The Impact of Urban Democracy as a Policy in Evolution and Developing the Master Plan of the City

The Impact of Urban Democracy as a Policy in Evolution and Developing the Master Plan of the City

Inaam Qassem Abdullah* Khansaa Ghazi Rasheed

Department of Architectural Engineering, University of Technology- Iraq, Baghdad 10070, Iraq

Corresponding Author Email: 
ae.19.38@grad.uotechnology.edu.iq
Page: 
39-49
|
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.18280/ijdne.180105
Received: 
16 December 2022
|
Revised: 
25 January 2023
|
Accepted: 
2 February 2023
|
Available online: 
28 February 2023
| Citation

© 2023 IIETA. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract: 

The research aims to build a comprehensive cognitive framework about the policy of urban democracy in developing the master plan of the existing city and the interconnection of its spaces with each other spatially. Previous literature indicated that the evolutionary development of master plan is obtained through a gradual approach led by citizens and local authorities. The research classified the levels of democracy depending on the method of community participation into two styles: formal and intellectual. The hypothesis of the research is that, the idea of urban democracy in the master plans of city centers depends on the creation of the integrating the design or legislative strategies of urban democracy. And presenting Arab and international experiences to reach a comprehensive theoretical framework for the politics of democracy in developing the master plan for the purpose of enhancing cohesion, feeling, interaction, prosperity and belonging to the place. The research found a number of different indicators for the development of the master plan, including activating the will of the user in the integration and development of the city and identifying the elements of the city's structuring, which is represented by the interaction and democratic response in the processes of development and transformation or the expression of the distinct user personality for every place and time.

Keywords: 

democracy, master plan, urban democracy, the principle of integrative thinking, community participation, social justice

1. Introduction

The master plan is the basic organizational structure of the city in terms of forecasting variables and transformations, defining movement nodes, locations of green, public or private and semi-private spaces, as well as defining the different land uses and their physical relationship with the rest of the spaces.

In order innovate the master plan development policies and link its different cities within a unified and coherent design, it is necessary to achieve social justice, and to involve the local community in that, democracy is an effective policy that includes various social, cultural, and economic fields and groups, which has an important intellectual role in achieving human freedom as well as civil and political rights that transfer thought to application. It also seeks to develop practical awareness and local knowledge, and to promote dialogue or intellectual and formal communication between urban product and receiver, as well as providing ways to preserve historical and cultural symbols and mutual respect during the renewal policy process.

Participatory design and urban democracy are of great importance in shaping sustainable development plans, selecting the best alternatives for the master plan, linking the old historical center of the city with the new centers, and upgrading the city as a whole towards a socially, economically, culturally, environmentally, and urban sustainable perspective.

Hence the problem of the research, "the existence of a comprehensive lack of knowledge about the policy of urban democracy in the development of the master plan of the city and the interconnection of places with each other spatially." The aim of the research is to build a comprehensive knowledge framework on urban democracy policy in developing the master plan of the city and interconnecting its spaces with each other spatially by relying on employing the dimensions and mechanisms of urban democracy as a planning and development policy and with an integrated logic in making the best urban decisions and upgrading the city towards the perspective of sustainable development in all its dimensions.

To achieve this, the research adopted a descriptive and analytical approach to a number of previous urban studies that dealt with the main research axes according to the following steps:

Building a comprehensive theoretical framework, after exploring the most important vocabulary related to urban democracy policy.

- Applying the vocabulary of the theoretical framework to selected models of urban development projects such as (Stanmore neighborhood) in England and (Al-Turath neighborhood) in Egypt.

- Reaching to the results represented by: the participatory control and management of the human being over the urban fabric of the city represented by the sustainability of society in the light of community participation and solidarity, functional and formal compatibility represented by the ability to adapt with change, which is considered one of the most important dimensions of employing democracy as a development policy, as for the mechanisms of employing democracy as a planning or improvement policy are represented by supporting official government programs, employing contractors who contribute to the development of deteriorating urban areas, involving community members in decision-making and implementation processes, and integrating spaces with the city in connection with the transportation network, as well as improving green networks and infrastructure at the city level. While integrative thinking based on self-motivation represents the generation of the new democratic place by making the best urban decisions and upgrading the city towards the perspective of sustainable development.

2. The Significance of Democracy in Urban Design

Béal [1] emphasized that democracy helps in developing the management of urban environmental issues, and follows the transition period from focusing on the "local environment" to "sustainable urban development", facilitating the use of environmental policies as a gadget for understanding the transformations of urban management, especially the transformations of the actors involved in making policies, how local elites use sustainable development policies with the aim of neutralizing urban conflicts within the master plan of cities, preparing urban and economic redevelopment strategies, enriching the quality of community life in the creation and investment of the place, and preparing the occupants and users of the growing space with the aim of eliminating conditions that encourage and perceive crime, as well as enhancing urban competitiveness ability.

