In our industry, the planning discipline has gradually become removed from the physical design process and matters of physical form. Instead, planners are directing their attention to procedural and programmatic matters (as is the case in many transportation and environmental planning efforts) and a number of related specialty fields, such as the management of major investment studies, public outreach efforts, and alternatives analyses. It seems that involvement by planners in the physical design process does not extend past the early conceptual stages. Although at PB we consider a number of technical skills to belong to the realm of planning, planners are primarily applying these skills to support the development of conceptual designs in traditional “planning products” rather than as part of the actual infrastructure design process.

Changing market conditions are causing the physical design process to move toward a more integrated, multi-disciplinary approach. A look at the field of transit design—PB’s oldest business—underscores the importance of such multi-disciplinary design thinking and suggests how physical planners are well-positioned to contribute to every phase of a more interactive design process.

Design Approach Changing from Sequential to Parallel

Traditionally, the design process has been organized sequentially, containing three relatively discrete phases: conceptual design or planning; preliminary engineering and final design. As designs are advanced from one stage to the next, the technical skills required and the disciplines involved change considerably. The transition between design phases—frequently, though not necessarily, marked contractually—can be rather abrupt, often leaving insufficient room for inter-disciplinary exchange.

Planners generally assume leadership in the conceptual planning stage, leading efforts relating to community outreach, demand forecasting, and preliminary operational analyses. During the preliminary engineering phase, architects and engineers often advance the conceptual designs without much planning involvement. Finally, in the final design phase, technical specialists put the finishing touches on the design without benefit of much project history. Naturally, as the need arises for inter-disciplinary coordination, staff members instrumental in previous stages are brought into the subsequent phases. Such an approach, however, involves mobilization costs and presents the risk of duplicating efforts.

Today, accelerated design schedules and shortened expectation cycles on the part of the client and the public require a flexible design process where the technical exchange between disciplines is more fluid. New project delivery systems, such Design Build Operate Maintain (DBOM) contracts, are emphasizing condensed design periods and parallel execution of multiple tasks that may traditionally have been scheduled sequentially. In this condensed schedule, interagency coordination and stakeholder involvement are likely to extend into the later stages of the design process, requiring designers to be able to respond to changing parameters even in the advanced stages of design.

These changing realities could suggest the need for a transition from the traditionally sequential design process to a more parallel approach, where varied disciplines are closely integrated throughout the entire design process. This approach de-emphasizes the transition from one design phase to the next. It is based on the formation of design teams that encompass the necessary range of technical disciplines for a given assignment and that can assess the design impacts of changing project parameters across disciplines. Formation of such design teams in response to specific project assignments is an established practice in the industry and may well find increased application at PB.

PB Planners As Design Coordinators

With the adoption of a parallel design approach, there emerges a need for design coordinators with a technical understanding of a broad range of issues affecting the design process who are able to facilitate the technical exchange among design specialists. The case may be made that, building on their existing skills, planners at PB are well-positioned to assume such a role. Consideration of a few technical issues and coordination needs frequently encountered in the field of transit design helps to underscore this contention.

Patronage Demand Forecasts and Transit Facility Design. Increasingly, patronage demand forecasts are generated not only as decision-making tools in the initial evaluation of the merits of a project, but also as design tools for the sizing of individual facilities, such as transit station platforms, escalators and stairs. As the generation of demand estimates becomes more streamlined and the design process is accelerated, it will be increasingly common for patronage estimates to be updated throughout the design process to reflect changing conditions.

Planners at PB who are closely involved with the development of ridership forecasts possess the skills to act as liaisons between demand modeling experts and facility designers. Similarly, PB planners have typically been closely involved with the development of transit service plans, and are therefore in positions to make valuable contributions to the operational planning efforts. Here too, the need for effective communications between designers and demand forecasters is essential, as modeling updates affect the sizing of storage and maintenance facilities.

Pedestrian Planning and Intermodal Facility Design. Pedestrian planning and related skills associated with the design of intermodal facilities have long belonged to the realm of planning. Yet, these pedestrian planning skills are often not sufficiently integrated with either the architectural design process or fire protection engineering.

For instance, pedestrian circulation studies are typically performed in the early conceptual design stages while emergency egress requirements are often addressed independently at a much later stage when strong allegiances to particular design solutions may already have been formed. This fragmented approach potentially leads to the undesirable situation where designers find themselves incrementally modifying mature designs to comply with emergency evacuation needs introduced at a relatively late stage.

Emergency Procedures and Transit Station Design. Although much is made of the need to integrate facility-operation considerations into the early phases of the physical design process, this integration is rarely realized fully. Their multi-disciplinary backgrounds could help planners to bridge gaps between traditionally segregated design disciplines.

Fire protection issues at transit stations offer an illustrative example. Most municipalities require, as part of the design of a transit station, the development of emergency procedures that offer guidance to emergency personnel and agency staff in the event of an emergency at the future station. These guidelines offer detailed instructions for the operation of ventilation equipment and the development of emergency evacuation plans. Yet, because emergency procedures are typically not developed until well after the station geometry is finalized, little integration exists between the procedural and design realms.

This lack represents a missed opportunity. Integration of emergency and other operational procedures into the early stages of the design process could generate more elegant design solutions and possibly even reduce construction costs, as emergency procedures could be offered in lieu of emergency facilities as a means for meeting requirements. Unfortunately, the reverse is more common, where station designs require modification at a very late stage in order to accommodate the needs of local authorities.

Community Participation and Urban Design Coordination. Traditional community planning and urban design issues have been incorporated into the early phases of the design process for some time. Growing public interest in design solutions that reflect the character of their host communities has led to an “opening” of the design process. With this broadening of project stakeholders and constituencies, the involvement of planners and urban designers has become more integral.

A number of new build transit projects, for instance, have included ambitious “transit arts” programs where the local artist community was invited to contribute to the design of the system. The programs have involved tremendous outreach and administrative efforts that needed to be managed within the constraints of the design schedule. Planners were uniquely qualified to lead the coordination efforts and administer the interface between the project designers and the community. In the face of accelerated project delivery systems (e.g., DBOM), such efforts need to span all phases of the design process, as community design objectives need to be solidified early, be incorporated into directive drawings explicitly, and be re-interpreted alongside the contractor during construction.

Conclusion

The need for an integrated, multi-disciplinary design process is clear. Not only does such a process offer increased efficiencies, but it also offers the promise of superior, more responsive design solutions. Planners have the skills and background to make important contributions in all stages of a more integrated design process. The direct applicability of some of the existing planning skills at PB is quite clear in the realm of transit design; but planners’ broadened involvement need not be limited to transit projects. Other potential market areas could include airport design, where key issues include community outreach, environmental and land use issues; as well as traffic, transit and pedestrian planning.

We should aim to build on the existing skills available in PB’s planning groups and develop additional technical skills that would further underscore planners’ potential roles as coordinators in these and other design fields. Ultimately, our industry’s end products are physical projects. Planners already contribute to these projects in a variety of ways and there is good reason for their increased participation in the development of the actual designs, thereby joining engineers and architects in shaping PB’s principal product.