plan (Spatial Structure & Living Sphere Plan) The basis of the 2030 Seoul Plan is to develop the future vision of the city and to propose appropriate goals and strategies. The Plan therefore is composed of the vision, key issues, and spatial plans that touch on spatial structure and living sphere plans for 2030.

Inter-departmental Collaboration at Seoul Metropolitan Government Led by the Urban Planning Bureau, the existing urban master plans were mostly focused on spatial and physical elements. However, the 2030 Seoul Plan reinforced welfare, education, history, culture, environment, and other non-physical aspects. During the entire planning stage, the Management & Planning Office and the Urban Planning Bureau encouraged the departments and offices at Seoul Metropolitan Government to work closely together and raised the status of the umbrella Seoul Plan. Enhanced Role & Function of Living Sphere Plans The existing urban master plans paid attention to quantitative and external growth and competitiveness but did not place much emphasis on quality of life. The 2030 Seoul Plan however, laid out the framework necessary to build a 100-year urban plan that encompasses everything from the city-wide plan to minor, detailed plans that affect the life of the citizenry. 84

Implementation Structure of the Seoul Plan

Development & Description of the 2030 Seoul Plan

Collaborative Network of Citizens, Experts, & Administrators In accordance with the 2030 Seoul Plan, the “2030 Seoul Plan Development Committee” was founded to establish the plan within a collaborative network and framework of citizens, experts, administrators, and other interested parties. The committee was comprised of the Seoul Plan Citizens’ Group that shapes the vision, and of subcommittees that help develop the plans for key issues.

Preparation - Vision & Tasks – Drafts - Collection of Input and Administrative Procedures For the 2030 Seoul Plan, an expert advisory group was formed to identify the basic direction and implementation structure of the Plan, and determine public participation. To develop the vision in line with the direction, the 100-member citizens’ group was created to come up with the vision and key tasks for Seoul in 2030.

The Citizens’ Group has 100 citizens as participants and is responsible for identifying the vision and key tasks for the city. As for the sub-committees, there are 5 of them, with 108 participants in total, according to the tasks set up by the Citizens’ Group. Each sub-committee is composed of 20 people (experts, Seoul city government officials, city council members, civic organization and civic group members, and researchers from the Seoul Institute. They work together to propose goals and strategies for key issues.

To realize the vision and key tasks identified by the citizens’ group, the 2030 Seoul Plan Development Committee was created, comprising citizens’ groups, city council members, experts, and officials from the Seoul government. It drafted the 2030 Seoul Plan, which categorized the plans by key issue, spatial structure and land use plans, regional plans, and action plans.

This draft, made by the citizens, experts and administrators, was reviewed at public hearings and regional presentation sessions, and was finalized after fulfilling the statutory administrative procedures.

Singapore Adele Tan

“Singapore is not just a city, but a nation, and a small island of just 720 km². Our challenge is how to plan so that we can continue to be a global and connected city, with a high quality and sustainable living environment for our people, even as our population grows and ages.”

Adele Tan is Group Director of Strategic Planning, responsible for the long-term land use planning for Singapore. She has been with the Urban Redevelopment Authority of Singapore since 1997 – this department focuses on national land use planning and conservation with a mission to make Singapore a great city to live, work and play. She has been involved in all kinds of land use planning matters, in the 20 years she’s served the Singapore public service. She’s worked on balancing development and conservation, planning for an aging population and developing a master plan for Singapore’s underground space. She was also Director of Corporate Development in Singapore’s National Parks Board from 2012-2014.

Current Situation

On 29 January 1819, a British landing party made landfall near the mouth of the Singapore River. The landing was the result of then-Lieutenant Governor of Bencoolen, Sir Stamford Raffles’s mission to establish a new British settlement south of Malacca in order to protect the British trade route to the East and to thwart the growing Dutch influence in the region. On 6 February 1819, the British and then-chief of the Singapore Island signed a treaty that gave the British East India Company (EIC) the right to set up a trading post in Singapore. Singapore became a hub for entrepot trade that attracted immigrants from China, India, the Malay Archipelago, and beyond. During World War II, Singapore fell under Japanese Occupation from February 1942 until 1945 when Singapore was returned to the British. The colony gradually moved towards full self-governance in 1958, and the first Prime Minister of Singapore, Mr Lee Kuan Yew, was elected in 1959. The British colonial rule ended in the State of Singapore when Singapore merged with the Federation of Malaya in 1963. Racial and political tensions eventually led to the separation of Singapore from Malaysia, marking Singapore’s independence as a nation state on 9 August 1965. Since then, Singapore has worked its way from addressing bread and butter issues to striving to provide a high quality of living for its residents.

Key trends • •

• •

ageing population increasing public transport mode share: The percentage of trips made by public transport (rail,bus and taxi) increased from 63% in 2012 to 67% in 2016. Private car vehicle population decreased by 9.6% from 605,149 vehicles in2012 to 546,706 vehicles in 2017. high home ownership: Overall increase in home ownership rates have consistently remained high(more than 90%), in large part due to our public housing programme. city in a garden The greening of the city started in the 1960s with tree planting efforts. Despite urban development, green cover is 15% higher than in the 1980s. But with continued development pressure, we will need to find new ways to stay green

Planning for Singapore Unlike many cities, Singapore needs to cater to both the needs of a city and a country. This includes residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs like housing, industry,commerce and recreational space, and also larger national needs, such as providing space for a port, airport, military training grounds, as well as reservoirs. For many other countries, these large land uses are typically located outside the city area.

It is thus critical for us to carefully balance how we allocate land for all these different needs, and plan for them upfront to fit them within our territorial limits. In that context, planning for sustainable development and optimising resources is of high importance to us. Our urban planning approach seeks to achieve 3 key sustainability objectives, within the limits of our land and sea space: 1. We seek to sustain a robust and vibrant economy, that allows us to be globally competitive 2. At the same time, we want to ensure that we provide people with a good quality of living, and a sense of well-being 3. In all that we do, we must develop in an environmentally responsible manner Our planning process begins with the Concept Plan. This is a long-range land use and transportation plan that maps out the strategic vision for Singapore for the next 40-50 years, and is reviewed every 10 years. The structure and broad strategies laid out in the Concept Plan is then translated to a statutory land use plan that guides developments over the next 10-15 years. This Plan details the land use intent for each parcel, and the intensity to which the parcel can be built up. To realise the Concept Plan and Master Plan, we sell land to direct development at strategic locations at the right time, and this also ensures the stability of our property market. Our Development Control unit ensures development proposals are in line with our planning intentions and development guidelines. 89

General Vision and Key Strategies

An Inclusive, Liveable, Economically Vibrant And Green Home For Singaporeans (Master Plan Vision, Urban Redevelopment Authority)

Visions for Singapore Relieving urban density recreational spaces for all • •

Key planning strategies

•

Integrated land use and transport planning

Close integration of land use and transport planning processes Practising transit-oriented development by developing land use around transport nodes

and

providing

Planning a network of parks and greenery 90% of households within 400m walking distance of a park by 2030 360km of park connectors by 2030 and 150km Round Island Route

Polycentric development

Bringing jobs closer to homes to reduce travel time to work and travel into the city A way of land use redistribution to reduce peak hour congestion

Mobility for all

Encouraging the use of public transport, walking and cycling as we strive towards a “car-lite” society. A “carlite” society optimises land use, reduces congestion, maintains environmental sustainability and fosters a more equitable transport ecosystem. Building a more extensive rail, bus and cycling network 8 in 10 households within 10-mins walk of an Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) station by 2030

Building liveable townships and affordable homes

Ensuring daily amenities and recreational spaces are provided and within easy reach of residents

Key challenges

Moving forward, we are expecting a growing population, and anticipate some challenges that will follow.

