Plan vs. Process: The Case of Neighbourhood Planning

One of the hallmarks of the New Urbanist movement is the idea that cities ought to be planned as a series of physically delineated neighbourhoods. But there is a conflict between the attempt to align neighbourhoods as physical plans, based on normative theory, with neighbourhood planning as an open-ended process guided by citizens. Neighbourhood plans are valued for their forethought and tangibility, but it is unclear how they might integrate with a bottom-up process designed to empower residents. This review article summarizes the debate that exists between neighbourhood plans vs. neighbourhood planning as a process of community engagement. I summarize the tension between planning for a specified end state and 'neighbourhood planning' that is process-oriented and not reliant on any particular physical outcome. The former is viewed as 'top-down' and harmful, and there is ample evidence that neighbourhood plans have been used to override resident desires. To critics, planned neighbourhoods will always be too controlling, antithetical to 'authentic', self-managed neighbourhoods. But to others, neighbourhood plans are the antidote to placelessness, social detachment, and urban sprawl. I conclude by considering whether both approaches might be integrated, incorporating bottom-up generation in tandem with planned physical ideals.