Hågemark [2] pointed out that the essential feature of democracy in architecture or urban design is responsiveness; that is, political decisions respond to the will of the electorate. Previous studies show that most people tend to prefer architecture inspired by classics and historical traditions in urban environments; democratic design contributes to achieving response to people’s demands, rooting the past in the present and linking it with the future within a contemporary urban architectural style, strengthening the relationship between politics and urban development, and how to develop and design urban areas, making the city more environmentally sustainable, adding identity or social democratic character on the urban space, rooting inclusive values, ideals, ideologies and popular traditions, and obtaining different ideas and suggestions on how to shape the urban environment according to the collective consciousness.

3. Previous Literature

To clarify the concept of urban democracy, master plan and related terms, and to achieve a comprehensive definition, the studies that referred to them will be reviewed in an explicitly or implicitly way, and they will be discussed to reach a comprehensive theoretical framework by adopting urban democracy as a development policy for the master plan of the city.

3.1 Von Sydow [3] “Urban Democracy and the Local Exploring of the Local Governance in Urban Planning and Development”

This study indicated the most common types of urban democracy (participatory, representative, and deliberative) and focused on how to activate participatory democracy as a positive development policy or urban developmental planning through the cooperation of public and private actors to create the ability to govern, thus achieving their agenda in developing housing projects, planning green areas and services, and preserving a building of outstanding historical value.

Whereas representative democracy refers to representation through accountability and delegation, where citizens influence politics through voting and representatives make decisions even though representatives listen to public opinion and motivate their decisions in elections without influence. Deliberative democracy refers to making comprehensive decisions by means of rational arguments, and the representatives involved must separate themselves from self-interest and not exercise power over others.

These three types of democracy focus on a set of design principles represented by: flexibility in locating, preserving the city’s position in the urban hierarchy, creating high-level administrative service centers, and redefining the city and changing it towards an image that is not linked to an industrial city with vibrant, competition places; and the formal mechanisms embodied by: extensive physical redevelopment of urban waterfronts, collaboration of local authorities with a wide network of agencies and stakeholder groups ranging from business elites to community groups, provision of care and services locally, integration of spaces with the city in connection with the transportation network and with paths of movement through facilities service, facilitating the work of cooperative projects, and the participation of actors in defining and implementing economic development programs such as business associations, chambers of commerce, local companies and popular initiatives, etc. [3].

It is concluded from this study that it emphasized the three types of democracy (representative, participatory, and deliberative) as a mechanism for planning and developing housing projects, or preserving cultural and historical landmarks and symbols, or the policy of improving areas to achieve urban development for the city, basing on a set of design principles and formal mechanisms.

3.2 Grigorovschi [4] “City Planning Evolution-Urban Development Directions in the Transition Period”

The study dealt with democracy as a spatial adjustment policy for the settlement depending on the basic development factors. This adaptation process possesses a set of the elected features of the spatio-spatial plans, the study explained the city as the social space described as a spatial framework in which groups live and adapt through cultural and ecological factors; taking into consideration the determinants of social adaptation of the settlement spatially as a second nature for cities, for the purpose of adapting to changes within the social structure.

Two phases can be distinguished in urban development, the first of which was embodied in the transitional phase between 1990 and 2008, while the second phase begins in 2008, and the difference between them lies in the rhythm of developed phenomena. Within these two phases, a set of urban development trends can be defined, as shown below:

The first trend expresses the urban explosion and expansion of functions within its spaces and its wide diversity. It did not look at the redefinition of existing urban spaces, and the functions of the inner city; but looking to gain spatial support outside the context of the building, the first level of development trends is represented by: generating developmental poles, urban and spatial expansion of jobs, with a tendency to justify future developments, as shown in Figure 1a as for the second level, it is embodied in: the development or growth of the centrifuge from a group of different urban jobs, especially housing projects, and this is called concentric occupancy within semi-urban areas, as shown in Figure 1b, those developed jobs generally occur within residential, small areas, and gatherings, as one of the characteristics of both levels of social development embodies development with the absence of basic urban facilities, which in turn provide a dimension for permanent urban development, such as the sewage system, water, and gas, and the promotion of suitable jobs (education, commerce, housing, .... etc.), with the provision of appropriate means of communication; there is also another feature embodied in the explosion of jobs on the administrative urban areas, which in turn belong to other entities, as in Figure 1c, and the main resource of urban space is the workforce, so that relationship is represented in urban services, including (transportation, culture, utilities, and health care) as shown in Figure 1d [4].