Responding to technology

Advances in technology will change the way we work and live. Some examples include the rise of e-commerce and on-line shopping, mobility-ondemand, autonomous vehicles. How can our city harness the benefits of technology for its citizens, and be able to adapt and respond to the new ways of working, living and moving around?

Need for land optimisation

Within our limited land, we are always thinking of how to optimise the use of land. This includes how to build highdensity but liveable districts, and how to make use of our underground and sea space.

Sustainable development

We want to make sure our city is developed in a sustainable way. We will need to find ways to maintain the greenery of the city in order to cater to biodiversity needs and manage the city’s temperature and air quality. We will also need to advance towards a “car-lite” society. This is because a society which prioritises public transport, walking and cycling will have less environmental impact than a city built for private cars. “Carlite” strategies can range from carparking strategies to designing districts that prioritise public and shared transport. Lastly, we are exploring how we can plan our city to better optimise resources such as energy and water.

Shaping a city for our elderly

1 in 4 Singaporeans will be aged 65 and over by 2030. We will need to ensure that seniors are socially integrated, and have convenient access to daily amenities, can get around easily, and have access to care facilities. We want to be a “City for all Ages”.

Sydney Natalie Camilleri

“Greater Sydney is growing rapidly from the coast to the mountains. Key challenges are – housing for diverse needs, aligning infrastructure with growth, creating 30-minute cities and variable climatic conditions. Working more collaboratively to solve city dilemmas is key to delivering better place-based outcomes. Collaboration requires a concerted shift away from the confines of working in traditional silos and sectors within our city.”

Natalie Camilleri is the Director of Strategic Planning Projects at the Greater Sydney Commission, which is leading metropolitan planning to make Greater Sidney more productive, sustainable and liveable. Camilleri’s primary project is resetting the vision for Greater Parramatta and the Olympic Peninsula, forging new kinds of collaboration between government, industry and the community. Camilleri has worked in many manners on the integration of land use, design, and infrastructure in Sydney. She has worked for several agencies, such as Sydney Water, Transport for NSW, the Department of Urban Affairs and Planning and Landcom. In 2010 she published her book “The Creative City – Reality or Rhetoric?”. 93

Current Situation and Key Challenges

Greater Sydney is one of the fastest growing metropolises in the world. Its population of 4.7 million people as at 2016, is expected to grow to 6 million people by 2036 and to 8 million people by 2056. To meet this growth, Greater Sydney will require an additional 817,000 jobs – a 35 per cent increase – over the next 20 years; and an additional 725,000 homes – a 40 per cent increase – over the next 20 years.

As Greater Sydney grows it is also changing. Between 2016 and 2036, the number of infants (aged 0–4 years) is projected to increase by 85,000, and the number of children and young people aged 5–19 is projected to increase by 333,000. Within the same timeframe the proportion of the population over 65 years of age is projected to increase from 13 to 18 per cent with the number of working age people, aged 20–65,

expected to decrease from 62 to 58 per cent. These changing demographics will affect the types and distribution of services and infrastructure required in neighbourhoods and centres. In addition to Greater Sydney’s fast growth and demographic changes, geographic challenges of the region are leading to unequal access to jobs, affordable housing, transport and other infrastructure and services. One of Greater Sydney’s biggest geographic challenges is that its largest CBD is on its eastern edge. The Harbour CBD is the nation’s economic powerhouse. It has a concentration of 500,000 jobs, which is reinforced by its radial rail network and by the clusters of economic activity with office precincts, universities, biotech clusters and trade gateways to its north and south along the Eastern Economic Corridor. Such a concentration leads to large numbers of residents from across the region becoming increasingly isolated from a diversity of jobs, major institutions and services. Greater Sydney has one of the highest proportions of long-distance commuters in the western world. This imbalance, between those who have quick and easy access to the Harbour CBD and those who do not, is most severe on residents in newer residential areas, particularly on Greater Sydney’s western edge. Their commuting times are growing and there is increasing pressure on public transport, land values and housing affordability. In some areas, new or improved transport and other infrastructure has not kept pace with the increased numbers of new housing developments. In addition, housing affordability is impacting on the productivity of Greater Sydney, particularly where it affects key workers such as nurses, police offices and others in essential trades. As Greater Sydney grows it will transform from suburban to urban – a significant change that will challenge the cultural norms and expectations of current and future residents.

1996

2016

2036 95

General Vision

The Greater Sydney Region Plan, A Metropolis of Three Cities, adopted by the NSW government in March 2018, is built on a vision of three liveable, productive and sustainable cities where most residents live within 30 minutes of jobs, education and health facilities, services and great places.

the benefits of growth to residents across the region, no matter where they live. The vision is for all Greater Sydney residents to have quick and easy access to jobs, infrastructure and essential services. Housing supply and a range of housing types in the right locations will create more liveable neighbourhoods and support Greater Sydney’s growing population. The environment and precious resources will be protected. Importantly, infrastructure will be delivered at the same time as new homes are developed and jobs are created. Managing and retaining industrial land close to centres and transport will ensure essential urban services are available to support businesses and residents.

To meet the needs of a growing and changing population the vision seeks to transform Greater Sydney from one city on its eastern edge, into a metropolis of three cities. The cities are: •

•

Western Parkland City – will become Australia’s first 21st century city with world-class transport and digital connections. It will be established on the strength of a new international airport and aerotropolis attracting high-technology businesses from around the world. New city-shaping transport and the airport will make it the most connected place in Australia. The city will have a diverse range of housing around centres and transit nodes.

Having three cities, each with supporting centres, will put workers closer to knowledge-intensive jobs, city-scale infrastructure and services, entertainment and cultural facilities. Green infrastructure such as urban tree canopy, green ground cover, bushland, waterways, parks and open spaces will be valued for its economic, social and environmental benefits and will help to establish the Greater Sydney Green Grid. This Grid is a network of walking and cycling links that will become increasingly important in daily travel arrangements improving sustainability and the wellbeing of residents.

Central River City – this city will grow substantially capitalising on its location close to the geographic centre of the region. Its transformation is being led by an unprecedented level of public and private investment in infrastructure and developments. This city includes the Westmead health and education precinct which is one of the largest integrated health, research, education and training precincts in Australia. A $1 billion redevelopment of Westmead will prepare the hospitals for growth and solidify their world-class reputation.

This vision was shaped in collaboration with state government agencies, local government, community, industry and peak groups. Since its establishment in 2016, the Commission has engaged with over 250,000 people and reached more than 750,000 people through social media.

Eastern Harbour City – this city includes the Harbour CBD, the Camperdown-Ultimo health and education precinct, and the Eastern Economic Corridor stretching from Macquarie Park to Sydney Airport. The Harbour CBD is Australia’s global gateway and financial capital. Innovation and creative industries will be boosted alongside knowledge-intensive jobs and the night-time economy will be stimulated. The city will transition to adopting low-carbon, high-efficiency water, energy and waste management systems at a precinct scale.

