Zoekresultaten

R-LINK goes PLPR: Institutional Innovations in Land Development and Planning in 20th and 21st centuries

Coming to grips with urban environmental quality in planning sustainable cities

from the article: Abstract Based on a review of recent literature, this paper addresses the question of how urban planners can steer urban environmental quality, given the fact that it is multidimensional in character, is assessed largely in subjective terms and varies across time. The paper explores three questions that are at the core of planning and designing cities: ‘quality of what?’, ‘quality for whom?’ and ‘quality at what time?’ and illustrates the dilemmas that urban planners face in answering these questions. The three questions provide a novel framework that offers urban planners perspectives for action in finding their way out of the dilemmas identified. Rather than further detailing the exact nature of urban quality, these perspectives call for an approach to urban planning that is integrated, participative and adaptive. ; ; sustainable urban development; trade-offs; quality dimensions

Creating space for urban farming

Urban farming projects often involve the (temporarily) redevelopment of urban space by local co-productions of citizens and/or entrepreneurs. To realize their ambitions these coalitions often need support of public (government) resources such as time, money, space and regulation (Green Deal Stadslandbouw, 2013). This paper asks the question to what extent the development of urban farming projects can be understood as an example of planning through direct citizen participation/ participatory governance (e.g. Cornwall, 2004; Roberts, 2004) and what this means for the role of the municipal planning professional or civil servant in making these projects successful. Literature on the role of the municipal planner or civil servant in urban farming projects mainly concerns the role as enabler of projects given the many difficulties for projects. However, when looked at the development of urban farming as an example of citizen participation/ participatory governance and the transfer of social functions towards society other roles and tasks of planners seem to be important to make urban farming successful. This discussion paper looks to the role of planners and civil servants in some related government domains such as landscape (e.g. Van Dam et al. 2008, 2010, 2011) and neighbourhood development (e.g. Frieling et al., 2014) to complement our understanding of the role of planners in making urban farming projects successful. With this analysis the paper sets the scene for further research into tools for the planning professional or civil servant to support urban farming. In the paper the situation in Amsterdam serves as an example.

E-Governance in European and South African Cities

Since the late 1990s, city councils have become increasingly aware of the potential for information technologies (ICTs) to improve the management of cities and as an instrument for economic and social policy. This has resulted in a wave of urban ICT strategies and policies, such as the adoption of ICTs within the city administration itself, projects that facilitate access to ICTs by weaker social groups and policies to improve the urban electronic infrastructure. By comparing eight cities - Barcelona, Cape Town, Eindhoven, Johnnesburg, Manchester, Tampere, the Hague and Venice - this book examines a range of innovative urban e-governance strategies and develops a framework of analysis that permits a common approach. Throughout the book, a distinction is made between access policies (aimed at improving access to ICTs for all citizens), content policies (directed to improve the use of ICTs in the city administration and semi-public domains) and infrastructure policies (to improve the provision of broadband infrastructure). For each of the cities, e-strategies and policies are critically reviewed and compared. The book reveals that urban e-strategies have evolved from an internal and technology-centred orientation to a more outward-looking approach.

The values of green spaces in towns and cities

This booklet reports on experiments carried out by Van Hall Larenstein University of Applied Sciences in the context of the VALUE project. It consists of three parts. The first two chapters describe some experiments carried out in the Dutch town of Amersfoort and the students’ input and approach. This is followed by an intermezzo on sources of inspiration outside the Netherlands and examples of the way urban green spaces and elements can provide an impulse for towns and cities. The final two chapters concern the way such a green strategy can be designed in Dutch urban settings. Chapter 5 discusses how local governments can use the added value provided by urban green spaces for new investments:value capturing. Chapter 6 focuses on a new type of planning: Planning by Surprise, which combines dreams and pragmatism. The photo essay at the centre of the book tells the story of the many sides of green spaces in towns and cities. Unintentional, intentional, planned, dreamed of, drawn,remembered, pictured, developed: Planning by Surprise.

UP-TOWN Zwolle

Achtergrond en aanleidingDit rapport is tot stand gekomen in het kader van de (inmiddels gesloten) subsidieregeling “Aanpak Leegstand Kantoorpanden Overijssel” van de provincie Overijssel. Deze subsidieregeling had, naast andere doelstellingen en voorwaarden, een specifieke kennisdoelstelling. Met deze kennisdoelstelling is geborgd dat de uitkomsten en resultaten van de gesubsidieerde activiteit bijdragen aan kennis op het gebied van aanpak van leegstand kantoorpanden in Overijssel, die overgedragen wordt aan andere partijen in Overijssel.Centraal in dit rapport staat de kennisontwikkeling naar aanleiding van de transformatie van een oud PTT-gebouw nabij het centrum dat diende als kantoor tot een duurzaam wooncomplex van appartementen en maisonnettes aan de rand van het Zwolse stadshart. Geanalyseerd is hoe de verschillende partijen de samenwerking hebben ervaren: wat ging goed en waar kan de samenwerking tussen de verschillende partijen beter of anders? Kortom, welke “lessen” hebben de verschillende partijen getrokken uit de samenwerking?