It is concluded from this study that democracy has a role in reorganizing or modifying the urban structure for contemporary development, and in light of a number of aspects, including: flexibility in adapting existing urban relations to the requirements that were revealed during development, functional and spatial expansion, modifying or adapting the functional relations of the urban system in terms of the infrastructure facilities that it represents, intervening by adding new complementary relationships to the same existing within the existing and emerging economic, social, and cultural context.

a) Embodiment of axial urban expansion

b) Central urban occupancy

c) The embodiment of the spatial urban expansion

d) The phenomenon of the big city or the present

Figure 1. The trends of development in urban evolution of cities according to democracy as a spatial social adaptation policy [4]

3.3 “Using Deliberative Democracy for Better Urban Decision-Making through Integrative Thinking” [5]

This study emphasized the use of deliberative democracy policy in promoting better urban decision-making that emphasizes the interaction of people with events based on the principle of integrative thinking in improving complex issues and existing problems towards sustainability in all its social, economic, cultural, environmental, and urban dimensions.

Deliberative democracy is defined as “a form of collective decision-making on policy issues that affect the formation of the city’s fabric, where the members of the community analyze the problem accurately, examine the proposed formal alternatives that in turn reflect a variety of viewpoints, and then choose the best logical solution.

The use of deliberative democracy in order to enhance life in cities, and the formation of sustainable urban spaces, is very important, as most cities are characterized by the complexity that is a feature of their system, the latter resulted through the presence of unknown and unoccupied spaces, and kinetic paths that are not connected with the old urban center, In addition to the growth of the city and the interaction of its components due to the increase of individuals, it appears in new non-linear suburbs that are not linked to the mother city; All of this contributes to making city spaces repelling and influenced by the social and environmental conflicts that do not encourage economic development and sustainable growth, in addition to climate change, loss of biodiversity, and inefficient use of natural resources [5].

The study emphasized the activation of the policy of deliberative democracy based on dialogue, community participation and integrative thinking in making the best urban decisions, elevating the city towards a sustainable development perspective, and creating liveable places that preserve the visible and invisible values of the community.

4. The Concept of Master Plan

Ganis et al. [6] states that the master plan is the main plan that provides guidelines for the redevelopment of city sites, urban spaces and urban infrastructure projects and the allocation of land for different uses with the aim of creating spaces within the city as perceived, and adaptive spaces for urban social, economic, and technological change. The master plan embodies the relationship between people and places in a self-organizing approach to place-making and repair, accommodating growth and the need for renewal.

4.1 Master plan features

Sharma [7] indicated a set of characteristics that must be provided in the master plan scheme:

  • Material (physical) although the master plan scheme is a reflection of social and economic values, it is a basic rational guide for the physical development of society and its evolution.

  • It is long-term and covers a period of time that exceeds one year, usually five years or more, and this in turn makes its implementation become in multiple stages.

  • Inclusiveness It covers the entire city geographically - not just one or more divisions, it also includes all the functions that make a community work such as transportation, housing, land using, utility systems, and entertainment, moreover, the master plan looks at the linkage of functions within new city centers.

  • A guide to decision-making for the planning and design board, the board of directors, and the mayor or director.

  • A manifestation of the general urban policy, as the master plan translates the values, desires and visions of the community into principles of land using and development that can guide the future growth of the community. The policies of the design plan provide the basis for public decision-making.

  • Public participation is embodied in the participation of members of the local community in the processes of developing their cities and all stages of master plan, and this is done in the light of direct or indirect referendums, and holding seminars, as well as raising community members' awareness of the planning process and its importance and enhancing ways of participating in reform and community design [7].

4.2 Master plan stages

The board of supervisors [8] states that the base design seeks to provide a clear picture of the future in terms of area development, allowing for predictability of: (1) the general public, (2) the county government and its constituent departments and agencies, and (3) potential developer; therefore, the preparation of the master plan is divided into four stages, as follows:

- Pre-application stage:

Before submitting an application to use the baseline design process, the prospective applicant must discuss the project with the district in the pre-application process. The duration of this stage varies from project to project depending on the intricacies of the proposed baseline design. The applicant and district staff discuss within this stage is the scope of the project, potential issues, project concepts, limitations, and sometimes problems.

- The master plan initiation stage:

which includes submitting a request to use the master plan process to implement the general plan policy (project description, a scaled neighborhood map showing the project area and the areas located from it, a scaled site map showing the property and external property lines, existing land uses,... .etc.);); initial notification of a request to start the master plan process; criteria for starting the process when placed outside the UPA, i.e. in the case of new cities expanding from the original old center, must be within the limits of logical, comprehensive and coherent planning; strengthening the review and monitoring by those in charge of the project.

- Base design preparation stage:

includes the application in the development of accompanying plans and other relevant information regarding proposed modifications to appropriate plans or proposals to amend zoning division, communicating with the community to raise awareness about the project with a statement of its needs and taking them into consideration (convening neighborhood meetings, correspondence, forming a citizens advisory committee (CAC) or consulting with the district planning committee), initial consultation on environmental review, holding a technical advisory committee (TAC) consisting of from selected representatives from key county departments and other agencies, major project issues are discussed and technical issues reviewed as appropriate, technical studies and draft management plan are prepared, and the draft final plan and technical studies are submitted as one complete document.