The vision for Greater Sydney will be achieved by continued collaboration between all tiers of government, and between governments and key stakeholders including the community, interest groups, businesses, industry groups and non-government organisations. Collaboration is formal and informal, on institutional and individual levels, and is ongoing – from planning for growth, to implementation the plans for Greater Sydney.

The 40-year vision for Greater Sydney brings new thinking to land use and transport patterns to boost liveability, productivity and sustainability. The vision aims to extend

The Western Sydney City Deal, a partnership of the Australian Government, NSW Government and eight 96

Topics and Themes

local governments will be instrumental in delivering the aspirations of the Western Parkland City.

The Greater Sydney Commission is leading metropolitan planning in Greater Sydney. It will deliver on the 40-year vision within A Metropolis of Three Cities by strategies and actions based on the themes of Infrastructure and Collaboration; Liveability; Productivity; and Sustainability.

Greater Sydney is already an outstanding global city with a reputation for liveability and cultural diversity that attracts international investment and appeals to visitors. A Metropolis of Three Cities will build on its social, economic and environmental assets to improve the quality of life for all its residents and to uphold its status as one of the top cities of the world. For the first time in NSW, this long-term land use plan A Metropolis of Three Cities, has been prepared concurrently with the long-term transport plan Future Transport 2056 and the long-term infrastructure plan State Infrastructure Strategy 2018â&#x20AC;&#x201C;2036.

Infrastructure and Collaboration

Greater Penrith

Collaboration between three tiers of government and across State Government agencies is essential for coordinating and delivering land use and infrastructure plans. Working collaboratively will help to solve major city issues and is key to delivering better place-based solutions. Three new formal collaborations are underway:

Greater Parramatta Harbour CBD Western Sydney Airportâ&#x20AC;&#x201C; Badgerys Creek Aerotropolis

Liverpool

To provide infrastructure and services for population growth and changing demographics, the Commission is piloting a Growth Infrastructure Compact. The compact is a place-based whole-of-government process for aligning the nature, level and timing of new or enhanced infrastructure to jobs and housing growth.

Campbelltown â&#x20AC;&#x201C;Macarthur

The Commission is undertaking a Collaboration Area process over a range of locations to solve complex issues affecting multiple stakeholders. The Collaboration Area involves key stakeholders collaborating to create inspiring places for businesses to invest and thrive, and great places for people to live and work. It provides a framework for 97

supporting a local economy and creating the conditions to attract high quality businesses and skilled, talented workers; improving transport connections; strengthening communities; and protecting the local environment.

includes the joint and shared use of infrastructure. Joint use involves a school and a community organisation jointly funding a building or sportsground. Shared use is where a school allows community use of its facilities during out-of-school hours.

The Commission is also leading the delivery of the Western Sydney City Deal, which is an historic deal between the Australian and NSW governments and eight councils to coordinate key infrastructure and services for the Western Parkland City and to support the new Western Sydney Airport.

The role of local centres has been recognised as important for providing day-to-day goods and services and transport infrastructure, augmenting arts and cultural facilities, providing employment, and as great places for bringing people together. The Commission has published Principles for Local Centres to support the place-based planning of local centres.

Key features of the City Deal include a North South Rail Link, which will connect people with the Western Sydney Airport and Aerotropolis, 200,000 new jobs across a wide range of industries, a $150 million Liveability Program to respect and build on local character and a $30 million housing package to ensure sustainable growth.

Productivity Greater Sydney is Australia’s global economic gateway, accounting for almost a quarter of Australia’s Gross Domestic Product.

Liveability

Greater Sydney is at the stage where changing its structure – from one city on the eastern edge to three cities across the region – is needed to maximise economic growth and cater for population growth. Greater Sydney, as a metropolis of three 30-minute cities, means that people are connected to their closest city and can access jobs, businesses, education, health and other services within 30 minutes of their homes. Strategies by the Commission and Transport for NSW will increase the percentage of people with access to the 30-minute city from 39 per cent in 2016 to 71 per cent in 2036. This includes the planning and protection of future infrastructure corridors.

Improving liveability involves providing a range of housing types, tenures and price points, access to infrastructure and services, as well as social, recreational, cultural and creative opportunities close to homes. To meet the projected demand of 725,000 new homes by 2036, the Commission has set five-year housing supply targets for each local government area, and mandated that each council in Greater Sydney prepares a local or district housing strategy. It has also set an Affordable Rental Housing Target of 5–10 per cent of uplift on newly rezoned sites to help address the housing needs of lowincome earners.

A centres strategy will see jobs, infrastructure and services focussed on a hierarchy of metropolitan, strategic and local centres. Health and education, and other knowledge-intensive jobs are being targeted for nominated health and education precincts across the three cities. In addition, strategies have been developed for retaining and managing industrial and urban services land, which has been recognised as essential for the effective growth of the three cities.

The Commission is focussing on ensuring government services meet people’s changing needs. It will work with councils and State Government agencies on providing social infrastructure such as health, education and aged care services to meet people’s changing needs. This

The new Western Sydney Airport and aerotropolis will become economic catalysts for the Western Parkland 98

City. In the long term, well over 1.5 million people will live and work in this city which will benefit from mass transit connections. The Western Sydney City Deal will see three tiers of government focussed on the development of this new city with funding and support for infrastructure, services, jobs creation centred on aerospace and defence, and sustainable neighbourhoods.

acute shocks. And it has adopted the concept of Green Infrastructure – waterways, urban bushland, urban tree canopy and green ground cover, and parks and open spaces. The new Western Parkland City will be designed and developed to be cool and green. It’s major waterway, South Creek will become a prominent landscape feature with areas of higher density and high quality public places being oriented towards waterways. Walking and cycling trails and regularly spaces bridge crossings will connect open spaces, including riparian corridors.

A Growth Infrastructure Compact is being piloted in Greater Sydney’s fastest growing economic corridor – Greater Parramatta and the Olympic Peninsula (GPOP). GPOP contains the metropolitan centre for the Central River City. The pilot involves government agencies collaborating to align the nature, level and timing of infrastructure and services to jobs and housing growth. This new place-based concept aims to improve government decision-making on land rezonings so that current and future businesses and residents are better supported by infrastructure and services.

Urban tree canopy cover of the public realm will be expanded across existing and new areas of the region, this will be particularly effective in reducing urban heat in the western parts of the region, which are hotter and drier than other areas. According the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, every 10 per cent increase in tree canopy cover can reduce land surface temperatures by 1.13 degrees Celsius.

Greater Sydney’s Harbour CBD is the Eastern Harbour City’s metropolitan centre and includes Sydney, North Sydney, Darling Harbour, Camperdown-Ultimo and Sydney East. It is major global financial services hub and burgeoning innovation area. It incorporates a large part of the Eastern Economic Corridor which contributes to about two-thirds of the State’s economic growth. The Commission is focussed on increasing the global competitiveness of the Harbour CBD so that it attracts even more skilled people and innovative ideas from around the world.

Open spaces will be enhanced and expanded, including by the creation of a Greater Sydney Green Grid linking parks, bushland, walking and cycling paths, and other open spaces. This will lift liveability and productivity, including by improving people’s health; and support ecological communities. The Commission supports initiatives that contribute to achieving net-zero emissions by 2050, including placebased projects to increase renewable energy generation and energy and water efficiency; and to re-use and recycle waste. Planned Precincts, Growth Areas and Collaboration Areas may present opportunities for such initiatives.

