Do you speak placemaking?
Faced with the practical implications of placemaking, the need for a common language and a move to interdisciplinary teamwork is paramount, says Paul Reynolds, leader of the urban design team at Atkins London
Urban design, arguably the discipline at the heart of good placemaking, is a collaborative specialism that spans a number of traditional built environment professions. Those of us who call ourselves urban designers generally come from a background in architecture, landscape architecture, planning, engineering or similar fields, and see ourselves as having taken a sidestep from our traditional professional roles to work in areas where the boundaries are a little more blurred, the lines between disciplines a little hazier. Working in this way can often be challenging, as it takes us out of our professional comfort zones.
Multidisciplinary people are literate in multiple disciplines. A common theme such as placemaking may thread the beads together, but ultimately there are language gulfs between the disciplines. Within multidisciplinary project teams, members speak in their own languages – and even if simpler language is used the results are, frequently, at best confused and at worst incompatible. It is clear that only by developing a common language can successful interaction occur.
It is often said that the easiest way to learn a new language is to move to a country where it is natively spoken. As an urban designer working at the largest multidisciplinary consultancy in Europe, maybe I have been lucky in working in an environment in which I am surrounded by colleagues from all the professions. Whilst this has helped me a great deal, I believe, we need to go further. Rather than being a merely a multidisciplinary team, we need to become interdisciplinary.
To be interdisciplinary, one must recognise the deep connection between the disciplines. A common language is possible that cuts through the disciplines is possible if we develop a set of metaphors that lets us use the same concepts, words and visual tools facilitating efficient knowledge transfer.
Academic institutions are starting to recognise the need for commonality. The University of Cambridge offers a two-year part-time Interdisciplinary Design for the Built Environment (IDBE) masters degree, however, it seems that individual companies are slower in picking up the mantle. The hope must be that this shift in academia will quickly be mirrored within the ethos of professional institutions and organisations, and in turn become more prevalent within design practices themselves.
As many urban designers, architects and planners have learnt the hard way, one cannot dictate activities. All we can do is to suggest uses, and as long as the places are sufficiently robust, the activities will simply happen
Making places
For some, the term ‘placemaking’ is one that suggests an influence far beyond that which can be achieved with a pen and paper – the term placeshaping may be a more accurate description of the actual process in the context of urban design. After all, many places already exist, just maybe not in the form that we envisage them. As many urban designers, architects and planners have learnt the hard way, one cannot dictate activities. All we can do is to suggest uses, and as long as the places are sufficiently robust, the activities will simply ‘happen’.
Urban design is about setting the vision and moulding the process, rather than prescribing how space should be used. The composition and skill of the design team is often reflected in its outputs, a fact that clients with strong visions would do well to remember. Whilst clear client brief and direction is to be welcomed (and unusual), it is difficult to quantify the impact that the design team has on the finished place, as it is determined by the end user.
The person ‘on the street’, will use the space as he or she sees fit. Whilst successful places are those that offer the most flexible spaces and are most open to interpretation by the user, there is no guarantee that these will have been designed by the best team. In theory, any team of professionals is capable of producing a technically correct and deliverable scheme. Unfortunately, many such schemes are also sterile and inhuman places that work financially and meet the criteria of the brief, but fail to grasp the spirit that lay behind the concept. Places must be able to engage with those who use them, at both a conscious and subconscious level. There is no one profession that can bring these skills to the drawing board. Such design magic develops from a team that works well together and operates as a single entity.
Teambuilding
Getting a team to work in harmony can be a challenge. Generally speaking, a design team will be appointed in a top-down process, with the first appointment being the lead designer or masterplanner. This designation is non-profession specific, but often the role is taken on by an architect. It could be argued that there are better choices for this role. Landscape architects or town planners (who would traditionally lead large-scale masterplanning teams) could claim to have a greater ability to grasp ‘the bigger picture’. Architects are frequently accused of focusing on individual buildings at the expense of the overall place.
Whoever leads the team, the next step will be the appointment of the key professions whose input is required at the earliest stage to ensure the feasibility of the scheme: architects, landscape architects, town planners, highway engineers, structural engineers and environmental specialists. These are supported by cost consultants and property consultants, whose role it is to convert the designs and visions into the cold hard numbers that will ultimately determine whether the scheme will go ahead.
