Elke Pahl-Weber, Frank Schwartze

Urban planning

CC license: CC-BY-SA 4.0 International

URN: 0156-559923803

This is a translation of the following entry:

Pahl-Weber, Elke; Schwartze, Frank (2018): Stadtplanung. In: ARL – Akademie

für Raumforschung und Landesplanung (Hrsg.): Handwörterbuch der Stadt‐ und
Raumentwicklung. Hannover, 2509-2520.

The original version can be accessed here:

urn:nbn:de:0156-55992380

Typesetting and layout: ProLinguo GmbH

Translation and proofreading: ProLinguo GmbH

Recommended citation:
Pahl-Weber, Elke; Schwartze, Frank (2018): Urban planning.
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0156-559923803.
Elke Pahl-Weber, Frank Schwartze

Urban planning

Contents

1 Term and functions

2 Fields of actions and challenges
3 Development of urban planning and the professional discipline
4 Urban planning methods and stakeholders
References

Urban planning is a cross-sectional discipline for the regulation,

steering and development of both urban and rural areas. It is
the anticipation of future action and part of political decision-
making processes as it is based on local planning autonomy,
which is guaranteed by Article 28 of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz)
of the Federal Republic of Germany.

2
Urban planning

1 Term and functions

Urban planning is a specialist discipline, which focuses on the ▷ Planning and management
of spatial development at the municipal level. The focus on the future is a defining aspect. It
comprises all activities for the forward-looking regulation and steering of the development of
the built environment in urban and rural areas (▷ Rural areas) alike and their subspaces. Urban
planning is distinct from an older discipline, which is both the origin and part of urban planning:
▷ Urban design. While urban design refers to the built part of the urban space, urban planning
additionally includes social, ecological and economic dimensions. Conrads states that urban
planning concerns the regulation and coordination of the spatial distribution and interlinking of
uses as well as the built manifestation of the community as a whole; it is realised through urban
design (Conrads 2000: 6 et seq.). There are close links and overlaps between the two disciplines,
which cannot be clearly distinguished. This is reflected in other common terms, such as city
planning, which relates to local conditions. Even though ‘urban’ planning is derived from the Latin
term for ▷ City, town (‘urbs’), it also comprises planning of municipalities of various sizes, whether
or not they are deemed cities/towns. The term urban planning is therefore somewhat vague. In
Anglophone countries, several new terms have evolved, which are also used internationally, such
as urban design, community planning, spatial planning (Albers/Wekel 2008: 11).
Urban planning is the subject and part of a political decision-making process, which aims to
implement economic, ecological and social objectives in spatial terms.
Characteristic for urban planning in this regard is the process of planning as an anticipation
of future action, which precedes almost any reasonably rational decision (cf. Fürst 2008: 22).
This is secured through the scientific foundation of urban planning, which is expressed in the
methodical use of surveys, forecasts (▷ Forecasting) and methods for the development of
objectives. It is supplemented by measures adopted from the field of political decision-making,
which are characterised by institutional and participatory mechanisms and regulatory processes,
but are also guided by creative elements and spatial visions, design strategies and models
(cf. UN Habitat 2015).
In Germany, urban planning is closely linked to local planning, which is a responsibility of
local authorities. It is established in Article 28 of the Basic Law, which safeguards local planning
autonomy by requiring that ‘Municipalities must be guaranteed the right to regulate all local
affairs on their own responsibility, within the limits prescribed by the laws’1 (Stüer 2006: 11). A
related area is urban development law, which pursuant to section 2(1), sentence 1 of the Federal
Building Code (Baugesetzbuch, BauGB) grants local authorities the responsibility and right to
prepare urban land-use plans to regulate land use. The Federal Building Code, which was adopted
as federal law, establishes the scope of action for local authorities in terms of urban development
law and defines the tasks of municipal urban planning, especially ▷ Urban land-use planning ,
in Chapter 1 on the General Urban Development Law and urban regeneration in Chapter 2 on
the Special Urban Development Law (▷ Special Urban Development Law). The task, concept
and principles of urban land-use planning are defined in section 1 of the Federal Building Code.