Sustainability

The sustainability of Greater Sydney’s environment is intrinsic to the region’s liveability and productivity. The Commission has focussed on the sustainability of the natural landscape, the efficient management of water, energy and waste systems, and the resilience of natural systems and communities to chronic stresses and 99

100

Tokyo Hiroo Ichikawa

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Tokyoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s challenge for the future is twofold: tackling a declining and aging population, and ensuring a prosperous, sustainable future for the next generation. Through careful redevelopment, new infrastructure, and engaging with innovative technology, Tokyo will aim to not only maintain its status as a major global city, but to also establish itself as the best place to work and live. As a city that has faced destruction and rebirth several times, Tokyo is well-poised to take on these challenges and show the world its urban identity on the world stage at the 2020 Olympic Games.â&#x20AC;?

Dr Hiroo Ichikawa is Professor Emeritus at Meiji University and Executive Director of the Mori Memorial Foundation. He majors in urban policy, urban and regional planning and emergency management and has authored numerous books on issues related to Tokyo and metropolitan regions. He has also served numerous public and private organizations including the Japanese government, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, Japan Telework Society, and Japan Association of Emergency Qualified Specialists. He graduated from Waseda University with a Bachelor of Architecture and later earned a Master of Urban Planning degree at Waseda University. He continued his studies under a Canadian government scholarship at the University of Waterloo where he was granted a Ph.D. from in Urban and Regional Planning. He is a member of the steering committee and a chairman of the working committee for the Global Power City Index (GPCI). The GPCI, carried out by the Mori Memorial Foundation, is the sole global city ranking issued in Japan. 101

Current Situation and Key Challenges

Tokyo is currently undergoing a large-scale redevelopment in its primary core areas, with new metro stations, towers, and mixed-used developments being constructed. This trend is also in-line with the overall return of population and activity to the central districts in the city. Of particular note are the areas around Tokyo Station and Shibuya Station, as well as Toranomon, which are experiencing significant change. Adding to this renewal are the ongoing preparations for the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, which will boost city infrastructure and tourist facilities. Olympic facilities and the Athlete’s Village are being developed in the waterfront areas of Harumi and Toyosu. Despite these positive and forward-thinking conditions in Tokyo, there do still remain challenges that the city will be required to face in the coming decade. Chief among these is an aging and declining population, and the resulting effects that will have on society. Ensuring sustainability and an improved environment within the urban region is also a concern, as is preparing the city and its inhabitants for natural disasters. The Tokyo Metropolitan Government has developed several key strategic plans for the future of Tokyo. Two of the most recent plans are (1) “New Tokyo. New Tomorrow. The Action Plan for 2020”, and (2) “The Grand Design for Urban Development: Creating Tokyo’s Future”.

102

General Vision

“New Tokyo. New Tomorrow. The Action Plan for 2020.”

“The Grand Design for Urban Development: Creating Tokyo’s Future”

Officially released in December 2016, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government’s Action Plan is a 4-year roadmap for the city looking towards 2020. Overall, the plan aims to focus on putting Tokyo citizens ‘first’ by strengthening and fully realizing 3 distinct types of city: a Safe City, Diverse City, and Smart City. Each of these categories then has several key measures that will be implemented to achieve the stated goal.

Officially released in September of 2017, the Grand Design is an all-encompassing plan with an eye to 2040, and ties in with the Action Plan 2020 by using urban development to facilitate the “3 Cities”. Its ambition is to establish the urban vision that Tokyo should pursue, as well as the policies and measures that should be carried out to attain that vision. As the plan aims to envision the city well past 2040, future socio-economic and demographic realities are incorporated into the planning.

Safe City

Vision of Tokyo in 2040

Protecting the lives and assets of Tokyo residents from all kinds of disasters, and building a dynamic and bustling Tokyo. Advance the removal of utility poles; advance earthquake resilient buildings; enhance community disaster preparedness; enhance torrential rain countermeasures; maintain and renew urban infrastructure; improve counter-terrorism measures; promote community development in the Tama Area.

First, the Grand Design envisions the social conditions that are projected to exist in 2040. These include: • • • •

Diverse City

Creating a Tokyo full of kindness and warmth where everyone can lead vibrant lives and be active in society. Enhance support for marriage, pregnancy, and childcare; build a comprehensive regional care and support system for the elderly; encourage life-long healthy living; greater support for the disabled; promote life-work balance; advance the active role of women in society; promote the employment of senior citizens; incorporate universal design into urban development; improve education for all children.

• • •

Tokyo’s population will start to decline after 2025. Acceleration of international exchange; regional infrastructure more connected Tech innovations in autonomous vehicles, AI, energy, IT All residents will be able to engage with each other and play an active role in society Various choices of lifestyle and work available Nature is abundant and available within the city Safe and secure communities

It then outlines the urban structure that Tokyo should pursue.

New Urban Vision

Due to rapid social changes, two types of urban structures— one on a regional level and one on a local level—are used to balance the maintenance and advancement of urban vitality with a comfortable and relaxing urban lifestyle.

Smart City

As a global megacity and Japan’s capital and engine driving the economy, we will create a sustainable Tokyo that can solve the challenges facing the megalopolis and continue growing to emerge victorious in the international competition between cities. Promote smart energy throughout the city; reduce waste and food loss in everyday life; improve water and greenery throughout the city; promote the revitalization of the financial industry; support innovation and SMEs; promote Tokyo’s attractiveness for tourism; promote the arts and culture; improve land, sea, and air transport network; advance vibrant urban development with diverse functions.

Regionally, special hubs will be promoted with enhanced connectivity in order to increase cooperation and facilitate innovation. Locally, urban functions will be concentrated around stations to encourage a more compact, walkable city. Further, the city will be organized into distinct spheres and zones to envigorate advanced urban functions. To achieve the overall vision of the Grand Design, 7 strategies were adopted with a combined 30 policy measures which cross several sectors. The 7 strategies are: 103

Topics and Themes

1. Create hubs full of vitality that generate sustainable growth. 2. Achieve flexible, unrestricted exchange of people, goods, and information. 3. Build a city that addresses the risk of natural disasters and environmental issues. 4. Build a supportive and comfortable environment for all. 5. Realize highly convenient lifestlyes and create diverse communities. 6. Build a city with a network of beautiful seasonal greenery and water. 7. Create new appeal through the arts, culture, and sports.

Sustainable Building Policy Tokyo Cap-and-Trade program Established in 2010, it sets mandatory CO2 emissions reduction targets for large facilities, which includes buildings in the commercial sector. Owners of facilities are required to meet their emissions reduction targets through on-site energy efficiency measures or through emissions trading. Large-facilities covered account for 40% of CO2 emissions in the entire commercial and industrial sector. Carbon Reduction Reporting Program This program targets small and medium-sized facilities, which account for 60% of total CO2 emissions. The TMG works with these businesses to help them identify their emissions levels and provides assistance creating benchmarks based on collected data. Green Building Program Building owners are required to submit a “Building Environmental Plan” at the planning stage to encourage voluntary measures before construction begins. Buildings are also assigned ratings in 5 categories.

The final goal is to pass on a “highly developed, mature city” to future generations.