- Hearing and base design approval phase:

Once the environmental document has been completed by staff, the environmental document and master plan will be circulated for review and public comment as provided in the CEQA guidelines, distribute this document to all responsible agencies and interested parties, and the plan should be made available for review, and analysis or other additional information may be requested [8].

5. The Concept of Urban Democracy

Roulier [9] referred to urban democracy as a policy of reforming and developing built environments within the master plan scheme, and reshaping urban suburbs as dependent cities linked to the spatial master plan.

Urban democracy is defined procedurally as a policy of decision-making, spatial reorganization, regional development, production or development and management of master plan spaces either by preserving its intellectual assets, or by renewing urban suburbs and upgrading them towards sustainable urban or planning design in determining the basic urban structure of the city, urban democracy is based on participation and dialogue, community consultation or what is known as social reform to take care of society and develop new city centers and absorb them into the master plan scheme of the existing city through urban connectivity, either spatial, kinetic, or spatial, taking into account social justice and regional equality between Individuals that guarantee them the right of citizenship and live in the city away from monopoly and authoritarianism, thus achieving morphological and spatial integration between the spaces of the old center and the new suburbs within a unified, coherent and sustainable city.

5.1 The relationship between urban democracy and master plan

Antonio [10] referred to the policies of developing the master plan in accordance with the concept of urban democracy with the aim of providing the best service to the community, making changes to the mechanisms for implementing the master plan, and evaluating the city's progress towards achieving the goals and policies of the sustainable development plan, these policies vary according to the desired goal: achieving the benefit of the city's resources and authorities to manage growth and development is embodied in the light of the following policies:

- Conducting a comprehensive review of city codes, including the master plan, new cities, and their component parts, the uniform development code, and reviewing all ineffective, outdated or inconsistent requirements and definitions in light of the inclusion of public participatory democracy in the land use regulation review process.

- Distribution of land uses to meet the physical, social, cultural, economic, and energy needs of the present and future population in light of encouraging public participation in the decision-making process regarding land use with developing economic incentives to encourage growth in the targeted areas.

- Utilize all geographic, hydrological, topographic, demographic, and economic data available throughout the city.

- Develop, implement, and annually update a comprehensive five-year capital improvement plan that sets priorities for specific projects.

- Coordination of the capital improvement plan with all other city plans and those of other government units (district, educational districts, hospital district, and university).

- Encouraging a balance between new development and redevelopment.

- Making physical improvements in the inner city to encourage redevelopment and the development of urban dictation [10].

Democracy is represented by community participation as a policy to renew the master plan scheme and putting evolution policies at the neighborhood level, democracy establishes a framework for governance and a methodological framework that has the potential to foster inclusive debate and consensus building, giving stakeholders an opportunity to become more aware and critically reflect their relationships, practices and cultural processes in the development of their new cities, as well as embodying the intellectual and formal communication between the master plan scheme and the new cities in order to provide intellectual resources in the light of which a framework for critical evaluation of the characteristics of interactive operations can be developed, in other words, it provides a normative framework for decision-making arenas to become more pluralistic and democratic in terms of their structure, operations, and outcomes; this means that local communities are recognized as dynamic, multicultural entities that engage in processes of master plan renewal, upgrading the city centers within it towards sustainable spatial and urban development [11].

5.2 Principles of urban democracy in the development of master plan

The development of the master plan in accordance with the policy of urban democracy within the goals and principles of urban design in creating places for people in response to technological, social, and economic challenges, and the upgrading of new suburbs, including (buildings, public and open spaces, and movement and transportation systems) towards sustainable development is in the light of a set of design principles, including:

  1. Flexibility to continuous developments and transformations in light of fine granularity, creative use of detailed elements, adoption of laws and standards that encourage community participation in policy development, and taking into account expected changes to infrastructure services.

  2. The city’s adaptive capacity: in light of the measurement of accessibility and movement, surrounding buildings and their uses, climate and shading, and urban furniture planning for streets and kinetic pathways towards environmental comfort [12].

Heidari, et al. [13] indicated that activating urban democracy as a development policy requires a set of design principles that are embodied in:

a. The embodiment of the principle of the right to the city in light of the right to the allocation and use of space away from capitalism / the right to live and use places for meetings and social interactions / creating a social spirit in the space and the right to participate in spatial reproduction / violation of the reciprocal and capitalist nature of space / emphasis on social institutions.

b. Implementation of the principle of social justice: citizen participation / preservation of the rights of low-income citizens / equal use of public and private spaces / the need for mutual understanding of social justice and urbanization.

c. Spatial justice: equality and social justice, and freedom of access to human rights in space/conceptualizing the right in the city as a means to achieve material equality and respect for people in different situations.

d. Embodying the principle of urban justice: in light of the emphasis on diversity and communicative rationality based on deliberative democracy, equality, choice, access, communication, ownership, diversity, participation, inclusion, belonging, beauty and creative innovation as ten additional principles to improve urban justice [13].