1 [Translation of Basic Law by Prof Christian Tomuschat, Prof David P. Currie, Prof Donald P. Kommers and Raymond Kerr,
in cooperation with the Language Service of the German Bundestag, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/
index.html (18 February 2021)]

3
 Urban planning

According to this provision, the objective of urban land-use planning is to establish and guide the
use, including built use, of the land parcels within the municipal territory in accordance with this
Code (section 1, sentence 1 of the Federal Building Code). While urban land-use planning is tasked
with regulating and organising the urban planning and development regime, urban regeneration
focuses on measures that serve to significantly improve or redesign an area to address particular
urban development problems (urban deficits), (section 136, sentence 1 and 2 of the Federal
Building Code). Urban development law allows municipalities to set limits and stipulations for the
private use of land, which is constitutionally guaranteed, for the public benefit and in a manner
consistent with the objectives and rights of the urban land-use plans as listed in the Federal
Building Code and for the regeneration of the building stock. Urban development law at the level
of the local authorities is supplemented by supra-local ▷ Planning law, which is also binding
for local authorities, and based on which spatial developments can be influenced, e.g. through
specifications of federal state spatial planning and ▷ Regional planning in accordance with the
Federal Spatial Planning Act (Raumordnungsgesetz, ROG) and other superordinate instances of
sectoral planning.
The legal specifications of planning law, in particular urban development law, are therefore
both an instrument and a framework of urban planning and are thus closely linked with the
substance and processes of this discipline.
Hence, urban planning is essentially a public task with a pronounced focus on the ▷ Common
good, which is at the interface between the sectoral discipline and policy-making. It is mostly
application-oriented and addresses practical problems of urban structural development in
relation to the forward-looking regulation and steering of spatial development, which in Germany
must be consistent with the guiding principle of ▷ Sustainability .

2 Fields of actions and challenges

Land, being essentially a non-expandable asset (except for the act of reclaiming land, which is,
however, a significant intervention in nature), forms the essential material foundation of urban
planning. The establishment of regulated land use, as a core task of urban planning, faces a broad
range of challenges. The most important current and future challenges for urban planning in the
years to come are:
• Demographic developments with declining populations (▷ Demographic change) in most
European countries – even though vastly different developments are to expected at a
small-scale level – which lead to the close spatial proximity of shrinking and expanding areas.
• Social cohesion in the face of increasing disparities in income, assets and means of subsistence
(cf. ILO 2014).
• The integrative capacity of cities, which is increasingly demanded to cope with accelerating
▷ Migration (cf. BMI [Federal Ministry of the Interior] 2015) (▷ Integration, social and ethnic).
• Climate developments, accompanied by extreme weather events, which lead to local
challenges such as heat waves, torrential rains and rising sea levels (cf. IPCC 2014) (▷ Climate,
climate change).