Environment The TMG has been pursuing a robust environmental policy in order to improve the sustainability of the city as the 2020 Olympic Games approaches, and for the years following. They have established the following goals to be accomplished by 2030 (partial list): • • • • •

Mitigation of Urban Heat Island Pockets of Tokyo can reach uncomfortable levels of heat and humidity during the summer months, which is exacerbated by urban heat island effects around roads and buildings. To mitigate these factors, “cool spots” will be developed in cooperation with municipalities and businesses, where soft mist generators are installed, as well as trees and shrubbery. Solar heat-blocking pavements and water-retaining pavements will also be installed in some areas of the city to help lower day-time temperatures. As of March 2017, 106km in total of these pavements were installed. The TMG also carries out a policy of maintaining and improving tree-lined roads and parks to provide ample shade to pedestrians.

30% reduction in GHG emissions from 2000 levels 38% reduction in energy consumption from 2000 levels 30% renewable energy target for electricity use 200,000 fuel-cell vehicles and 150 hydrogen stations 37% recycling rate of municipal solid waste

Within the realm of climate change and urban energy, the TMG has developed several specific policy measures.

104

Expansion of Renewable Energy

building specialized group homes. The overall goal is to provide comprehensive care in a familiar environment to ensure that older citizens can live normal, healthy, and enjoyable lives. Systems in all municipalities will also shift to promote home-care.

With only 11% of total electricity use coming from renewable energy (2015), Tokyo will expand its support for solar and other forms of sustainable energy. The Tokyo Rooftop Solar Register provides online information to those who need information on the potential for power generation of their properties. The TMG will also support the initial introduction of geo-thermal power where it is available, and offers subsidies for the beginning phase. Introducing hydrogen power on a wider scale is also one of the key sustainability goals being undertaken. The TMG will create initial demand for fuel-cell vehicles with total vehicles in the city approaching 200,000 by 2030. Likewise, hydrogen stations will be constructed, with 35 by 2020 and 150 by 2030. The Olympic Village will also act as a model for future hydrogen-based transportation.

For employment, the TMG will aim to have a higher percentage of senior citizens engaged in work, with 56% being achieved by 2022. Public services such as â&#x20AC;&#x153;Hello Workâ&#x20AC;? and the Silver Human Resources Center will offer guidance and training to help senior citizens rejoin the workforce, or transition to alternative employment that matches their skillset.

Disaster Preparedness Throughout Tokyoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history the city has faced numerous instances of natural disaster, including earthquakes, fires, and flooding. Being especially prone to seismic activity, much has already been done to ensure that buildings meet earthquake-safe standards, and that rescue services can quickly reach affected areas. As of 2014, it was estimated that 83.8% of homes were earthquake resistant, but this number is expected to increase to above 95% by 2020 though TMG policies.

Support for the Elderly With an aging and declining population, Tokyo will begin to feel the effects in providing adequate longterm care services as well as ensuring a high quality of life for residents. The labour market may also suffer from shortages should the population decline and aging of workers not be addressed sufficiently.

Older districts with densely packed wooden housing are being redeveloped, or reorganized, to prevent the spread of conflagrations by widening roads and increasing the size of parks to act as firebreaks. Where possible, new housing is also built often in the form of apartments or other forms of shared housing to open up space.

The Tokyo Metropolitan Government plans to address these concerns by building more nursing homes, increasing the capacity to 60,000 by 2025. Capacity for dementia care will also increase to 20,000 through

105

106

Vancouver Gil Kelley

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Vancouver is a young city. Nevertheless, in its short life it has created an iconic skyline, a vibrant shoreline, a mixed-use city centre and an international reputation for sustainable development. Now, Vancouver faces a new set of challenges involving growth and densification, affordability, mobility, sociable public spaces and diversification of its economy. Resolving these issues may require preparing a first-ever Citywide Plan for Vancouver.â&#x20AC;?

Gil Kelley is an internationally recognised urban strategist and visionary. He currently serves as the General Manager of Planning, Urban Design, and Sustainability for the City of Vancouver. Kelley is a fierce promoter of civic engagement and innovative thinking in both his public and private work. Kelley also leads an independent planning consultancy and continues to advise cities and governments on a range of urban development strategies, including economic development, neighbourhood and downtown revitalisation, waterfront development, urban design and sustainability. In the past he was the Chief Planner for several West Coast cities and an independent advisor to cities and governments across the globe. He also served as the Director of Citywide Planning for the City of San Francisco, the Director of Planning for the City of Portland, and Director of Planning and Development for the City of Berkeley. 107

Current Situation and Key Challenges

Key challanges Housing Affordability Sea Level Rise and Climate Change Poverty and Vulnerability Broadening the Economy City-Building Goals • • • • • •

Vancouver is a livable, affordable and inclusive city. Vancouver is an environmentally sustainable city. Vancouver’s business climate is dynamic and robust. Vancouver is a safe city in which people feel secure. Vancouver offers extraordinary civic amenities. Vancouver’s assets and infrastructure are well-managed and resilient.

Priorities for Long Term Livability • • • • •

Affordable living (housing, childcare and transportation). Economic diversification (creative services and creative manufacturing). Place-making. Investment planning and partnership development.

The Big Questions

Poverty & Social

• • • Vulnerability •

Who is Vancouver being planned for? Who will be able to live and work here? What are the impacts to businesses if workers cannot afford to live here? Sea Level be Rise &toClimate How will sufficient investments made serve andChange sustain growth?

Broadening the Economy

Housing Affordability

108

General Vision

Housing Vancouver Strategy • • •

Shift towards right supplyby building more affordable housing and limiting speculative investment Protect our existing affordable housing stockfor the future Increase support and protectionfor those who need it most

Greenest City 2020 goals

Vancouver has proven that a city can grow and prosper and still become a green capital —a global leader in addressing climate change. •

City Core 2050

Develop a shared vision for the city core. Includes 5 interconnected work programs: • Central Waterfront • Civic/Health Precinct • False Creek South • Broadway Subway Extension • Employment Lands

Resilience and Sustainability

Vancouver has proven that a city can grow and prosper and still become a green capital —a global leader in addressing climate change.

Places for People / Urban Design

Through Places for People Downtown, we will create a strategy to shape and deliver vibrant public spaces

•

Vancouver is set to bring our community-based greenhouse gas emissions down to 5% below 1990 levels, even as our population has grown by over 27% and jobs have increased by over 18%. Vancouver’s electricity is generated in British Columbia—93% of it from renewable sources. We are also developing neighbourhood-scale renewable energy projects. Conversion to renewable sources will create new green jobs.

The City has implemented the greenest building code in North America. Vancouver is rising to meet the green transportation challenge by creating compact neighbourhoods with higher density to provide easy access to work, shopping and recreation. The City has shifted investment to walking, cycling and transit infrastructure instead of building new roads.

downtown.

“It’s up to everyone to do their part, to rethink, re-evaluate and re-imagine the way Vancouver works and how we lead our lives.” 109 Vancouver’s Greenest City Action Team

Greenest city 2020 goals

the carbon content of vehicle fuels and electricity, and to support Canadian cities with new regulatory authority that enables each municipality to build a low-carbon future. The foundations of the Climate Leadership goal are the Green Buildings, Green Transportation, and Zero Waste sections of this plan. Other specific linkages to actions within this plan include the creation of new green jobs, reducing our ecological footprint, and creating local food assets in the city.

2020 ACTION PLAN

3. Lead the world in green building design and construction. The following strategies need to be implemented together. Support is also needed from partners in the design, development, and construction industries, as well as from organizations providing education and capacity building services.

