1. The Practice of Charrettes: From Norway and Transylvania to the UK
Dr Susan Parham, Head of Urbanism, Centre for Sustainable Communities
www.uh-‐sustainable.co.uk
3. The background – situating charrettes
• Need to situate charrettes within broad trends in which participation in planning and design
processes has moved from edge to mainstream
• Variations of participative process now found in all kinds of planning and design regimes at all
levels – supranational, national, regional, sub-regional, city wide, neighbourhood and very
local
• Why? Changes driven by ‘bottom up’ citizen activist movements of the 1960s/1970s (cf
Rachel Carson’s ‘Silent Spring’, reaction to comprehensive ‘renewal’ processes)
• Focus on participative democracy reflects ‘crisis of legitimacy of the state’ and the ‘democratic
deficit’
• Participative approaches can act as counter balance to ‘top down’ processes of planning and
development
• Participation in planning and design can be aspect of good ‘governance’ of place
• Can reflect more reflexive approach by government, business, social stakeholders
4. The background - charrette practice and urbanism
Sustainable urbanism: before the crash….
“As the housing market becomes ever more pressurised, Britain is embarking on a series of
massive urban developments under the banner of the government’s growth agenda. There is a
great opportunity to take advantage of this development and regeneration programme to change
the face of the country for the better – to produce walkable communities on a human scale, with
local character and a sense of identity, which provide for social balance and show respect for the
environment. But equally there is an enormous danger that the mistakes of previous waves of
20th century comprehensive development may be repeated, and more ‘nowhere’ places
produced offering no particular identity or sense of community cohesion, no new hopes or
possibilities for our weakest social groups”.Valuing Sustainable Urbanism, PFBE, 2007
Downturn a chance to reflect and improve design based engagement/placemaking?
5. The background to charrette practice
Sustainable urbanism principles….
6. Charrettes’ theoretical underpinnings
Arnstein’s ladder of participation
(1969) justly famous
• Citizen Control
• Delegated Power
• Partnership
• Placation
• Consultation
• Informing
• Therapy
• Manipulation
“Jumping off Arnstein's ladder: social
learning as a new policy paradigm
for climate change adaptation“Kevin
Collins and Ray Ison, Environmental
Policy and Governance, Volume 19, Issue
6, pages 358–373 November/December
2009
“The snakes and ladders of user
involvement: Moving beyond Arnstein”
Jonathan Quetzal Trittera,
Alison McCallumb, Health Policy, Volume
76, Issue 2, Pages 156-168 (April 2006)
“Community Engagement: Participation on
Whose Terms?” Brian W. Head,
Australian Journal of Political Science,
Volume 42, Number 3, September 2007 ,
pp. 441-454
7. Situating charrettes - from theory to practice….
Charrette processes moving to the mainstream…engagement at the heart of the process
Take up of charrettes reflects way stakeholder engagement now the mainstream language (and
practice) of public policy, management consultancy, public relations, and business strategic
planning and CSR.“Engagement is the process of exchanging information, listening to and
learning from stakeholders - with the goal of building understanding and trust on issues of
mutual Interest. http://www.sustainability.com/researchandadvocacy/program_article.asp?
id=1194
“Community Engagement or Community Action: Choosing Not to Play the Game” James
Martin Whelan and Kristen Lyons, Journal of Environmental Politics, (2005) pp596-610, No
14
8. Situating charrettes and the
mainstreaming of
engagement
Increasing the democracy
of design?
The language of engagement now
permeates public policy but is this a form
of incorporation? Does it reflect real shifts
in power? Can the practice of charrettes
move us beyond this?
10. Charrettes as part of the ‘palette’ of engagement methods in
urbanism practice
Now a broad palette of engagement methods and techniques can be used,
depending on the planning and design circumstances. Some examples are:
• visioning exercises/‘mind mapping’/’clean sheet of paper’ exercises
• walkabouts and street audits
• planning for real type exercises/charrettes/Enqiries by Design/masterplan consultations
• facilitated workshops, focus groups or forums
• one-to-one in-depth interviews with stakeholders/peer interviewing/vox pops
• social surveys and questionnaires
• participant/non-participant observation
• case study construction, narratives (‘light’ ethnography)
• online consultative formats (the rise of Survey Monkey)
• ideas exhibitions/other feedback and dissemination events
11. But what exactly is an urban design and planning charrette?
Some working definitions
Definition from The Town Paper
“A charrette is an intensive planning session where citizens, designers and others collaborate on a
vision for development. It provides a forum for ideas and offers the unique advantage of giving immediate
feedback to the designers. More importantly, it allows everyone who participates to be a mutual author of
the plan.”