4
Urban planning

• The finite nature of fossil fuels (cf. BGR [Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources]
2014).
The dynamics and dimensions of urbanisation processes (▷ Urbanisation) underline the major
challenge for the discipline’s aim to shape the development of urban spaces and municipalities
through scientific methods in such a way that they are able to do justice to future developments
that cannot be accurately predicted. At the same time, urban spaces are globally the focus of
more sustainable and thus more climate-compatible and energy-efficient development. Cities/
towns are places of rapid growth as far as the economy, land use (▷ Land use change) and
consumption of resources are concerned, and thus central action spaces for the implementation
of global climate policy – in particular to reduce the carbon footprint. The redevelopment of urban
systems from a model of consumptive use of resources towards a resource-friendly circular model
is indispensable for achieving effective sustainability. In this context, various aspects of urban
systems such as the urban structure, transport system, resource flows and the governance system
must be addressed through suitable measures. All four areas must be regarded as integral parts
of the concepts and strategies for sustainable ▷ Urban development. Urban planning assumes an
important role in this regard in shaping sustainability in the various sectors (cf. UN Habitat 2009).
A core task is the development of integrated planning strategies that jointly look at infrastructure
development (▷ Infrastructure), land use and ▷ Spatial development. These strategies must take
various levels and dimensions of the planning process into account, achieve the integration of
different stakeholders and promote new, resilient forms of building and infrastructure. Including
ecological considerations in planning processes is a key trend, which is reflected in preparatory
land-use planning (▷ Preparatory land-use plan) as well as in the approach to building. In the
future, planning with an ecological focus will have to remain linked with city planning in many
different ways.
The same requirements that must be applied to the planning and shaping of new urban
and settlement structures (▷ Settlement/settlement structure) also apply to the redevelopment
and further development of existing urban structures. Hence, urban planning in the German
and European context also plays an important role in the implementation of a sustainable
transformation of settlement structures through urban regeneration or urban redevelopment
measures (▷ Urban regeneration; ▷ Urban redevelopment). In this case, the mission of urban
planning is to adjust existing cities/towns to the changing conditions in accordance with the
central challenges outlined above. Urban planning in this respect amounts to the development
of the building stock. Cooperation between the people who live in the existing ▷ Space, and
those engaged in planning as the future shaping of this space, is indispensable. It also becomes
clear that not only cooperation between municipal stakeholders and local residents in regard to
urban planning is required – as envisaged by the General Urban Development Law in the form
of early participation in the urban land-use planning process (section 3 of the Federal Building
Code) and the participation and collaboration of the parties affected (section 137 of the Federal
Building Code), but also a specific collaboration and codetermination on the part of residents.
Unlike the lateral expansion of cities in past decades, which primarily gave rise to conflicts with
the environment and led to the inclusion of environmental concerns in the planning process,
the sustainable development of the building stock will lead to increasing conflicts of interests,
because this development will be effected through the densification, redevelopment and renewal
of buildings and infrastructure.

5
 Urban planning

3 Development of urban planning and the professional

discipline

Urban planning is a comparatively young discipline, which has developed as conflicts and demands
from different sectors and needs in increasingly more complex urban spaces generated a demand
for forward-looking regulatory approaches. As outlined above, urban planning evolved from the
older discipline of urban design, which is an expression of the thinking about an urban planning
and development regime and therefore as old as urban settlements themselves. Whether colonial
cities or fortified towns of the Hellenic and Roman era, whether cities newly built in medieval times
or as a means to expand and secure land – the knowledge applied methodically since antiquity in
founding cities and thus creating the legal and technical framework for urban development can
be considered the precursor of urban design and urban planning – as it was indeed a deliberate
action of forward-looking planning which was based on certain skills and insights and with the
help of which urban facilities were systematically planned, taking into account the dimensions,
extent and expected number of inhabitants.
In the modern era, the cities, which had been hitherto limited by their fortifications, were
supplemented by urban structures, mostly erected as part of public urban design (cf. Fehl 1992)
at the initiative and under the auspices of sovereign rulers. These expansions, often based on
geometrically shaped city foundations, building lines and regulatory building laws, formed the
basis for future city planning, which was formally inspired both by earlier perceptions of planning
for the ‘ideal city’ and by the layouts of Baroque gardens based on symmetrical axes. In addition
to the Baroque city enlargements (▷ Urban expansion), urban redevelopment and reconstruction
planning activities following catastrophic fires are particularly worth mentioning. The repeal of
feudal regimes and the privatisation of the land in the early 19th century laid the foundation for
new, liberal forms of urban development. They were accompanied by technological innovations
in the transport sector and industrialisation processes. Both mutually dependent processes
were prerequisites for a rapidly growing population in the cities and their peripheral areas. While
premodern cities developed relatively slowly prior to the mid-19th century despite the repeal and
end of feudal regimes (cf. Fehl 1992), their lateral expansion became possible and necessary in
the second half of the century. This led to cities, towns and settlements growing within a mere
few years to a size that would previously have taken decades or even centuries to reach. These
accelerated growth processes in the course of the 19th century necessitated the regulation of
urban development and gave rise to the emergence of city planning as a modern specialist
discipline. In addition to the instrument of building line planning and formal models, the city
planning discipline focused in particular on the integration of technology-based urban systems,
in particular traffic and ▷ Utilities, which was reflected in the first treatises on urban design
(cf. Cerda 1859; Baumeister 1876) and was supplemented only in a second step by issues relating
to the ▷ Cityscape (cf. Sitte 1889; Stübben 1890). The dynamics of the urbanisation processes
and the social disruptions triggered by them at the close of the 19th century introduced new
considerations within urban planning which had until that point been purely aimed at the creation
of functional urban spaces in terms of their economic, technical and design aspects. These new
considerations initially related to issues of health, but subsequently also to fundamental issues in
regard to the form and organisation of social cohabitation in the cities/towns.