1. Secure Vancouver’s international reputation as a mecca of green enterprise.

•

The City and the VEC (Vancouver Economic Commission) support, encourage and enable green job creation, but the real leadership needs to come from those who are ready to seek out the business opportunities that exist in Vancouver’s green economy. The Green Economy goal is directly connected to the other nine goals, particularly Green Buildings, Zero Waste, and Local Food— areas where many new green jobs are expected. At least 10% of green jobs have low barriers to employment and are accessible to residents facing language barriers, mental health issues, homelessness, or other challenges. These include jobs in local food, waste management and recycling, and some forms of construction (including home weatherization and deconstruction). Nearly 70% of green jobs require post-secondary qualifications, including technical or trades training.

•

The development of a simple policy that raises requirements consistently and predictably in order to reduce uncertainty for developers and others in the market. Financing tools and incentives that provide ways to address concerns of affordability and fairness, and increase the pace of change towards green developments and retrofits. Actions that range from continued leadership in building City-run facilities that achieve net zero or living building standards, to the distribution of Green Home Renovation Guides and Passive Design. Education and outreach programs to engage building occupants.

4. Make walking, cycling, and public transit preferred transportation options.

The City can do a great deal when it comes to greening transportation, but there is significant need for support from other agencies like TransLink, the Province, Metro Vancouver, and ICBC in order to achieve these targets. Vancouver needs to achieve the Green Transportation targets in order to meet the 2020 targets for Climate Leadership, Lighter Footprint, and Air Quality. Green Transportation is also tied to Access to Nature and specific actions such as building new greenways and upgrading portions of our bikeways to greenways.

2. Eliminate dependence on fossil fuels. Despite Vancouver’s success to date, achieving the 2020 Climate Leadership target will call on all of us to expand our efforts. We need to double the current rate by which we’ve been reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. The success of this plan also depends on continued action from the provincial and federal governments to decrease 110

5. Create zero waste

8. Vancouver will have the best drinking water of any city in the world.

At a regional level, Metro Vancouver is hard at work on waste reduction and recycling strategies, and Vancouver needs to work closely with Metro in order to achieve our own target. Leadership will also be required from the businesses and residents that call Vancouver home. The Zero Waste goal is closely tied to the Greenest City goals of Green Economy, Climate Leadership, Lighter Footprint, Clean Water, and Local Food.

Metro Vancouver plays a lead role in ensuring high water quality for all residents of the region. The new SeymourCapilano Filtration Plant will protect water quality for many years to come. The City also has an important role to play in monitoring and in working with residents and businesses to protect water quality and to prevent water waste.

6. Vancouver residents enjoy incomparable access to green spaces, including the world’s most spectacular urban forest.

The Clean Water goal requires coordination with the Green Building goal and associated actions and strategies on issues of rainwater and greywater capture and use. It also recognizes the need to coordinate with Local Food actions, focusing on synergies between urban agriculture and water conservation efforts.

Finding land for new parks is possible but can be challenging, so we’ll need innovative ways, such as neighbourhood-scale mini-parks, to ensure that all Vancouver residents have accessible green space.

9. Breathe the cleanest air of any major city in the world.

The City has the capacity to modestly increase the number of street trees that are planted on its properties. It will need to work with other public landholders like the Vancouver School Board and the Vancouver Coastal Health Authority to increase trees planted in other public spaces. The City will also need to work closely with private property owners to encourage tree planting and stewardship.

The Clean Air goal is closely linked with the Green Transportation goal as many transportation strategies will have significant positive effects on air quality in Vancouver and the region. There are also links with Climate Leadership and some other important planning initiatives at the City like the Urban Health Strategy. The City of Vancouver will work closely with Metro Vancouver and many other stakeholders to achieve this target.

The Access to Nature goal is closely connected to several other Greenest City goals including Green Economy, Climate Leadership, Green Transportation, Lighter Footprint, Clean Air, and Local Food.

10. Vancouver will become a global leader in urban food systems. As with many Greenest City goals, strong partnerships are necessary for success. From Vancouver’s Food Policy Council to local food producers, from regional and provincial governments to neighbourhood groups, there is a place in this plan for everyone to play a role. Fortunately, Vancouver has a strong and growing community of people working for a local, sustainable, and just food system. This is a foundation we can build on as we make progress towards our 2020 goal.

7. Achieve a one-planet ecological footprint. The Lighter Footprint goal and target connect to many of the other Greenest City goal areas. Specific targets and actions in the Green Building, Green Transportation, Zero Waste, and Local Food plans will have a positive impact on reducing our ecological footprint. However, the City’s ability to influence the decisions that will lead to a reduced footprint is limited. The work to meet this goal and target is an opportunity for creativity and leadership from other levels of government, as well as from businesses and local residents. 111

ppendix

112

113

Berlin

SenStadtWohn

01.06.2018

I A 28/32

9(0)25 1324

„We make the city festival“, 22.–23.06.2018 – Reader: Berlin 1. General Data 1

Nominal GDP : 136 billion Euro (2017) GDP Growth Rate : Zwischen 2007 und 2017 stieg das Bruttoinlandsprodukt um jahresdurchschnittlich 2,1 %, gegenüber bundesweit 1,2 %. Area Berlin (12 boroughs, each a medium-sized city): 2 892 km 2 Area Capital Region (B + 50 municipalities): 3.700 km Population (Berlin): 3.71 million Population Capital Region: 4.67 million 2 Population Density (Berlin): 4.100 / km 2 Population Density (Capital Region): 1.200 / km

The Polycentric City Berlin has a very successful polycentric structure with a hierarchy of centres. The great number of Neighbourhood centres and shopping streets are what gives Berlin its economic, social and cultural identity. Their quality lies in a mix of retail, restaurant, services, leisure and cultural offerings. The location of retail shops close to residential areas allows Berliners to do their everyday shopping on foot, by bicycle or using public transport. The goal is to maintain and develop the polycentric structure, to boost the functional mix, and to uphold neighbourhood shopping facilities. Density Accordingly the Population Density is spread out. This is also connected to Berlins Building Typologies. Berlin‘s particular qualities, its mixed-use neighbourhoods from the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th century, are high density in terms of housing, inhabitants and jobs. An analysis of the current situation in the city shows – the lilac colours along the diagonal axis – which areas already have a good mix of working and living. The other areas show where working (blue-greenish colours) or living (orange colours) tend to dominate. Wherever this is possible and makes sense, the aim should be to achieve mixed use. (An inhabitant or job density of fewer than 20 inhabitants or jobs per hectare is categorised as „low“; a density of 20 to 100 inhabitants or jobs per hectare as „medium“ and a density of more than 100 inhabitants or jobs as „high“.)