5.3 Policies to develop the master plan in accordance with the policy of urban democracy

Hall et al. [14] touched on social policy as one of the effective policies in developing the master plan and linking its new suburbs and upgrading them towards social and economic development within the framework of a more comprehensive vision, and it can be used to address collective poverty and enhance human well-being, to include alleviating the severity of the poverty, promotion of social protection and social inclusion and provision of human rights, social policy determines : the state model, the institutional welfare model, the individualist approach, the free market approach, and populist or community development strategies. All contributed in making elements of a hybrid and comprehensive model of social policy in developing countries that would be useful in identifying the most appropriate interventions to meet the specific needs of diverse groups; development institutions at the local and international levels began to integrate and institutionalize social policy, social planning and social development in their main activities [14].

The "European association of historic towns and regions, 2007" [15] referred to a set of development intervention policies directed at exploiting historical buildings with a distinct cultural heritage, and turning them into a impulse for integrated urban regeneration in accordance with the urban democracy policy with the aim of promoting the interests of historical and heritage cities and their integration with the new suburbs on the economic, physical, and morphological level, as well as managing those places in a participatory manner in light of realizing the potential of investing in heritage directed to development or sustainable urban renewal, and these policies are embodied by: improving a high quality environment that leads to a refinement of regional attractiveness, which in turn is an attractive factor for investment ,increasing employment opportunities and quality of life, stimulating investment in renewable energy and reusing buildings, and strengthening the identity of the region and its community, which making it more attractive to visitors [15].

Upgrading degraded or slum areas is seen as planning for a new or developed cultural or community facility or is the process of redevelopment of new city areas and changing the use of empty or abandoned buildings. There are several policies to achieve this, including:

  • Promote a network of shared community facilities within a reasonable journey of users.

  • Providing facilities and services that meet the needs of the community and specific service requirements.

  • Providing integrated services through facilities suitable for a range of uses and adaptable to changing needs over time.

  • Improving, standardizing and rationalizing the existing community infrastructure (when necessary).

  • Partnership approach to provide infrastructure for the community.

  • Focusing on financial and social sustainability [16].

6. Theoretical Framework of Urban Democracy

The theoretical framework was built through previous studies and proposals related to the adoption of urban democracy as a policy in developing the basic design of the city and its development. The use of urban democracy as a policy in sustainable urban planning requires activating community participation in new ways and with multiple mechanisms and an integrative logic in making the best urban decisions and advancing the city towards comprehensive and sustainable development in all its dimensions.

The theoretical framework included three main terms: the dimensions of employing democracy as a development policy, the mechanisms of employing democracy as a policy of planning or improvement, and the principle of integrative thinking to create a sustainable place.

The first main term is to activate the will of the user in the integration and development of the city and to identify the elements of the city’s structure, given that the master plan of the city is the outcome of the interaction of functional, physical, and psychological factors, … etc., and that the areas of the city must be undivided and integrated in their surrounding context with daily community activities that in turn enhance the participatory control and management of the human being over the urban fabric of the city embodied in the sustainability of the community in the light of consultation and democratic participation among the members of the local community in the generation of new forms that grow and change and are linked to the mother city through public spaces, and the integration of planning intervention policies with formal and informal policies to be relevant to the specifics of sites and their reform to become on an expanded spatial scale multi-sectoral.

As for the second main term, the process of developing facilities, services, and sites assumes an activity in which the community contributes on one hand, and another party participates, which may be represented by a governmental agency or a non-governmental organization on the other hand, in a way that encourages and enhances the development of society, unifying the efforts of the people themselves with the efforts of the government authorities in improving social, cultural, and economic conditions. Also trying to integrate these communities into the life of the nation and enable their full participation in the development or improvement of residential neighborhoods and try to upgrade them, and this is what the mechanisms of participatory planning represent. While the urban upgrading mechanism in the degraded areas is represented by the rehabilitation of facilities and services, improving the levels of infrastructure...etc. As for the mechanisms of stimulating policy and programming reforms that broaden the scope of democracy in local development and planning processes through support for formal government programs, adherence to national policy and social inclusion, embedding a different urban vision in a gradual, citizen-led approach to development with flexible orientation towards diverse local preferences and efforts to improve affordability costs, intensification in the provision of multipolar green and public spaces linked to a network of sustainable transportation serving the city, and the integration of the urban center with its various functions with remote rural areas are among the most important indicators that represent the mechanisms of multipolar conjugation.

While the third term focuses on the principle of integrative thinking to create a sustainable place that combines logic, intuition, and creative imagination to generate comprehensive solutions, and move to the best different functions of cities, which requires different mindsets, the ability to tolerate change, re-evaluation of the proposed network alternatives, an open-minded approach, and the creation of livable places that maintain on the visible and invisible values of society. Thus, the most important terms of urban democracy may be summarized in the theoretical framework summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. The theoretical framework of urban democracy (Source: The researchers)

Main terms

Secondary terms

Indications

Dimensions of employing democracy as a development policy

Activating the user's will to integrate and develop the city

- Democratic interaction and response in development processes.

