The conservation of our heritage buildings is a European wide policy objective. Historical buildings are not only works of art, but embody an important source of local identity and form a connection to our past. Protection agencies aim to preserve historical qualities for future generations. Their work is guided by restoration theory, a philosophy developed and codified in the course of the 19th and 20th century. European covenants, such as the Venice Charter, express shared views on the conservation and restoration of built heritage. Today, many users expect a building with modern comfort as well as a historical appearance. Moreover, new functionality is needed for building types that have outlived their original function. For example, how to reuse buildings such as old prisons, military barracks, factories, or railway stations? These new functions and new demands pose a challenge to restoration design and practices. Another, perhaps conflicting EU policy objective is the reduction of energy use in the built environment, in order to reach climate policy goals. Roughly 40% of the consumption of energy takes place in buildings, either in the production or consumption phase. However, energy efficiency is especially difficult to achieve in the case of historical buildings, because of strict regulations aimed at protecting historical values. Recently, there has been growing interest in energy efficient restoration practices in the Netherlands, as is shown by the 'energy-neutral' restoration of Villa Diederichs in Utrecht, the 'Boostencomplex' in Maastricht and De Tempel in The Hague. Although restoration of listed buildings is obviously focused on the preservation of historical values, with the pressing demands from EU climate policy the energy efficiency of historical building
MULTIFILE
Car use in the sprawled urban region of Noord‐Brabant is above the Dutch average. Does this reflect car dependency due to the lack of competitive alternative modes? Or are there other factors at play, such as differences in preferences? This article aims to determine the nature of car use in the region and explore to what extent this reflects car dependency. The data, comprising 3,244 respondents was derived from two online questionnaires among employees from the High‐Tech Campus (2018) and the TU/e‐campus (2019) in Eindhoven. Travel times to work by car, public transport, cycling, and walking were calculated based on the respondents’ residential location. Indicators for car dependency were developed using thresholds for maximum commuting times by bicycle and maximum travel time ratios between public transport and car. Based on these thresholds, approximately 40% of the respondents were categorised as car‐dependent. Of the non‐car‐dependent respondents, 31% use the car for commuting. A binomial logit model revealed that higher residential densities and closer proximity to a railway station reduce the odds of car commuting. Travel time ratios also have a significant influence on the expected directions. Mode choice preferences (e.g., comfort, flexibility, etc.) also have a significant, and strong, impact. These results highlight the importance of combining hard (e.g., improvements in infrastructure or public transport provi-sion) and soft (information and persuasion) measures to reduce car use and car dependency in commuting trips.
MULTIFILE
This paper analyses the effect of two new developments: electrification and ‘free floating’ car sharing and their impact on public space. Contrary to station based shared cars, free floating cars do not have dedicated parking or charging stations. They therefore park at public parking spots and utilize public charging stations. A proper network of public charging stations is therefore required in order to keep the free floating fleet up and running. As more municipalities are considering the introduction of an electric free floating car sharing system, the outline of such a public charging network becomes a critical piece of information. The objective of this paper is to create insights that can optimize charging infrastructure for free floating shared cars, by presenting three analyses. First, a business area analysis shows an insight into which business areas are of interest to such a system. Secondly, the parking and charging behaviour of the vehicles is further examined. The third option looks deeper into the locations and their success factors. Finally, the results of the analysis of the city of Amsterdam are used to model the city of The Hague and the impact that a free floating electric car sharing system might have on the city and which areas are the white spots that need to be filled in.
DOCUMENT
The Dutch Environmental Vision and Mobility Vision 2050 promote climate-neutral urban growth around public transport stations, envisioning them as vibrant hubs for mobility, community, and economy. However, redevelopment often increases construction, a major CO₂ contributor. Dutch practice-led projects like 'Carbon Based Urbanism', 'MooiNL - Practical guide to urban node development', and 'Paris Proof Stations' explore integrating spatial and environmental requirements through design. Design Professionals seek collaborative methods and tools to better understand how can carbon knowledge and skills be effectively integrated into station area development projects, in architecture and urban design approaches. Redeveloping mobility hubs requires multi-stakeholder negotiations involving city planners, developers, and railway managers. Designers act as facilitators of the process, enabling urban and decarbonization transitions. CARB-HUB explores how co-creation methods can help spatial design processes balance mobility, attractiveness, and carbon neutrality across multiple stakeholders. The key outputs are: 1- Serious Game for Co-Creation, which introduces an assessment method for evaluating the potential of station locations, referred to as the 4P value framework. 2-Design Toolkit for Decarbonization, featuring a set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to guide sustainable development. 3- Research Bid for the DUT–Driving Urban Transitions Program, focusing on the 15-minute City Transition Pathway. 4- Collaborative Network dedicated to promoting a low-carbon design approach. The 4P value framework offers a comprehensive method for assessing the redevelopment potential of station areas, focusing on four key dimensions: People, which considers user experience and accessibility; Position, which examines the station's role within the broader transport network; Place-making, which looks at how well the station integrates into its surrounding urban environment; and Planet, which addresses decarbonization and climate adaptation. CARB-HUB uses real cases of Dutch stations in transition as testbeds. By translating abstract environmental goals into tangible spatial solutions, CARB-HUB enables scenario-based planning, engaging designers, policymakers, infrastructure managers, and environmental advocates.