114

https://www.berlin.de/sen/wirtschaft/wirtschaft/konjunktur-und-statistik/wirtschaftsdaten/wirtschaftsleistung/ ;

Brussels

Helsinki

Brussels Capital Region 1.175.000 inhabitants 160 kmÂ˛

005 1.000.000 015 1.150.000 1 5

15.000

0 5 1. 50.000 1 10.000 no Belgian nationalit 66 born abroa or parent born abroa Belgian Belgian origin

erage in ome per apita 00 B

nemplo ment rate 011 B

115

CITY OF LONDON KEY FACTS

2.9 sq. km roughly the footprint the Roman town established AD43 CITYcovering OF LONDON KEY of FACTS London 2.9 sq. km roughly covering the footprint of the Roman town established AD43

CITY OF LONDON KEY FACTS

CITY OF LONDON KEY FACTS CITY OF LONDON KEY FACTS 2.9 sq. km roughly covering the footprint of the Roman town established AD43 Almost 2,000 years of history Almost years of history 2.9 sq. km roughly 2,000 covering the footprint of the Roman town established 2.9 sq. kmAD43 roughly covering the footprint of the Roman town established AD43 AlmostThe 2,000 yearsleading of history World’s international financial, business centre World’s leading international financial, business centre AlmostThe 2,000 years of history Almost 2,000 years of history The World’s leading international financial, business centre The World’s leading international financial, business The centre World’s leading international financial, business centre

1,350,000 sqm of commercial floorspace under construction 1,350,000 sqm of commercial floorspace under construction 1,350,000 sqm of commercial floorspace under construction 13 new planned towers in the development pipeline in the Eastern Cluster 1,350,000 sqm of commercial floorspace under construction 1,350,000 sqm of commercial floorspace under construction

13 new planned towers in the development pipeline in the Eastern Cluster willtowers accommodate 60% of thepipeline City’s growth over the next 10 years 13 newwhich planned in the development in the Eastern Cluster will accommodate 60% of the City’s growth over the next 10 years 13 new which planned towers in the development pipeline in the Eastern 13 new Cluster planned towers in the development pipeline in the Eastern Cluster which will accommodate 60% of the City’s growth over the next 10 years 400,000 sqm of co-working spaces which will accommodate 60% of the City’s growth over the which will accommodate 60% of the City’s growth over the next 10 years next 10 years 400,000 sqm of co-working spaces 400,000 sqm of co-working spaces Over 90% of journeys to work made by public transport, walking or cycling 400,000 sqm of co-working spaces

400,000 sqm of co-working spaces

600 listed Historical buildings 26 Conservation Areas 48 Scheduled Ancient Monuments from Roman times onwards 4 Historic Parks and Gardens 350 pocket parks 25 hectares of public open space in the City Over 60 green roofs delivered in the last 10 years equivalent to 6

Wembley football pitches or 55 Wimbledon centre courts

116

Paris

Seoul

Population Area Density

9 838 892 hab. (2018) 605,52 km2 16 249 hab./km2

GDP Nominal: $1.4466 trillion (projected numbers)[1](2017) PPP: $1.9865 trillion (2017) GDP rank 11th(nominal) /14th(PPP) GDP growth 2.7% (2016) GDP per capita $29,115 (nominal, IMF, 2017 est.) $39,276 (PPP, IMF, 2017 est.) GDP by sector Agriculture: 2.6% industry: 39.2% services: 58.2% (2010) Inflation(CPI) 1.1% (January 2014)[2]

Paris is compact • City of Paris: 105 km2 with the woods, 85km2 without, 2.25 M inhabitants, 20 000 inhab/km2, 28km2 green spaces ( 8km2 without the woods), 1,9M jobs, 26M tourists per year • Greater Paris Metropolis : 700 km2, 6.6M inhabitants, 4.4M jobs, 8.000 inhab/km2 • Ile-de-France Region : 12.000 km2, 11.7M inhabitants, 1.000 inhab/km2, 80% of natural territory (agriculture and woods), 5.5M jobs

Population below poverty line 15% (below income of 19,179 USD 2007 est.)[3] Gini coefficient 30.2 (2015)[4] Labor force 25 million (2012 est.) Labor force by occupation Agriculture: 6.4% industry: 24.2% services: 69.4% (2011 est.) Unemployment 3.1% (Oct. 2015)[5]

117

Singapore

Sydney

S IN GAPORE SIN

lationour our

S IN GAPORE S S II N NG GA AP PO OR RE E GSAI P OARP E NG ORE

Greater Sydney â&#x20AC;&#x201C; general data (current) Population

APORE our populationSAs IofNJuneG2017 population As of June 2017 our population As of June 2017 As of June 2017 population As of June 2017 our ulation population As of June 2017 As of June 2017 our our our land area area land our area land area

3.3 times the size of Amsterdam, but also 1.5 more dense 3.3 times thetimes size of Amsterdam, but also 1.5 more dense 3.3 times thetimes size of Amsterdam, size of Amsterdam, also 1.5 times more dense imes more but dense 3.3 times the size of Amsterdam, but also 1.5 times more dense

land area our land area

area

Modes of travel to work Private car

25%

our the size of Amsterdam, our Density:USD 7,800 persons/km % Total Land Area USD 335,016MIL GDP2017 Top .5 times more dense % 2 our Real% GDP Growth into2017 contribution Nominal3.6 GDP2017 economy At Current Market Prices Top 19.2% contribution to Nominal GDP2017 economy % 3.6 Land our (2017) Density: 7,800 persons/km Area 17.6 Top % GDP contribution to Real Growth in Nominal 2017 %Total 19.2 economy GDP2017 3.6 GDP2017 (2017) 14.8 Real GDP Growth 17.6 19.2 in 2017 USD 335,016MIL 13.3 (2017) 14.8 17.6 Top % contribution to Nominal GDP2017 economy 13.3 14.8 19.2 3.6 % our Real Growth in 2017 13.3 Top % contribution Nominal GDP2017 (2017) 17.6GDPto omy USD 335,016MIL GDP2017 14.8 19.2 Manufacturing % contribution to Nominal GDP2017 13.3 At Current Market Top Prices (2017) economy 17.6 Wholesale & Retail Trade 19.2 our

14.8 Real GDP Growth in 2017 13.3

720 km 2

ation

cation

(total) (Urban Area)

Density

445 p/km2 2,052 p/km2

Cycling

(total) (Urban Area)

Greater Sydney â&#x20AC;&#x201C; general data (projections to 2036) Population

34 Mil TEUs Container Throughput 628Mil MilTEUs Tonnes Cargo Throughput 34 Container 628 MilTEUs Tonnes Cargo Throughput 34 Mil Container 628 Mil Tonnes Cargo Throughput

3.6 %34 Mil TEUs Container Throughput

628 Mil Tonnes Cargo Throughput

Housing

+725,000

34 Mil TEUs Container Throughput Mil Passenger Throughput 34 Mil TEUs Container Throughput 62.2 Mil Manufacturing Passenger62.2 Throughput 628 Mil Tonnes Cargo Throughput 628 Mil Tonnes Cargo Throughput 17.6 Wholesale & Retail Trade 14.8 Business Services 13.3 Finance & Insurance

education our education education our 62.2 Mil Passenger Throughput education

10,574 km2 2,067 km2

Walking

Top % contribution to Nominal GDP2017 nomy our our 19.2 education (2017)

Land area

Public transit

USD 7,800 persons/km2 Total Land Area Density: USD USD %

Manufacturing Wholesale & Retail Trade Manufacturing Business Services Wholesale & Retail Trade Manufacturing Finance & Insurance At CurrentWholesale Market Prices Business Services & Retail Trade Finance & Insurance Business Services Manufacturing Finance & Insurance Wholesale & Retail Trade 62.2 Mil Passenger Throughput Business Services 62.2 Mil Finance Passenger Throughput & Insurance 62.2 Mil Passenger Throughput Manufacturing (2017)Business Services 17.6 Wholesale & Retail Trade 14.8 Business ServicesThroughput 62.2 Mil Finance & Insurance Passenger 13.3 Finance & Insurance

Land area and density

56%

persons/km2

At Current Market Prices

(2016)