http://www.tndtownpaper.com/what_is_charrette.htm
An alternative charrette definition from Kingston University, Department of
Landscape Architecture, 2009
“Design Charrette - Typically a collaborative session in which a group of designers drafts a solution to a
design problem. While the structure of a charrette varies, depending on the design problem and the
individuals in the group, charrettes often take place in multiple sessions in which the group divides into sub-
groups, including consultation or active participation of a range of stakeholders. Each sub-group then
presents its work to the full group as material for future dialogue. Such charrettes serve as a way of quickly
generating a design solution while integrating the aptitudes and interests of a diverse group of people.”
12. Defining the urban design and planning charrette
An historical note
“The term "charrette" is derived from the French word for
"little cart." In Paris during the 19th century, professors at
the Ecole de Beaux Arts circulated with little carts to
collect final drawings from their students. Students would
jump on the "charrette" to put finishing touches on their
presentation minutes before the deadline.”
http://www.tndtownpaper.com/what_is_charrette.htm
13. The urban design and planning charrette: structure
How the charrette is organised
“The charrette is located near the project site. The team of design experts and consultants sets
up a full working office, complete with drafting equipment, supplies, computers, copy machines,
fax machines, and telephones. Formal and informal meetings are held throughout the event and
updates to the plan are presented periodically.”
http://www.tndtownpaper.com/what_is_charrette.htm
14. The urban design and planning charrette: process
The three stages of the charrette process
“Through brainstorming and design activity, many goals are accomplished during the charrette.
First, everyone who has a stake in the project develops a vested interest in the ultimate vision.
Second, the design team works together to produce a set of finished documents that address all
aspects of design. Third, since the input of all the players is gathered at one event, it is possible
to avoid the prolonged discussions that typically delay conventional planning projects. Finally, the
finished result is produced more efficiently and cost-effectively because the process is
collaborative.”
http://www.tndtownpaper.com/what_is_charrette.htm
15. The urban design and planning charrette: process
NCI system demonstrates useful points about good charrette practice
“Phase 1 - Careful stakeholder research and analysis guards against mishandling key parties
who, if overlooked, may become project blockers. The early public kick-off workshop creates trust
and educates a community
Phase 2 - The multiple-day charrette maximizes the opportunities for members of the public to
participate – day or night, weekday or weekend. Multiple-days provide the design team time to
work through concepts with key stakeholders and to respond to the unexpected
Phase 3 - The post-charrette phase provides a safety net for engaging those who may have
missed the charrette. Follow-up public meetings provide another chance for stakeholders to
participate in a design feedback loop”
http://www.charretteinstitute.org/projects/community-planning.html
16. The urban design and planning charrette: engagement
The charrette’s engagement aspects
“Charrettes are organized to encourage the participation of all. That includes everyone who is
interested in the making of a development: the developer, business interests, government
officials, interested residents, and activists. Ultimately, the purpose of the charrette is to give all
the participants enough information to make good decisions during the planning process.”
http://www.tndtownpaper.com/what_is_charrette.htm
Issues from any sector are aired, explored and tested – “live”
Parallel, not serial, engagement – those contributing hear multiple perspectives
All inputs are recorded, how they are processed is auditable – understand why, and why not
Perspectives are actively sought, not reactively received
17. The urban design and planning charrette:
a design refinement process
Feedback loops…
18. The urban design and planning charrette: refinement process
Image from Maudsley
Hospital Charrette
process in UK, 2008.