6
Urban planning

In view of the emerging housing problems – which had already been addressed in England
in the Public Health Act of 1848 – and the related, not merely hygienic but also moral and
sociopolitical considerations, the debate on urban design broadened to include the overarching,
value-oriented issue of the nature of social life in cities/towns. In this context, urban development
and spatial considerations were supplemented by scientific insights from other disciplines,
such as geography and economics. Newer models for a reform of urban development, such as
the Garden City model elaborated by Ebenezer Howard (1898) and the resulting Garden City
movements, provided additional impulses for the development of an independent discipline,
which considered the design of cities to be a responsibility connected with the development of
the common good and ranked public interests over those of private individuals. This was reflected
in the development of building laws and, with the zonal building regulations and the possibility
of expropriation to secure orderly urban structural development for the public benefit, marked
the transition from building regulations that focused purely on preventing fire hazards to a more
comprehensive urban planning law. In the early 20th century, the various strands of discussion
concentrated into an independent discipline of urban design and urban planning. Raymond
Unwin published his book Town Planning in Practice in 1909. In 1904, Theodor Goecke and Camillo
Sitte founded a monthly journal, Der Städtebau (Urban Design), for the discipline in Germany,
which was devoted to the artistic design of cities/towns in accordance with economic, sanitary
and social principles. Various technical universities introduced urban design courses (Henrici,
TH [Technical University] of Aachen 1877; Brix, Genzmer, TH [Technical University] of Berlin 1907).
The further development of the discipline in the 20th century was defined on the one hand
by architectural and design-related issues in settlement development, in particular housing
development, which took hold in Germany during the period of the Weimar Republic and,
on the other hand, by the demand for an accelerated, functional structuring of the city, as
programmatically stated in the Charter of Athens in 1933. In the 1930s, the discipline expanded
to include ideas and strategies for the large-scale planning and structuring of new cities/towns
beyond individual settlement units and thus also the development of settlements on a regional
scale. These notions, which were influenced by the National Socialist ideology in relation to
settlement and spatial policy, were characterised by a systematic shaping of the cities/towns,
their functions and demands for land, as presented, for example, by Gottfried Feder in his
book Die neue Stadt (The New City) in 1939 (cf. Carsten 2009:126 et seq.). In conjunction with
the central-place theory published by Walter Christaller (▷ Central place) in 1933, which would
prove to be groundbreaking for ▷ Spatial planning (Raumordnung) , a technocratic perception of
spatial planning as an allocation mechanism for standardised demands for land, functions and
facilities evolved from its urban planning foundations in the early 20th century. In conjunction
with normative notions expressed in guiding principles, such as the functionally separated, traffic-
friendly city or the structured and scattered city (▷ Guiding principles for urban development), this
theory became the foundation for planning in Germany after the Second World War. Apart from the
aforementioned foundations, urban planning was also strongly defined by determinist thinking
about architecture, whereby the focus was on a ‘good plan’ based on empirical knowledge and
the implementation of technical requirements and standards. In addition, there was an intensive
debate about the substance, guiding principles and perspectives for rebuilding the country in West
Germany after the Second World War, which is well documented in the Darmstädter Gespräche
(Darmstadt Talks) (cf. Evers 1950; Bartning 1952; Schwippert 1952; Neumark 1954; Vietta 1955;
Franzen 1959; Kogon/Sabais 1961).

