 Philip Roda from the Executive Director of Europe in Age, on the extensive research that he's been conducting and much of the publications and findings that you've seen in the product of Philip and his team has done extraordinary work. Thank you, Eddie. Before I start, I'd like to have to grant of course to the Wolfgang Nürburgring Center this morning. I'm really planning to paint not here, but when I'm back in London or within the next days. Let me start with this presentation here. It's very much a follow-up of what Tony Travers just talked about, zooming more into the specific issue of shaping the city while integrating transport. We have seen that from many of the quotes. It seems it remains one of the key issues when we talk about planning in particular, strategic planning. How do we bring those two together? Now I'm going to structure my talk into two parts. First I'll come back to some general observations, which seem obvious, nevertheless are important to me. And then I'm looking at the two European urban age cities, Berlin and London, to really investigate a little bit how strategic planning operates in those two cities. What we see here is an image which I think should have simply made the point that transport and land use, or the form of the city and mobility are simply two sides at the same point. They heavily interact and interrelate with each other. And there are probably three categories we need to consider above all. It's the size of the city, the absolute size of it, it's the density of the city, and it's the distribution of activity or mix of uses. Let me come to the latter two and start with urban density. And whether we start from this type of dense image here of Hong Kong, the high-rise density produced by that city or the lower-rise end of London in that case with a high percentage of green gardens and an ice surface coverage of roads, it is really the density that ultimately impacts transport patterns more than anything else. And it's probably the following chart that was already put together by the late 80s by two Australian researchers, Newman and Kenworthy. And they were matching here with the companional gasoline consumption per capita with the urban density of a variety of different cities. And we recognize a strong negative correlation and I think also, in relation to what Nick Stokes said this morning, it is a very important chart to consider when we plan our cities. What this basically tells us is the lower density of the city we lose efficiencies, we travel further distances and we make a moral choice more towards privatized transport, mainly the motor car, that ultimately results into a higher energy consumption. Looking at our urban age cities and here the two extremes it's on the one hand the most compact and dense city and London the other extreme and more spread out and almost a sprawling city one might say, we do recognize that correlation. There are many other connections which of course determine where we move in the city the level of wealth but that more than 55% in Mumbai water work whereas in London the largest share with more than 40% is by car is not a coincidence when it comes to the density level. And also individual modes of transport require a very different amount of space to move people and that is also another way of how those two land and moving people as far as at the speed of 50 kilometers an hour per person require more than 160 square meters now just to remind ourselves this is 50 times the average living space of a resident in Mumbai slums 50 times for one person to move and it's particularly problematic in a high density built up city like in Dubai where just about 11% of the surface coverage are available for road movement now compare that to London where we're above 20 or even Los Angeles where it's 40% gives you an idea what it means let me come to the second key particularly and that's the mix of usage let me contrast here London and Berlin we've seen the population densities before they don't differ that much Berlin's likely more compact and denser but if we look at the distribution of workplaces there's a significant difference London's massive work focus overall much higher than Berlin's of course concentrate in the middle in the center of London generating a massive amount for movement requirements and if we were to build today an indicator for mix use as a standardized workplace residence ratio we recognize the difference between the two cities Berlin generally is more mix use throughout the city that has a mirror image it's important to remind ourselves when we talk about mix use at what level are we actually looking at the city I just showed the metropolitan scale I'm now zooming into the neighborhood what we see here is a typical London neighborhood everything in black is the ground floor use residential the other four colors represent other uses let's move to a similar neighborhood similar distance to the city center in Berlin and we recognize the difference we'll go to New York and again we can recognize that something is very different with those buildings on the ground and it's that sort of topology of the building here in Berlin that allows us for a much more flexible use over time and much greater possibility to use also the ground floor for multiple purposes it's the same picture for the following topology and it's certainly different for much of London's residential let me now come to shaping the city the process of shaping the city I think it's important to re-emphasize that independent from any normative agenda for how we want to shape our cities the synchronization of transport and land use or the shape of the city and the movement pattern is desirable and any planning scheme and any planning professional would aim to have a high degree of integration we do know of course because of the separation of professionals it's a very difficult situation to achieve let's look at London it's a built-up form for London as it is and in fact the most important planning tool was already introduced by central government in the 1950s we have heard about it yesterday it's the London Green Belt which limits growth to the city and it does not allow further organization within the protected green area surrounding it in 2000 the Greater London Authority was re-informented it allowed consistent planning for the area which is now faked in green here and it first broke also because of the pressure points that transfer of the things