URBAN DESIGN AND PLANNING POLICY: THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS AND PROSPECTS FOR A NEW URBANISM IN PORTUGAL by LUIS D. BALULA A Dissertation submitted to the Graduate School—New Brunswick Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Program in Planning and Public Policy written under the direction of Anton C. Nelessen and approved by _______________________ _______________________ _______________________ _______________________ New Brunswick, New Jersey January 2010 © 2010 Luis D. Balula ALL RIGHTS RESERVED ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION Urban Design and Planning Policy: Theoretical Foundations and Prospects for a New Urbanism in Portugal by LUIS D. BALULA Dissertation Director: Anton C. Nelessen The rising authority of neo-traditional urban planning and design—either in the United States via New Urbanism or in Europe via the European Urban Renaissance—might provide much needed answers to the failures of Modern Urbanism to produce sustainable urban environments. Nevertheless, the ethos of modernist spatial planning seems to be pervasive on current planning processes despite its many flaws. This study aims at learning how urban design theory—and in particular neo-traditional urban design theory—can inspire and reform extant planning practices so as to counteract incoherent urban growth and promote a more inclusive and sustainable urbanism. A contextual analysis of the Portuguese planning system and its capacity to incorporate neo-traditional urban design concerns was conducted by various methods. First, a research of relevant legislation helped ascertain the national framework of spatial planning and its rapport with matters of urban design. Second, a nationwide survey was conducted in order to learn about urban development experts’ attitudes towards key principles of neo-traditional urban design. Third, a series of interviews with public officials ii in charge of urban planning in the city of Évora helped determine major challenges of local development control, and the way current legal and institutional regimes affect urban design quality. Fourth, a spatial survey of Évora’s neighborhoods provided an overview of the outcomes of different planning processes. Fifth, a visual preference survey evaluated the preferences of the general public, in particular the residents of Évora, in terms of city image. Major findings of these inquiries show that while both experts and laypersons seem to support neo-traditional urban design principles, the former are quite inconsistent in their assessments. Moreover, several issues emerged as major obstacles to the improvement of the current planning system, such as the exceedingly bureaucratic proceedings of urban design plans, very limited public participation, or a lack of consistent criteria to review the design quality of urban projects. Ultimately, the data suggests that in order to turn urban design into a successful policy tool it is necessary to promote a concerted effort in the fields of planning and development control, public participation, and environmental education. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I want to thank all the persons that helped me accomplish this work. Each one contributed differently, but decisively to the final outcome. My gratitude goes to: Professor Anton Nelessen, who provided me an essential bridge between scholarship and practice. In our many meetings and discussions he was always a most stimulating and inspiring interlocutor. I believe that this work’s optimistic perspective is in great part due to his enthusiastic confidence on a brighter urban future; Professor David Listokin, for his support and constant encouragement. Always accessible and ready to help, at several critical steps he assisted me in finding the necessary answers and stay on course; Professor Robert Lake, for his stimulating classes and accurate readings’ suggestions, which introduced me to some of the most interesting contemporary thinkers and helped me develop a sharper critical thinking; Professor João Cabral, at the school of architecture of Lisbon, for believing in the importance of this dissertation and facilitating my field work in Portugal; Professor Donald Kruekeberg, with whom I learned the fundamentals of good scholarship, and who helped me refine this dissertation proposal’s very first draft; Martin O’Reilly, for his inestimable help with the online version of the visual preference survey; Lynn Astorga, whose know-how and competence in assisting on all administrative hurdles were always remarkable; Dr. João Ferrão, secretary of state of urban and territorial planning, for his endorsement of this work from its very beginning; Dr. Ernesto Leão de Oliveira, mayor of Évora, who readily facilitated the necessary interviews with his technical and political staff; and Dr. Ângela Fernandes, president of APPLA, for her precious collaboration on the diffusion of the urban design criteria survey. iv I will never forget the gentle influence of Professor Philip Kubzansky, from Boston University, who first introduced me to New Urbanism’s ideas back in 1995 with the gift of a videotape with a lecture by Andrés Duany at the Museum of Fine Arts; this was indeed the beginning of it all. A very special thanks goes to my mother, a constant source of encouragement and support. Her trust and enthusiasm with my work were decisive in its advancement. To my friend Mauricio, I am grateful above all for his solidarity, always steady along the years. And last, but certainly not the least, my most affectionate gratitude goes to my lifetime companion, constant friend, and intellectual comrade Xinha—without whom the Great Adventure would lack all brilliance. * * * This work was made possible by a grant of the Portuguese Ministry of Science and Technology; as well as an award of the E. J. Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy—Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract ............................................................................................................................. ii Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... iv Table of contents.............................................................................................................. vi List of figures.................................................................................................................... ix List of tables ..................................................................................................................... ix List of charts..................................................................................................................... ix I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1 Background .......................................................................................................... 3 Asserting the Problem ........................................................................................... 5 Remaining Chapters.............................................................................................. 8 II. DEFINING URBAN DESIGN....................................................................................... 10 The Foundations of a New Theory of Urban Design. .......................................... 14 “Post”—Modernist Challenges.............................................................................. 31 Conclusion........................................................................................................... 35 III. THE NORMATIVE QUALITIES OF URBAN DESIGN................................................ 37 The Functional Dimension................................................................................... 38 The Social Dimension ......................................................................................... 41 The Morphological Dimension............................................................................. 43 The Temporal Dimension .................................................................................... 45 Conclusion........................................................................................................... 46 IV. URBAN DESIGN AND THE PLANNING PROCESS ................................................. 48 The Planning Context in Portugal........................................................................ 48 The Urban Planning System................................................................................ 52 The Development Control System....................................................................... 57 vi Public Participation.............................................................................................. 64 Conclusion........................................................................................................... 69 V. THE ÉVORA CASE STUDY ....................................................................................... 71 Urban Morphologies and the Quality of Public Spaces ....................................... 71 Urban Planning and Development Control Systems in Évora—a Diagnosis ........ 80 Conclusion........................................................................................................... 92 VI. ASSESSING EXPERTS’ OPINION: URBAN DESIGN CRITERIA SURVEY............. 94 Survey Design and Implementation....................................................................