Run by Bill Lennertz
using NCI principles
http://
www.maudsleyredesign.
co.uk/about.html
Feedback loops in detail…
20. Not all charrettes are exactly the same in approach
Some examples…
National Charrette Institute in US - provides a “proven, flexible, three-step framework that can be
customized for your project.” http://www.charretteinstitute.org/charrette.html
The Centre for Sustainable Communities at University of Hertfordshire conducts an ongoing
program offering entire range of NCI training, specifically adapted for practice in the UK, including
local case studies. http://www.intbau.org/news.htm#NCIEU0909
Prince’s Foundation undertakes a number of significant scale Enquiry by Design processes which
are analagous to charrettes http://www.princes-foundation.org/index.php?id=33
INTBAU and partners charrettes in places including Norway, Romania and Cuba - has developed
and run a range of charrettes which have pioneered the use of concurrent planning courses and
social surveys
21. Enquiries by Design
Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment Enquiry by Design (EbD) process
“A single event held over several days assesses a complex series of design requirements of a
new or revived community. …The EbD is usually staged over five days and varies according to
the size and complexity of the site. The outcome is a vision that unifies everyone involved in the
development, including those who will eventually give planning permission. This intense five-day
workshop is normally preceded by one or more two-day scoping workshops, to gather technical
information, conduct a thorough physical analysis of the site and its surroundings and produce a
Pattern Book - a study of nearby villages, towns and neighbourhoods which identifies prevalent
local spatial types which should be drawn upon for the design of the new development.”
http://www.princes-foundation.org/index.php?id=33
44. UK charrette examples:
The Hertfordshire Charrette -
Establishing The Most Sustainable
Design Options For Hertfordshire
The (now abandoned) East of England Plan
included government targets for an additional
82,300 homes in Hertfordshire. As with other
regions, the core issues facing the county are the
standard of existing housing and the requirement for
further homes and development. The Hertfordshire
Charrette was a collaborative exercise involving the
University of Hertfordshire, BRE, Turnberry
Consulting and urban designers, DPZ. Held in June/
July 2008, the main focus of the charrette was the
future growth of the county and how this could be
carried out in the most sustainable manner possible.
http://www.building4change.com/page.jsp?
id=74
45. UK charrette examples:
The Hertfordshire Charrette - Establishing The Most
Sustainable
Design Options For Hertfordshire
There were a number of workshops attended
by designers, planners, councillors, business
owners and the general public to discuss
views and visions for the best way forward.
These sessions provided an ideal platform to
address the social and environmental issues
relating to development whilst shaping
strategies which respond to Hertfordshire's
character and landscape. BRE provided an
on-going sustainability assessment of the key
workshop outputs using the GreenPrint
sustainability framework.
47. UK charrette examples:
Deptford Creekside charrette, London, 2008
“The charrette process should set a precedent for future consultations on
redevelopment and regeneration for Creekside and other areas. The key being that it is
employed at the start of the design process when minds are open, rather than
consultation at the end of a design process when minds are closed and battle lines
drawn. These proposals were put together by a multidisciplinary team of 26, who worked
for six long days, held six public meetings, held one to ones and smaller group meetings
and engaged with at least 350 stakeholders. The team met with passionate
engagement, optimism, despair, anger and joy. There is still time to think about
Creekside as a place and to create an exemplary, interconnected, sustainable, unique,
and creative destination and home. If you are involved in any way in shaping this place
we urge you to read this document and to take note of its ideas”
Quote from charrette report by Design for London www.creeksidecharrette.org
50. ‘Mini charrette’ process
Hanbury Hall, Inner East London, 2010
Using charrette principles –
including design ‘feedback loops’
in a ‘squeezed’
one day or half day format
51. Other charrette style examples:
Railway Street Masterplan, Brierfield, Pendle, UK (Urbed)
52. Critique of charrettes as a design and engagement process
Key strengths of the charrette process
Saves time and money, Increases probability for implementation, promotes trust between
communities, developers and government, results in the best sustainable design
Argued weaknesses
Use of single type of process - does not use the wider range of engagement processes that
might be suitable for participatory planning
Role of charrette facilitator - can be manipulator/maintain too much control
Bond, S. and Thompson-Fawcett, M. (2007) Public participation and New Urbanism: a
conflicting agenda? Planning Theory and Practice 8(4):pp. 449-472. 2007 http://
eprints.gla.ac.uk/3833/
53. The urban design and planning engagement process:
public policy under Labour
In 2008 the UK Department for Communities and Local Government announced grants of up to £70,000
(total pot up to £5 million) to allow under represented groups a better say on planning. Referenced
charrettes, “planning for real” and planning aid as very useful consultative planning tools:
“The new grants are part of a major Government drive to put communities in control, strengthen active
citizenship and give people more say over local services.
Planning is already one of the most democratic processes with the majority of decisions taken by elected
local councillors. But too often decisions become contentious because of the perceived lack of public
involvement in decisions that leave under represented groups frustrated and disenchanted.
