Looking at sheer numbers, Islamabad can be regarded as a successful
model of urban development. Half a century after its inception and the
implementation of the plan the city has grown to 1.2 million inhabitants,
the ‘urban sprawl’ beyond the limits of the plan has occupied more
space than assigned in the original plan. From 1972 until 2009 the
residential areas have been expanded from less than one fifth of the
agglomeration‘s space to an extent that has increased by half, mainly
on the expense of mixed vegetated areas. Nevertheless, at the same
time the space occupied by agricultural farm activities for the supply of
the citizens with goods and products of daily necessities has remained
bigger and is still covering approximately one third of Islamabad (Butt
et al. 2012: 111). The distinction between rapid urban development
and the need to supply its growing number of citizens with nutritional
and dairy products could well be a founding principle for planning cities.
Deficiencies and shortcomings are often embedded in a static perception
of urban development that lacks vision and imagination when it comes
to present and future demands of urban citizens and when unexpected
growth occurs.
Living with the plan Islamabad is presented as a case in point for
myopia in designing original plans, for necessary adjustments to daily
needs of residents and for vested interests of different stakeholders
that need to be negotiated in the framework of power and forceful
interventions. At the same time Islamabad functions within Pakistan
as an exceptional city which has got a planning authority that other
municipalities still grossly lack to have or fail to apply (Niaz Ahmad
& Anjum 2012). Planning and designing urban space is embedded in
socio-historical contexts and provides an expression of contemporary
thinking, fashions, power structures and influences from inside and
outside. Participation of future inhabitants is a rare exception while
planned cities often replicate the aspirations and affluence of decisionmakers.