Density: 7,800 Total Land Area Density: 7,800 persons/km2 Total Land Area Density: 7,800 persons/km2 Total Land Area

At Current Market Prices

Top 3 overseas origins of birth

$401 billion

4.7 million

2 720 km 2 720 km 2 2 720 km 720 km 2 Density: 7,800 persons/km 720 Total Land Area 335,016MIL km GDP2017 335,016MIL GDP2017 335,016MIL GDP2017 3.6 km2 Real GDP Growth in 2017 720 3.6 Real GDP Growth in 2017 335,016MIL GDP2017

At Current Market Prices 3.3 times the size of Amsterdam, but also 1.5 times more dense At Current Market Prices

Gross Domestic Product

Highest qualification attained among residents aged 25 years & over Highest qualification attained among residents aged 25 years & over 34 Mil TEUs Container Throughput Highest qualification attained among residents aged 25 years & over

628 Mil Tonnes Cargo Throughput

Highest qualification attained among residents aged 25 years & over

118

2036

2056

Jobs

+817,000

GLANCE VANCOUVER AT A Vancouver GLANCE VANCOUVER AT A GLANCE VANCOUVER AT A VANCOUVER AT A GLANCE GLANCE VANCOUVER AT A GLANCE

Tokyo

Population (23 wards) Population (Tokyo Metropolis) Population (Greater Tokyo Area) Area (23 wards) Area (Tokyo Metropolis) Area (Greater Tokyo Area) Pop. Density (23 wards) Pop. Density (Tokyo Metropolis) Pop. Density (Greater Tokyo Area)

Population and Density 9,390,000 people • City: 631,486 (53.8 people/hectare) – Growing at 4.6% per year 13,491,000 people • High proportion of young adults (20-40 yrs.) 37,800,000 people • Metro: 2,463,431 (8.4 people/hectare) – Growing at 9% per year Population and Density • Higher proportion of children outside of the City of Vancouver 627 km2 • Aging population across all ofat Metro • City: 631,486 (53.8 people/hectare) – Growing 4.6%Vancouver per year 2,191 km2 Population Density • High and proportion of young adults (20-40 yrs.) 13,500 km2 Transportation • Metro: 2,463,431 people/hectare) – Growing –atGrowing 9% per at year • City: (8.4 631,486 (53.8 people/hectare) 4.6% per year 14,981 people / km2 • Higher childrenliving outside ofadults the core City of • proportion Majority of of residents in the city (5 Vancouver km radius from CBD) go to • High proportion of young (20-40 yrs.) • Aging population across all of Metro Vancouver by 2,463,431 walking, cycling, or transit 6,157 people / km2 • work Metro: (8.4 people/hectare) – Growing at 9% per year Population and Density • Personal vehicular travelofdeclined 49% (45% asCity driver; 4% as passenger • Higher proportion childrentooutside of the of Vancouver 2,800 people / km2 Transportation

• 14% of residents walk to work Majority of residents in theadults city core (5 km radius from CBD) go to • High proportionliving of young (20-40 yrs.) •• 30% of631,486 residents use people/hectare) public transit to get to work at 4.6% per year Transportation City: (53.8 – Growing by 2,463,431 walking, cycling, or transit • work Metro: (8.4 people/hectare) – Growing at 9% per year • High proportion young adults (20-404% yrs.) • Personal vehicular travel declined toof 49% (45% ascore driver; as passenger) • Majority of residents living in the city (5 Vancouver km radius from CBD) go to • Higher proportion of children outside of the City of Economy • work Metro: 2,463,431 (8.4 people/hectare) – Growing at 9% per year • 14% of residents walk to work by walking, cycling, or transit •Density Aging population across all of Metro Vancouver Population• and • Higher proportion ofdeclined childrentovehicles outside of the of Vancouver Cycling (6%) surpassed passengers in personal (4%) 420,000 Jobs •• Personal vehicular travel 49% (45% asCity driver; 4% as passenger • use Aging population all ofat Metro •• 30% residents public transit to get to work Top 3of Industry by Jobs: City:of631,486 (53.8 people/hectare) –work Growing 4.6%Vancouver per year Transportation •• 14% residents walk toacross • High• proportion of young adults (20-40 yrs.) • Professional, scientific and technical services (15%) Cycling living (6%) in surpassed passengers in personal vehicles (4%) • Majority of residents the city core (5 km radius from CBD) go to Economy Transportation • Health care and social–assistance • Metro: 2,463,431 (8.4 people/hectare) Growing at(13%) 9% per year • 30% of residents use public transit to get to work work by walking, cycling, or transit • Accommodation food • Higher children and outside ofservices the core City(10%) of • 420,000 Jobs • proportion Majority of of residents in (45% the city (5 Vancouver km from CBD) go to • Personal vehicular travel declined living to 49% as driver; 4% radius as passenger) • population Unemployment rate: 5.6% Economy • 3 Aging across all of Metro Vancouver • Top Industry by Jobs: work by walking, cycling, or transit • 14% of residents walk to work • Professional, scientific and travel technical services49% (15%) •• Personal vehicular (45% 420,000 Jobs • Cycling (6%) surpassed passengers indeclined personaltovehicles (4%)as driver; 4% as passenger Transportation • Health social assistance (13%) •• care 14% residents walk toget work Top and 3ofIndustry Jobs: • 30% of residents use public by transit to to work • Accommodation and food (10%) Cycling (6%) surpassed passengers in personal vehicles (4%) • Majority of• residents living in theservices city core (5 km radius from CBD) go to • Professional, scientific and technical services (15%) Unemployment 5.6%or • 30% of residents use public transit to get to work by walking, cycling, transit Economy • work •rate: Health care and social assistance (13%) • Personal vehicular travel declined to 49% (45% as driver; 4% as passenger) • 420,000 Jobs • Accommodation and food services (10%) Economy •• 14% residents • Unemployment Top 3ofIndustry by walk Jobs:to workrate: 5.6% • Cycling (6%) surpassed passengers in personal vehicles (4%) • 420,000 Jobs • Professional, scientific and technical services (15%) • 30% of residents public by transit to get to work • Top use 3 Industry Jobs: • Health care and social assistance (13%) • Professional, scientific and technical services (15%) • Accommodation and food services (10%) Economy Health • Unemployment •rate: 5.6%care and social assistance (13%) • 420,000 Jobs • Accommodation and food services (10%) • Unemployment rate: 5.6% • Top 3 Industry by Jobs: • Professional, scientific and technical services (15%) • Health care and social assistance (13%) • Accommodation and food services (10%) • Unemployment rate: 5.6%

•Density Aging population across all ofat Metro • City: 631,486 people/hectare) – Growing 4.6%Vancouver per year Population and(53.8 • Cycling (6%) surpassed passengers in personal vehicles (4%)

•

Following are based on Tokyo (23 wards) Nominal GDP GDP per Capita GDP Growth Rate World’s Top 500 Companies Corporate Tax Rate Number of Foreign Residents Number of Visitors from Abroad Average Housing Rent Travel Time between Inner-City and Areas and International Airports Number of Cities with Direct International Flights Density of Railway Stations Important Trends

748.2 Billion USD 82,521 USD 1.1% 37 31.9% 410,650 13.1 million people 1,920 USD / Month 33 minutes

102 Cities 1.15 / km2

Aging population Population decline Sustainability

Disaster preparation

Promoting Tokyo to the world

119

120