The planning empowerment grants announced today will help tackle this sense of injustice by
encouraging councils to secure greater legitimacy for decisions by placing some power in the hands of
local communities generating a vibrant, engaged and healthier local democracy.”
http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/planningandbuilding/1006771
54. The urban design and planning engagement process:
public policy now – Localism Bill and beyond
Roll forward to 2012 and charrettes have received positive mention in Planning
Advice Note 3 on Community Engagement (Scottish Government) and in the new
Localism Bill. National Planning Policy Framework suggests strong role for
design and engagement in planning and development process:
“The draft Framework sets out nationally important issues and leaves other
matters for local councils and communities to decide themselves. So
communities can plan to meet their needs, without the Government always
getting in the way and telling them what to do”. Those bringing forward
development are “expected to play their part by recognising and responding to
the needs of communities”. (Draft NPPF, 2011: 5).
“Developers will be expected to work closely with those directly affected by their
proposals to evolve design proposals that take account of the views of the
community. Proposals that can demonstrate good engagement with the
community in developing the design of the new development should be looked
on more favourably.” (Draft National Planning Policy Framework, 2011: 34)
55. The urban design and planning engagement process:
National Planning Policy Framework
Framework makes the point that timely engagement can mean less
opposition to a proposed development and offer opportunities for
communities to play a bigger part in place shaping in future.
‘Front loading’ of the process is consistently advocated to make sure
issues are ironed out with communities before planning applications are
made.
Framework stresses the need for early engagement between
developers and councils, as well as between developers and
surrounding communities and statutory agencies.
“Early engagement has significant potential to improve the efficiency
and effectiveness of the planning application system for all parties.
Good quality pre-application discussion enables better coordination
between public and private resources and improved outcomes to the
community.” (National Planning Policy Framework, 2011: 21)
56. The urban design and planning engagement process:
related policy aspects
Local planning authorities in England have been invited by the
government to apply for grants under the Neighbourhood Planning
Front Runners scheme. The grants are being used to help local
planning authorities gain insight into how the provisions for
neighbourhood planning are likely to work in practice following
Commencement of the Localism Bill. Councils are being expected to
undertake a planning project in close collaboration with an established
community group or parish council in a manner similar to that
envisaged in the Localism Act, or, in business areas, with a local
business organisation.
Also a new role for local communities through Neighbourhood Plans to,
identify opportunities to give planning permissions through
Neighbourhood Development Orders and Community Right to Build
Orders.
57. The urban design and planning engagement process:
responses to present governmental position
Not everyone convinced by this – and there are implications for
sustainable design and placemaking outcomes and process of
getting there:
"Economic growth is generally set to trump the aspirations of
local communities expressed in local and neighbourhood plans.
The relationship between the presumption in favour of
sustainable development and the primacy of locally-led
development plans is not clear”. (RTPI)
Are development proposals agreed on the basis of ‘the
presumption’ likely to cause ongoing conflicts with local groups
that undermine rather than support the planning process?
(CSC)
59. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Scottish Government Planning Advice Note 3 2010
“Whatever the circumstances, it is important that all
stakeholders know the extent to which they can be
involved in planning decisions, taking into account the
practical limits of the process and the constraints within which it
operates. For instance, while development plans will set out the
planning authority's policies and proposals, whether
development will actually occur on a piece of land will also
depend on subsequent regulatory processes, such as the need
for planning consent, and a host of other factors including the
landowner's aspirations for the site”.
60. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Scottish Government Planning Advice Note 3 2010
Being clear about terms used
“The term 'consultation' is used to mean the dynamic process of
dialogue between individuals or groups, based on a genuine exchange
of views and, normally, with the objective of influencing decisions,
policies or programmes of action.
The terms 'engagement' and 'involvement' are generally
interchangeable and are taken to mean the establishment of effective
relationships with individuals or groups.
Participation is everything that enables people to influence the
decisions and get involved in the actions that affect their lives. In the
context of this document engagement is, in effect, giving people a
genuine opportunity to have a say on a development plan or proposal
which affects them; listening to what they say and reaching a decision
in an open and transparent way taking account of all views expressed”
61. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Scottish Government Planning Advice Note 3 2010
Principles of community engagement
1.Community Engagement must be meaningful and proportionate.
2.Community Engagement must happen at an early stage to influence the shape of plans and proposals.