7
 Urban planning

Once the reconstruction period which was inspired by these considerations came to an end in
the early 1960s, urban planning gradually evolved into an independent discipline in Germany and
broke away from urban design shaped by architecture. On the one hand, this development was
the response to a perceived lack of scientific rationality, which was intended to ensure objectively
justifiable planning as an expression of the contemporary belief in the scientific controllability
of the world (cf. Sieverts 2009: 17 et seq.). On the other hand, it was a necessary response to
problems which had become increasingly complex and the associated conflicts in connection with
the implementation of spatial development. These are manifested in the growing social relevance
of questions of environmental protection and the finite nature of resources, a general distrust of
the abilities of the public administration and the rising demand on the part of society for concrete
participation in the shaping of the environment. These de facto countervailing processes led to
the implementation of new approaches, such as the integrated development planning of the first
generation as an idea for the comprehensive management of all social and economic processes and
the related diversification of sectoral planning and, moreover, to the establishment of responsible
public offices and authorities as responsible planning agencies in the municipalities. This was
closely associated with the expansion of spatially-relevant legislation (the Federal Building Law
[Bundesbaugesetz] of 1960, the Federal Spatial Planning Act [Raumordnungsgesetz] of 1965, the
Urban Development Promotion Law [Städtebauförderungsgesetz] of 1971 and the requirements
for participation of 1976). With the emergence of the discipline, university courses in urban and
spatial planning were introduced (Dortmund in 1969, Planning Working Group [Arbeitsgruppe der
Planer] at the Technical University of Berlin in 1971, and since 1972 an independent vocational
training course, Kaiserlautern 1974, etc.).
While this period saw the structural embedding of urban planning as a municipal task,
the emergence of instruments and procedures and its systematic organisation through the
development of study programmes, it was followed after 1975 by a phase of disillusionment
in regard to the management capabilities and efficacy of the approaches to overall control that
had been developed. This phase also saw the development of the building stock become a
task of urban planning. It reflected a changed perception of ▷ Urban regeneration, with urban
renewal measures giving way to careful urban regeneration strategies. Maintaining the building
stock was as much in the foreground as maintaining social and economic structures in the urban
neighbourhoods to be regenerated. The planning and development of the building stock engaged
urban planning to a far greater extent in the social processes of the production of space and led to
a changed understanding of the discipline. Priority was no longer accorded to the implementation
of a systematically developed plan, but rather to the coordination and negotiation of plans and
projects with residents and the use of incentive systems to implement superordinate objectives in
cooperation with various stakeholders (cf. Selle 1993). In so doing, urban planning broadened its
scope to include cooperative and communicative elements and instruments, e.g. neighbourhood
management in the Socially Integrative City (▷ Neighbourhood/neighbourhood development;
▷ Socially Integrative City). In the 1990s, holistic urban planning took on a new profile shaped
by the objectives of sustainable development and the integration of elements derived from
landscape planning and urban planning. ▷ Informal planning, which formed the preparation
of formal urban land-use planning and planning of the building stock according to the Special
Urban Development Law, concentrated on certain focal points, abandoned its claim to be able
to regulate the entire urban territory in detail and provided more space to deal with unexpected
events through new methods of flexible urban planning.

8
Urban planning

The reunification of East and West Germany gave rise to a new field of activity for the first
time in the ▷ History of urban planning in Germany: urban redevelopment, i.e. the dismantling
and removal of structures that were no longer required. While project-specific planning largely
prevailed in the past in many areas outside the scope of urban development strategies, urban
redevelopment brought back the integrated urban planning strategies. To be able to assess
the need for dismantling and upgrading necessitated integrated urban development strategies
(▷ Integrated urban development) for the entire city, which are stipulated as a prerequisite for
such processes according to the Special Urban Development Law. This was in fact the first time
that an informal plan type was included in the Federal Building Code as a prerequisite for a formal
planning process.
To meet the complex substantive and methodical requirements, the professional training of
urban planners is designed today as an interdisciplinary course and relies on knowledge gained
from various sciences, social sciences and other disciplines associated with space, e.g. sociology,
geography, economy, law, philosophy and political sciences. Based on this know-how, there is
a need for skills in creative design and conceptual thinking to develop appropriate solutions
for substantive requirements and spatial problems. Urban planners are working and acting
as planners, researchers, teachers, consultants or experts. They elaborate scenarios, prepare
decisions, advise policy-makers, coordinate, moderate and integrate.

