2001-June 6-8 MILU - Iiinstitute.nl

• Need better area planning – reinforcing existing residential neighborhoods.
• Need to reinforce the existing good cultural life (more community gathering
places), a few existing farms of historical significance still exist in the area.
• Need to find financing for new improvements – looking for a mix of public-private
sources.
3. RELEVANT CASE STUDY CONSIDERATIONS
The working party was asked to present a few comparable case studies with a view
to illustrating possible relevancy’s and unique approaches to the problems of the
Groruddalen Valley. The following considerations emerged from two case studies
presented:
• Redevelopment can cause dislocations on local establishments and opportunities
i.e. equilibrium of land use (compatible land uses).
• Need for consistency with local character.
• No preference for mixed use over single use – expediency should dictate
approach.
• Establish a clear regional plan or strategic context for all interventions.
Specific issues emerging from these presentations were:
• Consider a telescoped scale of thinking – from the regional to local.
• Consider the advantages of current and future infrastructure.
• Consider the need for clear community definitions.
• Consider the nature of edges.
• Examine the degree of land coverage (large roof areas, degree of visible
exposure).
• Match ecology with topography.
• Do not ignore political realities while considering economic and ecological
considerations.
4. RECURRING WORKING PARTY QUESTIONS
The prevailing issues as listed were obtained through a series of observations from
the working party. Although they are descriptive of the valley, these issues do not
provide a sense of the larger imperatives for intervention necessary to assign
development priority and planning focus. Recurring questions from the working party
that would assist in this regard were:
• How critical are the existing distribution functions? What are the current and
future needs of this function?
• Regional imperatives – has the cost of losing infrastructure been considered?
• What are the known local imperatives by residents and local employers?
• Is there any assessment of the valleys potential for redevelopment?
19.