3.It is essential for people or interest groups to get involved in the preparation of development plans as this is
where decisions on the strategy, for growth or protection, are made.
Defining 'community' is not simple. It means different things in different situations. It can be based on location -
those who live, work or use an area. But it can also be based on a common interest, value or background - for
example societal groups (based on race, faith, ethnicity, disability, age, gender or sexual orientation), members
of sports clubs and heritage or cultural groups. Each community will have different desires and needs which
have to be balanced against the desires and needs of others”.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2010/08/30094454/3
62. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Scottish Government Planning Advice Note 3 2010
Community Engagement in Planning
“Effective engagement with the public can lead to better plans, better decisions and more satisfactory
outcomes and can help to avoid delays in the planning process. It also improves confidence in the fairness of
the planning system.
The Scottish Government expects engagement with the public to be meaningful and to occur from the earliest
stages in the planning process to enable community views to be reflected in development plans and
development proposals.
Minimum requirements for consultation and engagement in the planning system are established through
legislation. Advice on community engagement in the planning system, linked to the National Standards for
Community Engagement, is provided in PAN 81 Community Engagement.
63. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Scottish Government Planning Advice Note 3 2010
How the process is expected to work
Everyone has the right to comment on any planning application which is being considered by a planning
authority. Legitimate public concern or support expressed on a relevant planning matter should be a
consideration in planning decisions.
Planning authorities must ensure that communities are given the opportunity to get involved in the preparation
of development plans. Planning authorities and developers should ensure appropriate and proportionate steps
are taken to engage with communities when planning policies and guidance are being developed, when
development proposals are being formed and when applications for planning permission are made.
Individuals and community groups should ensure that they focus on planning issues and utilise available
opportunities for engaging constructively with developers and planning authorities.
Close working with communities can help to identify and overcome sensitivities or concerns associated with
new development. Liaison committees can have a role in offering communities greater involvement in the
operation of mineral extraction sites and other similar developments.
64. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Scottish Government Charrette Series
As part of the Scottish Sustainable Communities Initiative (SSCI), a Charrette Series was held between 1 and
25 March 2010. The SSCI Charrette Series provided a unique and innovative opportunity for Scotland to
develop new approaches to sustainable planning while enabling a new level of public engagement in the
place-making process.
A 'charrette' is an interactive and intensive multi-disciplinary event that engages local people with experts to
develop designs for their community. It is a hands-on approach where ideas are translated into plans and
drawings.
65. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Scottish Government Charrette Series
The charrettes developed designs for three of the
SSCI exemplar projects at: Ladyfield, Dumfries;
Lochgelly, Fife; and Grandhome, Aberdeen. This
involved a series of intense design workshops
lead by the internationally acclaimed designer,
Andres Duany, each engaging with key
stakeholders to deliver community masterplans
and a vision of vibrant future communities.
The events featured large, public presentations,
encouraging the views of local communities to
help formulate the visions, as well as several
specific meetings for special interest groups
within each of the sites' local areas.
http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/Built-
Environment/AandP/Projects/SSCI/
SSCICharretteSeries
66. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Where to next for the practice of charrettes?
What should we expect from charrette practice in turbulent times?
Expanded role for communities and third sector in planning and designing places? (Supported
by advice to third sector (PFBE and others)
A divergent context of both incorporation and increasing radicalism? (the 1% protests)
What about the ‘structural’ issues? Who plans, engages, decides and how do charrettes fit in
given following issues:
Climate change mitigation and adaptation
‘Lumpy’ nature of urban development and ‘sprawl’ as business as usual
North/side divide on housing and economic vibrancy
Big infrastructure issues (another round of nuclear power? Wind power? Transport inc new
airports and heavy rail? etc)
Waste and pollution (nuclear waste, air pollution etc…)
67. The urban design and planning engagement process:
Can charrettes work at the ‘big bits of kit’ scale?
Infrastructure Planning Commission
The Infrastructure Planning Commission is the
independent body that examines applications for
nationally significant infrastructure projects. These are the
large projects that support the economy and vital public
services, including railways, large wind farms, power
stations, reservoirs, harbours, airports and sewage
treatment works.
“With pressure on the UK’s ageing energy and transport
infrastructures mounting, is it time to put projects of
national importance ahead of local concerns? Or does
this bypass our democratic right to object?”