4 Urban planning methods and stakeholders

Urban planning is a key part of a more comprehensive system for taking decisions on the use and
design of built spaces. This system is composed of various interlinked subsystems, which include
in particular:
• the legal system, which defines land-related property rights and intervention rights on the
part of the state authorities,
• the planning system, which serves to develop plans and regulations for urban development,
• the administrative system, which organises urban ▷ Services and infrastructures,
• the land market, which allows for the swapping or sale of land (▷ Land market/land policy),
• the steering system, which serves to collect taxes and income for services provided by the
public authorities (cf. Blanco/McCarney/Parnell 2011: 227).
Urban planning interacts in this system as a coordinating, networking discipline of a spatial
nature to prepare and coordinate decisions – both in a mediating function integrated in the
sub-systems and between the various specialist sectors of spatial development as well as between
spatial levels in a planning process. The relationship between the spatial levels is a constitutive
element of urban planning. Planning for parts of a city must be embedded in urban planning for
the entire city as well as for urban-regional relationships. In this respect, urban planning law has a
clear mandate for drawing up preparatory land-use plans for the entire city/town, based on which
the binding land-use plans for subspaces must be developed.
The primary focus of urban planning is the space used and designed by humans. In order to
discharge its task of planning and shaping the organisation of these spaces in a forward-looking
9
 Urban planning

manner, urban planning has two key mandates: first, the regulation of private land-use rights
for the public benefit and the related conflict management and second, the definition of certain
qualities of spaces in structural, functional and social respects (cf. Healey 1998: 1-22). In part,
their activities lead to plans as the result of a planning process. Whether as a formal binding
land-use plan or as an informal plan to coordinate and prepare decision-making, the plan can
be defined as a model of the desired future function, structure and shape of a defined space (cf.
Albers 1992: 3). On the other hand, urban planning is responsible for shaping the planning process
as an instrument of conflict management. Depending on the plan type, this may be undertaken
fairly freely or broadly in line with the steps of urban land-use planning stipulated in building law.
The planning process starts with the outline of a spatial problem, which may be articulated
by various parties – as a political objective or through individual groups of stakeholders, as a
call for action based on an urban development deficit, as a result of structural changes or as the
consequence of other planning processes. Spatial planning is based on the identified foreseeable
demands, e.g. for industrial and commercial building sites, housing land, leisure time activities,
ecological, land planning and open space planning measures, and social measures in a spatial
context. The geological and nature-related spatial prerequisites for a development must be
included in urban planning. In transformation areas, e.g. in the conversion of industrial areas
or large-scale transport infrastructures, ▷ Contaminated sites must often be remedied before
a new use can be implemented. Guiding principles, visions and spatial strategies are drafted
based on these expansive planning processes. The resulting informal planning processes and
plans at the various scale levels (▷ Urban development planning, urban borough development
strategy, area development strategy, urban design competition results) may be defined as a
binding foundation for the subsequent formal planning processes based on the resolution of
the municipal parliaments. This is an important step, because the decision about conflicting
concerns can only be pursued based on agreed objectives. This ▷ Weighing of interests process is
an important element of urban planning, where decisions are taken at the threshold between a
strategy and its implementation.
Urban planning engages different public-sector actors in line with the levels of the federal
structure of the country concerned. In addition, the responsibility for ▷ Spatially-relevant sectoral
planning is exercised by the respective competent specialist offices at the federal and state levels
and by the territorial authorities (▷ Territorial authority) and local authorities. ‘Sectoral planning
is deemed to be spatially relevant when it directly or indirectly influences the development of
spatial structures. Planning in the transport, energy, environmental, waste management, and
water management sectors has a major impact on space, and is concerned particularly with
public infrastructure projects (including roads, canals, airports, power lines, sewage plants,
fortifications)’ (Pahl-Weber/Henckel 2008: 251).
Additional actors can be distinguished according to their function in the planning process:
planners, project operators/investors, parties affected by the planning and participating citizens.
Fürst notes that the actors behave differently according to whether they are natural persons
or cooperative actors, and in the latter case according to whether they are organised actors
(e.g. government agencies, territorial authorities, companies, associations of municipalities,
interest groups, trade and professional associations or political parties) or loosely connected
networks (e.g. civic associations) (Fürst 2008: 18).