- Transformation or expression of the distinct user personality for every place and time.

- The integration of city spaces with daily community activities within its surrounding context.

The Participatory human control and management of the urban fabric of the city.

- Sustainability of society in the light of social participation and solidarity.

- Maintenance or reinvestment in basic infrastructure services and facilities.

- The development of local or relational capital.

- Respect the privacy of new sites and fix them.

- Good and efficient management.

- Assimilation of the new within every unified and coherent.

Functional or formal compatibility

- Integration between the patterns of specific activities or events and the spatial form, down to the patterns of possible future jobs.

- Ability to adapt with change.

- Redesigning the existing architectural space in harmony with the open surrounding.

- Modifying planning intervention policies in integration with formal and informal policies.

Mechanisms of employing democracy as a policy of planning or improvement

Spatial adaptation mechanisms of settlements

- Flexibility in adapting existing urban relations to requirements.

- Evolution in the time of the local relationship resulting from the adaptation of urban space.

-Introducing a new context of newly developed urban relations, complementing the emerging and existing economic, social, and cultural context.

Mechanisms of urban upgrading in degraded areas

-Rehabilitation of facilities or services.

- Improving infrastructure levels.

-Create settlement plans and repayment schedules.

-Preparing policies and make decisions regarding the neighborhood plan, apartments building plan, bills of quantities or loan repayment, and urban management of all service.

Mechanisms of motivating of policy and programming reforms

- Supporting official government programs.

-Commitment to national policy and social integration.

- Employing contractors who contribute to the development of degraded urban areas.

-Restore the physical structure of the buildings to their previous state.

-Individual and mutual help.

Participatory planning mechanisms

-Involving members of the local community in decision-making and implementation processes.

-Justice and equality for all individuals.

-Encouraging social cohesion among members of the local community.

-Stimulating the human role and transforming it into an effective energy or force.

-Removing family breakdown and disintegration between individuals.

- Personal development of individuals either for the experiences that they encounter or for the practical simulation that they face.

- Participation or community contribution that supports the empowerment of individuals and increases their participatory democracy.

Multipolar coupling mechanisms

- Integration of spaces with the city in connection with the transport network.

-Improving green networks and infrastructure at the city level.

The principle of integrative thinking to create a sustainable place

Flexibility in dealing with existing problems in response to economic, social, and environmental transformations

- Analysis of the existing problem.

-Examination of the proposed formal alternatives.

-Choosing the best logical solution.

-Moving to jobs that adapt with the change.

- Further expansion within the urban context.

-Focusing on dialogue, sharing or deliberation.

Self-motivation in the generation of the new democratic place (as characteristics)

- Combining logic, intuition and creative imagination.

- Attention to the implications of meanings for all aspects and components of the problem intellectually.

-Causality, which recognizes that problems are caused by multiple factors.

- Connectivity of kinetic paths and networks with each other.

7. The Case Study

Urban democracy as a policy affects in evolution and developing in the master plan of the city as follows:

7.1 Stanmore neighborhood

Located in the city of Winchester in England, it consists of the parts shown in Figure 2 (A&B), the idea of this neighborhood is to empower the community (one of a policy of urban democracy) to improve the built environment and local development. It was worked on through three main axes [17], which are as in the scheme (Chart 1).

- The first stage (Data collection): This stage is considered the first step for the beginning of the entry of the community as an active party in the local development processes, and it consists in establishing a panel discussion with the members of the community, and setting a plan of development to process the negatives of their environment.

Aiming to chart the residents’ requirements and aspirations for the built environment, a table was designed to identify the pros and cons of living in this city with the aim of discussing them, and then encouraging thinking about finding solutions to these issues, and how to plan for solutions and proposals.

- The second stage (information analysis stage): In this stage, intermediaries are formed, including non-governmental organizations (NGos) and community-based associations (CBos), that work to coordinate development work with the population themselves, guiding them in the way and how to implement a successful training plan, by developing a set of solutions through continuous discussions between planners, mediator organizations and residents. Among the issues that this experience focused on are housing, open spaces, site services, roads, and pedestrian paths.

- The third stage (Final planning presentation): Based on the results of the discussions in the previous stages, the final plans and studies for improving the urban environment are reached in this stage through the continuation of the application of the social sectors to their work with the supervision of the government and the planners (a group of urban designers and architects in addition to the continuation of the role of the intermediary organization in follow-up) [18]. And as shown in Figure 3.

