General Plan vs. Master Plan
Heretofore, I have written several times and explained the difference between the General Plan and the Master Plan for the development of cities. Today I want to once again show the differences between them using the example of Baku and London. In Baku - General Plan, in London - Master Plan.
The main difference between the Master Plan and the General Plan of the city is purpose of the applied documents. The London Plan is a strategic document, developed rather for municipalities, which in turn become the final “window” for architects in terms of approvals and recommendations. In London, each municipality has a micro-level development plan that takes into account the recommendations and strategic vision of the City-wide Master Plan. It is on this local document that municipal authorities are guided when a new construction project within the boundaries of their area of responsibility comes to them for consideration.
The General Plan of Baku today is not very clear, because it does not take into account many of the needs of a modern metropolis. There are many emphasis on various transformations, but the requirements for modern multifunctional business centers for work are not detailed.
It is already good that the General Plan of Baku takes into account international experience and focuses on the development of the city's districts - this will allow the capital to develop polycentrically.
In London, unlike Baku, all decisions are made at the municipal level. The project can reach the level of a city or mayor only if it is large-scale or located on the territory of several municipalities. Development plans of districts, municipalities are developed on the basis of the Master Plan of the city and should not contradict it in their points, but they detail the picture and requirements for building. They clearly spell out the size of the housing needed for the area, the maximum height of objects, the quality of design, the requirements for the preservation of green areas - such a kind of "instructions for the use" of architectural projects in the location.
Our architectural and urban planning solution and British planning are similar from the point of view of an architect, but the latter includes additional aspects - a set of environmental measures, providing acoustically competent solutions, and so on. Overall, however, the documents differ slightly.
In Baku, all approvals are held at the city level - except for non-capital buildings. The architect gets acquainted with the General Plan only to understand the general vector of the city's development, but does not apply it in individual projects, paying more attention to the specifics of a particular site.
Interesting that in London, this seemingly convenient “one window” principle largely depends on the composition of municipal deputies and their affiliation with the party structure. So, in the municipality of Kempton, where traditionally the majority are Labor, more attention is paid to social housing, small-sized apartments as part of projects, and the union of apartments is prohibited. Whereas in Westminster, a more conservative municipality, it is more difficult to justify the idea of a facility with modern architecture.
What happens to a project if the requirements of the Master Plan change while working on it?
This, as a rule, does not happen - neither in Baku, nor in other European capitals. The documents - both the Master Plans and the Development Plans of the districts - are worked out for a long time and carefully, with the participation of residents and local authorities. If any changes are made to them, then this process is very time-consuming. Another issue is that the municipality in London, for example, may reject a project for formal reasons of non-compliance with the development plan. In this case, it will be brought up for discussion by the city authorities, and experts will evaluate it in the context of a development plan for an entire city.
The General Plan in Baku does not limit the ideas or concepts of architects, it only sets certain vectors - for digitalization, the creation of comfortable spaces, the formation of an accessible city, where all services and amenities should be easily accessible for Baku residents, regardless of their area of residence.
London has a number of statutory rules that are binding on all municipalities. One of them concerns the "green belt" of the city: these are natural areas in which it is impossible to build facilities under any circumstances and without exception. Recently, by the way, in the capital of Great Britain there has been a debate on this issue, since it lacks municipal housing, and the "green belt" severely restricts opportunities for new development. Other restrictions relate to the visual outline of the development - the main attractions and historical buildings are highlighted in the city, the view of which should not change. All municipalities in the city are also subject to these rules.
In Baku, the visual landscape analysis of the site is responsible for these norms, which is carried out by architects to submit a project for approval. But directly for the procedures of approval and compliance of the project with the district plan in Great Britain, for example, it is not the architect who is already responsible, but the planning consultant.
The UK has an industry of professional consultants who work with architectural projects on document level. Their tasks include drawing up and submitting project documents for approval to municipalities. As a rule, such companies employ specialists who know not only the legislation, but also the specific mechanisms of the work of municipalities, since they have experience in the structure and even participate in the preparation of development plans. Their duty is to adapt the project documentation in such a way that it meets all the norms and requirements. This simplifies the work of architects, and makes the process of project approval linear and protocol. When we have this kind of specialists, I am sure that their services will also be in demand.
The mechanism of work with architectural monuments in Baku is more centralized. There is the Ministry of Culture and a Department of Museum Affairs and Control of Cultural Values under it, which carries out the assessment and examination of the preserved monuments, and this is their area of responsibility. There are lists of monuments of republican and regional significance, which makes it possible to understand the boundaries of protection zones and the possibilities that a site with historical buildings has.
In London, work with monuments is also carried out at the local level. There are three approved degrees of “value” for historic sites, and each building in a historic center is of one type or another. For facilities of the first degree, only scientific restoration is possible, the second degree suggests a little more options, and so on. There are also security zones, like in Baku - construction cannot be carried out within them. But, unlike our capital, an entire street can be guarded. And even buildings that do not have the status of monuments will remain in their original form.
The more detailed the rules for which the architect is oriented, the easier it is to work - you clearly understand your framework and the direction of the idea. This is better for both the customer and the city: in the end, everyone gets an understandable result.
The main advantage of detailed plans for the development of districts is the ability to prevent the emergence of irrelevant and conflicting projects. In other words, if we want to build a skyscraper, we will build it in the municipality where this format is welcomed, where the norms for high density and building have already been calculated, and at the same time we will offer a more classic project for the historical center.
It will be interesting to see how the new General Plan of Baku is being implemented from this point of view - if a strict and large-scale document is supplemented with elements of master planning, then the city will be able to develop at a more comfortable pace and quickly adapt to the needs of our time.