10
Urban planning

For all types of plans, the process must be shaped by means of a suitable methodological
element. To determine the interests and to agree on objectives within the broad landscape of
stakeholders, the process requires moderation (▷ Moderation, mediation). To the extent that
they join the process without pursuing their own interests, plan participants may moderate
the proceedings. This adds the benefit of knowledge about the subject and substance of the
planning to the process. A neutral person should always be chosen, who records the different
interests, juxtaposes them, shapes the negotiation processes, records results and visualises
them as far as possible. Moderation is thus an indispensable methodological element of urban
planning, but does not replace urban planning as a discipline, as is currently often suggested.
The sectoral context is always a constitutive component of the entire process of urban planning.
The collaboration of the stakeholders in a shared planning process can be termed collaborative
planning. This term describes not only the across-the-board organisation of planning, but also a
planning process involving all stakeholders. Urban planning as a process is generally reliant on
the joint development of planning. To this end, the statutory framework provides local authorities
with a powerful instrument for managing this process in the form of urban land-use planning to
exercise their planning autonomy. Collaborative planning in this sense means a process where
the various stakeholders contribute their knowledge and vision in the different arenas with
the help of various communicative practices in which they are brought together in a process of
▷ Governance (cf. Healey 2002).
These cooperation-based processes have also brought about a change in the methods
of urban planning. For the application of the instruments of urban planning, increasingly
experimental and communicative elements are being used, e.g. ‘living labs’, where interactive,
innovative, technology-oriented approaches are developed and cooperation between the
stakeholders is being practised. These ‘real labs’ aim at the location-specific implementation
of new urban planning development strategies, and the new generation of ‘urban labs’ links
real places to virtual developmental labs, where evaluations can be examined using numerous
existing simulation programmes or those that are currently in development. For example, the
development of alternatives (described in section 3 of the Federal Building Code as essentially
distinct solutions), which is an established standard in urban planning, is employed using spatial
drafts and their impacts as illustrated through simulations. The scientific field is already providing
some examples, including MIT’s ‘Senseable City Lab’ (cf. MIT Senseable City Lab, undated). These
formats support the collaboration of diverse players in urban planning.
According to the modern understanding, urban planning is an active partner – focusing on
mediation and conflict resolution – in the production of space, which is closely linked to the
development of society and its objectives. As the process of ‘producing’ space and its current
manifestation as the product of that process are inseparable (cf. Lefebvre 1991: 37), urban
planning, as a function of autonomous action, assumes a coordinating and steering role in regard
to substantive spatial and procedural concerns with a constant focus on the common good, while
interacting with the stakeholders of urban development.

11
 Urban planning

References

Albers, G. (1992): Stadtplanung. Eine praxisorientierte Einführung. Darmstadt.