Chart 1. Shows the main axes of Stanmore's experience in a one of the urban democracy policy empowerment [17]

A

B

Figure 2. (A & B) The parts of the neighborhood of Stanmore [18]

Figure 3. The master plan of Stanmore (Vision and Objectives) [18]

7.2 AI-Turath neighborhood in Egypt

AL-Turath neighborhood is located in the city of Luxor and represents one of the city’s comprehensive development projects to protect the historical heritage (the archaeological development axis for the development of the city of Luxor), which aims to transform the historical and archaeological areas into an open museum, raise the standard of living, providing the services and facilities required for tourists. The work program relied on the mechanism of (dialogue and participation) as working groups, with a pivotal role given to the consultant in the process of preparing the necessary plans for the development of the city, which necessarily requires a kind of coordination, integration and participation to formulate an agreed future vision that is compatible with pressing problems and future aspirations.

All the actors involved in preparing the comprehensive general plan for the city were represented by the working group of representatives of the supreme council of Luxor city, popular leaders, civil associations, the tourist guides association, the supreme council of antiquities, the development authority, facilities and services departments, and the Luxor antiquities inspection.

AL-Turath neighborhood includes the temples of Luxor and Karnak, the Kabash road between them, some parts of the main city and some parts of the New Karnak area.

Several plans for Luxor have been adopted, starting from:

- The master plan adopted in 1984: the preparation for it began in the second half of the seventies, and the delay in its adoption led to the continuation and exacerbation of the city's problems. An urban space was also proposed that included all archaeological areas and regions for growth on the agricultural lands east and south of the city. And as shown in Figure 4.

-The master plan adopted in 1993: the space was modified with the aim of protecting agricultural lands and Karnak temples from random encroachment and violation. And as shown in Figure 5.

-The master plan of the comprehensive development project: preparation for it began in the late nineties of the last century and was approved in 2000 through the signing of a cooperative protocol between the Egyptian Ministry of Housing and the United Nations Development Program (UNDP) for the development of the city, based on the historical and archaeological importance of the city, which contains more than one third of the world's antiquities, which has suffered from neglect that led to the spread of slums in the city and the encroachment on antiquities and distortion them visually, constructionally and environmentally [19]. And as shown in Figure 6.

From the above, it can be seen to what extent the elements of the theoretical framework have been achieved in the selected projects, as shown in the Table 2.

Table 2. The indicators of theoretical framework of urban democracy in two projects (Source: The researchers)

Main terms

Secondary terms

Indications

Case 1

Case 2

Dimensions of employing democracy as a development policy

Activating the user's will to integrate and develop the city

- The integration of city spaces with daily community activities within its surrounding context.

  •  

 

The Participatory human control and management of the urban fabric of the city.

- Sustainability of society in the light of social participation and solidarity.

  •  

  •  

- Respect the privacy of new sites and fix them.

 

  •  

Functional or formal compatibility

-Ability to adapt with change.

  •  

  •  

Mechanisms of employing democracy as a policy of planning or improvement

Spatial adaptation mechanisms of settlements

-Introducing a new context of newly developed urban relations, complementing the emerging and existing economic, social, and cultural context.

 

  •  

Mechanisms of urban upgrading in degraded areas

- Improving infrastructure levels.

  •  

 

Mechanisms of motivating of policy and programming reforms

-Supporting official government programs.

  •  

  •  

-Employing contractors who contribute to the development of degraded urban areas.

  •  

  •  

Participatory planning mechanisms

-Involving members of the local community in decision-making and implementation processes.

  •  

  •  

Multipolar coupling mechanisms

- Integration of spaces with the city in connection with the transport network.

  •  

  •  

-Improving green networks and infrastructure at the city level.

  •  

  •  

The principle of integrative thinking to create a sustainable place

Flexibility in dealing with existing problems in response to economic, social, and environmental transformations

- Further expansion within the urban context.

 

  •  

Self-motivation in the generation of the new democratic place (as characteristics)

- Combining logic, intuition and creative imagination.

  •  

  •  

Figure 4. Shows the basic plan adopted in 1984 [19]

Figure 5. Shows the basic scheme adopted in 1993 [19]

Figure 6. Shows the update of the master plan preparation for Luxor City [19]

8. Conclusions

- Democracy is an effective policy in renewing the master plan scheme, raising the concepts of community participation and positive change, it seeks to develop practical awareness and local knowledge, enhance dialogue or intellectual and formal communication between urban production and the recipient, as well as provide ways to preserve historical and cultural symbols and mutual respect during the process of renewal policy.

- The master plan development policies according to the urban democracy style in order to achieve the utilization of the city’s resources and powers to manage growth and development are represented by: conducting a comprehensive review of the city’s symbols in light of including urban democracy and community participation, distributing land uses to meet the physical, social, cultural, economic, and energy needs of present and future residents utilizing all geographic, hydrological, topographical, demographic, and economic data available throughout the city ,develop or implement a comprehensive five-year capital improvement plan annually which sets priorities for specific projects, coordinates the capital improvement plan with all other city plans, as well as encourages a balance between new development and redevelopment, and conducts physical improvements in the inner city to encourage urban redevelopment of interspaces through acupuncture policy.

