The Master Plan as a Tool for Urban Design: Potentials and Restrictions. The Case of Antofagasta

Main Article Content

Gino Pérez Lancellotti, Mg.

Abstract

Territorial planning tools that regulate the growth of cities in Chile, ruled by the General Law on Urbanism and Construction, often evolve at speeds that fail to match the changes and needs of the environment. Before they are even implemented they already reflect obsolescence and rigidity, particularly to address urban design issues at the public space scale. The article describes the Master Plan tool as a more flexible planning option applicable to different scales of the urban design. For this purpose, a revision was conducted of the historical experiences with this tool in the city of Antofagasta and more recent uses in several projects. Its potentials in terms of flexibility and project implementation strategies were acknowledged, while limitations include reduced regulatory power due to the fact that implementation basically depends on the will of teams of technical experts and decision-makers in office.

Article Details

How to Cite
Pérez Lancellotti, G. (2017). The Master Plan as a Tool for Urban Design: Potentials and Restrictions. The Case of Antofagasta. AUS - Arquitectura / Urbanismo / Sustentabilidad, (15), 16–21. https://doi.org/10.4206/aus.2014.n15-04
Section
Artículos
Author Biography

Gino Pérez Lancellotti, Mg.

Territorial planning tools that regulate the growth of cities in Chile, ruled by the General Law on Urbanism and Construction, often evolve at speeds that fail to match the changes and needs of the environment. Before they are even implemented they already reflect obsolescence and rigidity, particularly to address urban design issues at the public space scale. The article describes the Master Plan tool as a more flexible planning option applicable to different scales of the urban design. For this purpose, a revision was conducted of the historical experiences with this tool in the city of Antofagasta and more recent uses in several projects. Its potentials in terms of flexibility and project implementation strategies were acknowledged, while limitations include reduced regulatory power due to the fact that implementation basically depends on the will of teams of technical experts and decision-makers in office.