on just to charge for the product of that but it then looked at regular access and ultimately developed a spatial strategy in a second that identified these areas of growth existing centers that's enormous focus in the city center in addition to corridors two growth corridors the one from the east most famously gateway where they had fired and are currently developed this is the mayor's main strategic document to answer the strategic planning on the city level the London plan includes in fact only one key map for a diagram is its hall which looks the following way it's a statutory document it needs to be prepared it's nearly binding for the GLA family for those institutions that are part of the mayor's of London but it's not for the boroughs and that is key for them as a guiding document the power the mayor has ultimately goes to another sort of between power so the individual site in London such as here, King's Cross ultimately is determined by a very complex negotiation process between the borough and the developer and any positive outcome such as some people might consider the future plans for King's Cross is ultimately a result of a developer who has a great understanding for how the city should develop and borrow with negotiation powers however, if we look at the Thames Gateway this is coming back to the integration of land use and transport there are shortcomings and along this area it's often that the boroughs agrees to density levels that do not actually respond to the strategic plan for transport they are too low with a few questions on the soul and often the development takes place in a public transport infrastructure so we have a tendency for car use let me come to Berlin and we heard before from Tony that planning in Germany is made in the remit of the state and the municipality now this is the metropolitan region of Berlin now fading in what is the state of Berlin surrounded by the state of the two states have to join forces for their planning mechanism here they decided to based on its extensive rail network come up with a strategy that looks for development opportunities only on existing transport infrastructure as it indicates and ultimately the transport infrastructure is then developed by the two states based on that strategic idea let's look at the plan how does this document really look like this is the regional development plan of Berlin around Berlin this is joint state planning effort we recognize the area for potential development but more importantly everything outside must not be developed and each state is then required to follow up with plans which principally follow that idea the most important planning instrument for Berlin is Berlin's land use plan it's more or less the equivalent of the London plan however it's much more specific it actually talks about specific mix use it talks about strategic infrastructure corridors and it talks about density levels but it also doesn't zoom all the way into the micro level it only talks about categories up to 3 hectares and above the boroughs then are legally required to follow that plan that's another difference to London and they then set up what are building plans or B plans followed by planning commissions again in Berlin as long as you adhere to the building plan set up by the borough you get planning permission this tool also allows you and this is the case of Watt-Stemmer plans which we demand from the developer to implement up to in that case 20% residential use and the crisis when they built that area initially refused to do so now they're very happy to assess the overall integration until we made that point Berlin through its rather rigid planning scheme is able to rather well integrate the transport uses and the land use functions let me now summarize what came out of our interviews with politicians and planners in the two cities is the key recommendations of how we can achieve a great degree of integration in that particular phase of transport and land use the first one is obvious a strategic body with a political mandate is tea it seems at least to those in London and Berlin that it's impossible to achieve that integration without the second is that integration is a top level issue it will not work if we do it on the local need to really have a strategic integration ideally at the national if not on the state level to then pass on the issues already in a more integrated way a large strategic development body or planning authority that really covers the entire political region is a further important reference that was made a strategic development plan such as the Greater London Plan where Steele could argue which direction does it have to go with the land use plan document of Berlin or is it a strategic vision document of and then a particularly important point if we want to achieve integration we have to pull our people professionals out of their line management commitments we need horizontal collaboration it's not possible to have people always reporting back according to the line management if we want to achieve a high degree of integration we have to have to part and speak to each other also at the lower and at the middle level the project teams work on specific issues it's absolutely critical and finally a comprehensive transport authority transport for London in fact covers not only as you would expect public transport but they are responsible now for any movement within the city so that comes from the pedestrian goes all the way to the motorists from the buses and to the underground let me finish with the following overview I talked about planning for cities to understand that the cities I represented are very much at the end of this one point called urban development sign up they are both re-urbanising and free densifying I believe that the planning system must also respond to that sort of cycle and take into consideration what level of maturity has already been achieved also we must recognise whether our cities rapidly grow such as many of the cities built here after this presentation about or in the case of London recovering or in the case of Berlin and Statenet so let me finish with this a little zooming out we have here a moonlight in fact I want to re-emphasise that the integration of land use and the integration of the shape of the city with transport is nothing more than really an integration of the various different scales of the cities from building a scale all the way to the metropolitan