- Urban democracy is an effective policy in reforming and developing city centers within the master plan scheme and in a manner that embodies the feature of intellectual and formal communication, the interdependence between the old center and the new centers, and the upgrading of the city as a whole towards a sustainable social, economic, cultural, environmental, and urban perspective.

- Citizens’ influence (community participation) is a cornerstone for the success of development programs at the local levels, whether the development is comprehensive or partial, phased or strategic, and no matter how high-tech or advanced scientific foundations these programs are, they cannot dispense with this influence because without it they will be powerless to achieve their aims.

  References

[1] Rosol, M., Béal, V., Mössner, S. (2017). Greenest cities? The (post-) politics of new urban environmental regimes. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 49(8): 1710-1718. https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X17714843

[2] Hågemark, H. (2022). Democracy of architecture an exploration of the lack of democratic responsiveness in contemporary urban architectural styles. Master's thesis, Department of Political Science / Statsvetenskapliga institutionen. http://hdl.handle.net/2077/70425.

[3] Von Sydow, Å. (2004). Exploring local governance in urban planning and development: the case of Lindholmen, Göteborg. Doctoral dissertation, Infrastruktur.

[4] Grigorovschi, M. (2010). City Planning Evolution-Urban Development Directions in the Transition Period. Buletinul Institutului Politehnic din lasi. Sectia Constructii, Arhitectura, 56(1): 63. 

[5] Hartz-Karp, J., Marinova, D. (2020). Using deliberative democracy for better urban decision-making through integrative thinking. Urban Science, 5(1): 3. https://doi.org/10.3390/urbansci5010003

[6] Ganis, M., Minnery, J., Mateo-Babiano, I. (2016). Planning people–places: A small world network paradigm for master planning with people in mind. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(6): 1075-1095. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265813515602260

[7] Sharma, M.N. (2004). Executive Director of Southern New Hampshire Planning Commission. Preparing a master plan for your community: A Handbook for Planning Board Members, Planners and Volunteers. Manchester, New Hamsphire, https://www.nh.gov/osi/planning/resources/documents/preparing-a-master-plan-for-your-community.pdf.

[8] Board of Supervisors: County of sacramento. (2012). Master Plan Procedures and Preparation Guide; A guide to Master Planning in the County of Sacramento and to accompany the Specific Plan Ordinance, Chapter 21.14 of the Sacramento County Code, Sacramento, pp. 7-14. https://planning.saccounty.net/PlansandProjectsIn-Progress/Documents/Growth%20Area%20Plans/MasterPlanGuidelines-01.24.12.pdf.

[9] Roulier, S. (2018). Shaping American Democracy: Landscapes and Urban Design. Batesville, Arkansas, USA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68810-7

[10] Antonio, S. (1997). Master Plan Policies, Adopted Plans and Other Studies, Adopted May 29. https://www.sanantonio.gov/portals/0/files/planning/npud/master_plan.pdf, accessed on Dec. 9, 2022.

[11] Maginn, P.J. (2007). Towards more effective community participation in urban regeneration: The potential of collaborative planning and applied ethnography. Qualitative Research, 7(1): 25-43. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794106068020

[12] Campbell, K. (2000). By Design-Urban Design in the Planning System: Towards Better Practice, the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions in partnership with the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, Crown, Britain. http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/.

[13] Barati, N., Heidari, F., Sattarzad Fathi, M. (2019). Towards a democratic process in urban planning and design; Assessing the Status of Citizens’ Involvement in Urban Plans and Projects in Iran. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-E Nazar, 16(76): 5-20. https://doi.org/10.22034/bagh.2019.135523.3627

[14] Hall, A.L., Midgley, J. (2004). Social Policy for Development. Sage. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446219973

[15] European Association of Historic Towns and Regions. (2007). Investing in Heritage – A Guide to Successful Urban Regeneration. The Inhert Partner Organisations, England. pp. 1-17. http://www.historic-towns.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Inherit-complete-doc-final-version-pdf-Layout-1-1.pdf.

[16] Coffs Harbour City Council. (2021). Community and Cultural Facilities Plan 2021-2031. pp. 23-25. https://haveyoursay.coffsharbour.nsw.gov.au/communityfacilitiesplanning.

[17] Hussein, R., Hussein, G. (2003). The Role of Society in Achieving Sustainable Urban Development - Sustainable Empowerment as an Entrance, Study of One of the Global Experiences in the Development of the Urban Environment, Faculty of Engineering in Mataria, Helwan University, Egypt, 2003. https://www.iasj.net/iasj/download/398c00468e0c33ff.

[18] BroadwayMalyan, Stanmore Planning Framework, Final Report, July, 2013. https://www.winchester.gov.uk/assets/attach/4626/Stanmore-Planning-Framework-Final-Report.pdf.

[19] Al-Iraqi, Ibrahim, M. (2018). Analysis of the Egyptian experience in the development of historic cities a case study of Luxor City. Journal of Al Azhar University Engineering Sector, 13(46): 303-317. https://dx.doi.org/10.21608/auej.2018.19092