Albers, G.; Wékel, J. (2008): Stadtplanung. Eine illustrierte Einführung. Darmstadt.
Bartning, O. (Ed.) (1952): Mensch und Raum. Darmstadt. = Darmstädter Gespräch 2.
Baumeister, R. (1876): Stadt-Erweiterungen in technischer, baupolizeilicher und
wirthschaftlicher Beziehung. Berlin.
BGR – Federal Institute for Geosciences and Natural Resources (Ed.) (2014): Energiestudie 2014.
Reserven, Ressourcen und Verfügbarkeit von Energierohstoffen. Hanover.
Blanco, H.; McCarney, P.; Parnell, S.; Schmidt, M.; Seto, K. (2011): The role of urban land in
climate change. In: Rosenzweig, C.; Solecki, W. D.; Hammer, S. A.; Mehrotra, S. (Eds):
Climate change and cities: First assessment report of the urban climate change research
network. Cambridge, 217-248.
BMI – Federal Ministry of the Interior (Ed.) (2015): Migrationsbericht des Bundesamtes für
Migration und Flüchtlinge im Auftrag der Bundesregierung – Migrationsbericht 2013.
https://www.bmi.bund.de/SharedDocs/downloads/DE/publikationen/themen/migration/
migrationsbericht-2015.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=5 (18 February 2021).
Carsten, J. (2009): Die Stadt und ihr Grundriss: Zu Form und Geschichte der deutschen Stadt
nach Entfestigung und Eisenbahnanschluss. Tübingen.
Cerdà, I. (1859): Plan official de la Ciutat Nova, fet en 1858 per N’Anfós Cerdà (Barcelona:
Establiment editorial de Albert Martin, 1908–1918). 862-3. Mapping property of
Institut Cartogràfic i Geològic de Catalunya, available at http://publications.newberry.
org/makebigplans/plan_images/cerd%C3%A0-plan-official-de-la-ciutat-nova-1918
(10 July 2018).
Conrads, U. (2000): 1980–2000, 20 Jahre Deutscher Städtebaupreis. Frankfurt am Main.
Evers, H. G. (Ed.) (1950): Das Menschenbild in unserer Zeit. Darmstadt. = Darmstädter
Gespräch 1.
Fehl, G. (1992): Privater und öffentlicher Städtebau. In: Die alte Stadt (4), 267–291.
Franzen, E. (Ed.) (1959): Ist der Mensch meßbar? Darmstadt. = Darmstädter Gespräch 6.
Fürst, D. (2008): Begriff der Planung. In: Fürst, D.; Scholles, F. (Eds): Handbuch Theorien und
Methoden der Raum- und Umweltplanung. Dortmund, 22-25.
Healey, P. (1998): Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society. In: Town Planning Review 69
(1), 1-22.
Healey, P. (2002): On creating the ‘City’ as a collective Resource. In: Urban Studies 39 (10),
1777–1792.

12
Urban planning

ILO – International Labour Organization (Ed.) (2014): Global Wage Report 2014/2015.
http://www.ilo.org/global/research/global-reports/global-wage-report/2014/lang--en/index.
htm (1 June 2015).
IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel Climate Change (Ed.) (2014): Climate Change 2014: Synthesis
Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/
uploads/2018/02/SYR_AR5_FINAL_full.pdf (10 July 2018).
Kogon, E.; Sabais, H. W. (Eds) (1961): Der Mensch und seine Meinung. Darmstadt. = Darmstädter
Gespräch 7.
Lefebvre, H. (1991): The production of space. Oxford.
MIT, Senseable City Lab. http://senseable.mit.edu (6 July 2018).
Neumark, F. (Ed.) (1954): Individuum und Organisation. Darmstadt. = Darmstädter Gespräch 4.
Pahl-Weber, E.; Henckel, D. (2008): The planning system and planning terms in Germany. A
glossary. Hanover.
Schwippert, H. (Ed.) (1952): Mensch und Technik: Erzeugnis, Form, Gebrauch. Darmstadt. =
Darmstädter Gespräch 3.
Selle, K. (1993): Kooperative Problemlösungen. In: Bochnig, S.; Selle, K. (Eds): Freiräume für die
Stadt. Volume II. Wiesbaden/Berlin, 269-296.
Sieverts, T. (2009): Die Vereinigung für Stadt- und Regionalplanung als Spiegel der Entwicklung
der Raumplanung in Deutschland der letzten sechs Jahrzehnte. Berlin. = Zukunft der
Planung. SRL Publication Series Volume 54.
Sitte, C. (1889): Der Städtebau nach seinen künstlerischen Grundsätzen, vermehrt um
‘Großstadtgrün’. Reprint of the 4th Edition from 1909. Basel/Boston/Berlin.
Stübben, J. (1890): Der Städtebau. In: Durm, J.; Ende, H.; Schmitt, E.; Wagner, H. (Eds):
Handbuch der Architektur. Part 4. Volume 9. Darmstadt.
Stüer, B. (2006): Der Bebauungsplan. Städtebaurecht in der Praxis. Munich.
UN Habitat – United Nations Human Settlements Programme (Ed.) (2009): Planning sustainable
cities. Global report on human settlements 2009. London/Sterling, VA.
UN Habitat – United Nations Human Settlements Programme (Ed.) (2015): International
guidelines on urban and territorial planning. https://unhabitat.org/international-guidelines-
on-urban-and-territorial-planning (18 February 2015).
Vietta, E. (Ed.) (1955): Theater. Darmstadt. = Darmstädter Gespräch 5.

Last update of the references: February 2021

13