In many design teams there will also be a range of ‘fringe’ consultants, working in niche areas such as public art, lighting or townscape. These consultants, who may be seen as providing a limited specialist input, in many cases actually provide the skills that help to drive the placemaking process. The final and most important member of a design team is the public, the end users who will be using the place every day to live, work or relax. People bring both local knowledge and an understanding of the history of the place, which in many ways is the very essence of ‘place’ itself.
There could be reasonable arguments for challenging the teambuilding status quo, but far more important than looking at who is appointed, and in which order, is having an understanding how the team works. A good team – whether professionals from a multidisciplinary firm or assembled from smaller firms – can provide huge amounts of added value. How they work together is the overriding concern. Any combination of professionals from firms small or large can work together well or badly.
A paradigm shift
There is a clear difference between multidisciplinary working and interdisciplinary working, and our keenness in promoting multidisciplinary teams could be misguided. There must be a paradigm shift within the built environment professions, and those that commission projects, to acknowledge that a design team can, and must be, more than the sum of its parts. Only when clients start to look for interdisciplinary teams, and interdisciplinary consultancies emerge to fulfil this demand, will we start to create places that genuinely inspire and delight.
A good team – whether professionals from a multidisciplinary firm or assembled from smaller firms – can provide huge amounts of added value. How they work together is the overriding concern
Chepstow town centre
As ‘place’ is not a tangible asset that can be easily incorporated into a design project, we must consider how best to reinforce the concept through physical interventions. One of the most successful routes is through the use of public art. In many schemes a piece of sculpture is added as a token gesture, and has little to offer. Atkins’ scheme in Chepstow town centre took a different route. Public art was fully integrated into the fabric of the scheme, with dramatic results. One of the reasons for this success was the inclusion of an artist as an integral part of the interdisciplinary design team, which also included landscape architects, engineers and highways specialists, all working closely with both the contractor and material suppliers. By working together at every stage, from concept design through to construction, a high quality solution was achieved, and one that successfully captures many of the images and words that reflect Chepstow as a place – its history and its people.
Trafalgar Square
Heralded as one of the key public realm improvements in Central London for many years, the pedestrianisation of the North Terrace of Trafalgar Square was actually one of a number of interventions that formed phase one of the World Squares for All masterplan. Along with the works in the square, all nine approach roads had footways widened and new seating added.
This was one scheme where the identity of the place needed no reinforcement – the space is recognised around the world, both in its own right and as a symbol for London. The project was only possible because of interdisciplinary working between (primarily) transport planners, highway engineers, architects, landscape architects and urban designers, working closely with a client that had the drive to push the scheme forward and not be derailed by the many issues that inevitably arise during complex and demanding programmes.
It is also an example of how interdisciplinary, rather than multidisciplinary, teams work in practice, with a combination of firms combining to provide the people and skills required in a shared working environment. Its success as a ‘place’ lies partly in its robustness and practicality; reflected in the vast range of events that haven taken place there since its completion.
Ashford urban extension
The toughest challenge for an urban designer is always a project that begins with a blank sheet of paper. Atkins’ work in Ashford for Church Commissioners has done exactly that, creating new villages and towns, each with their own identity and distinctiveness, for communities that don’t yet exist.
This has only been possible by bringing together the many skills that exist within the company, and coupling them with a methodology that embedded the population of Ashford at the heart of the design process. Using the Enquiry by Design (EbD) process, a planning tool developed by The Princes Foundation for the Built Environment, the design team produced a ‘pattern book’ grounded in the urban character of the existing areas of Ashford and surrounding villages, and the natural characteristics of the site. This was further informed by working to constraints identified by the integrated professional design team – ecologists, hydrologists and air quality specialists. Placemaking is very much an art rather than a science, and as such is open to interpretation. Yes these processes enable the design team to work within a set of definable parameters that will ultimately benefit the place, and those that will live there in the future.
For the pfd file of this article, please click here
Atkin’s scheme for Chepstow town centre, with integral public art to reflect place, history and the people of the town
Atkins worked on the remodelling of Trafalgar Square
Steps leading to the National Gallery and view to St Martins-in-the-Fields
The Square after improvement
Atkins has helped to create new communities in Ashford
Ashford employment area
Ashford high street
The Crescents
