Multifunctional Intensive Land Use – A Practitioner's Guide

MILUNET
THIRD DRAFT
PRACTITIONER’S GUIDE
MAY 2006

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
Page 2 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
TABLE OF CONTENTS
MILUNET.....................................................................................................4
City planning to meet the sustainability challenge ...............................5
What is Multifunctional Intensive Land Use (MILU)? ...............................7
Multifunctional land use..........................................................................7
Intensive land use...................................................................................8
Multifunctional Intensive Land Use (MILU) ...........................................8
Benefits and limitations of MILU ............................................................9
MILU METHODOLOGY ...........................................................................10
Implementation Lab ..............................................................................10
Six considerations.................................................................................10
Proceedings ..........................................................................................11
REFERENCE CASES..............................................................................13
City centres ...........................................................................................13
Suburbia ................................................................................................13
Urban-rural ............................................................................................13
Recycling former utility areas...............................................................13
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ...................................................14
Page 3 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
MILUNET
MILUnet is a network dedicated to the generation, collection, exchange
and transfer of knowledge on the subject of Multifunctional Intensive
Land Use (MILU) as a means to realise more sustainable (urban)
development in Europe. MILUnet is the successor of the working party
on MILU of the IFHP, International Federation for Housing and
Planning. Members of MILUnet are European cities and leading
European research institutions.
The lead partner in the network is HABIFORUM, a public organisation
in the Netherlands focussing on innovative multifunctional intensive
land use. The International Institute for the Urban Environment (IIUE)
assists Habiforum as secretariat to the network.
MILUnet is a European network, co-funded by the INTERREG IIIC
programme of the European Union.
Page 4 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
BACKGROUND: WHY MILU?
Cities are the multifunctional centres of European society today.
Simultaneously they are the motor of our national economies and home
to around 80% of the population. Our urban areas are concentrations
and mixtures of all kinds of people, industries, and services: home and
workplace, centre of learning and industrial estate, medical centre and
recreational facility, transport hub and cultural magnet.
But not only in Europe are cities dominant. All over the world the trend
towards urbanisation is increasing (see Table 1). More than half of the
world’s population now lives in cities and the urban population
worldwide grows by more than 160,000 every day. In developing
countries, where population growth is at its strongest, urbanisation is by
all forecasts set to continue.
Table 1: World population and urbanisation trends. Source: UNDP.
Total population
(millions) (1999)
Avg. pop. growth
rate % (1995-2000)
% Urban
(1995)
World total 5,978.4 1.3 45 2.5
More-developed regions * 1,185.2 0.3 75 0.7
Less-developed regions ** 4,793.2 1.6 38 3.3
Least-developed countries *** 629.6 2.4 22 5.2
Urban growth rate
% (1995-2000)
* More-developed regions: North America, Japan, Europe and Australia-New Zealand.
** Less-developed regions: Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean, Asia (excluding
Japan), Melanesia, Micronesia and Polynesia.
*** Least developed countries according to standard United Nations designation.
The challenge we face at the beginning of the 21 st century is to channel
this seemingly unstoppable urban growth into sustainable urban
development. With the current global population forecast to increase by
approximately 50% to around nine billion in 2050, and everyone
seeking to improve their standard of living, the pressure on our natural
resources will increase enormously. Demand for water, energy and raw
materials will grow. Demand for access to all kinds of services will rise,
bringing with it a demand for increased mobility. Waste generation per
capita will rise in parallel with or exceeding economic growth. Social
tensions will rise as different groups struggle to claim what they view as
their rightful place in the urban framework. Cities, as centres of
population and the economy are thus faced with enormous challenges.
City planning to meet the sustainability challenge
How cities plan and use their land for (re)development can make a
major contribution to meeting this sustainability challenge. For example,
planners can choose for the more American style of city where
development is based around the car. The result of this ‘Los Angeles
model’ is urban sprawl, an outward city expansion of low-density,
single-use structures and single-use areas. Whilst perhaps the easy
option in the short-term, such expansion stretches the ability of our
cities to function as coherent communities. Distances between homes
and services are increased making motorised traffic essential.
However, due to the lack of density inherent in this style of urban
development, public transport cannot be an efficient or attractive option,
Page 5 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
and in developing countries even electricity or water supply is a
problem.
Car(e)free day
[Enrique Penalosa]
Many (European) cities already realise that further sprawl is either
undesirable from a social, economic or environmental point of view, or
simply no longer physically possible. Others will be confronted with this
issue in the near future. As realisation of the need for sustainable urban
development grows, so is the appreciation that the alternative, more
traditional, European model may be the answer. In this ‘compact city’
more emphasis is placed on the human scale, public transport, cycling
and walking. Such a model provides enormous opportunities for more
efficient use of infrastructure and resources in the city itself, as well as
reducing the negative effects of the city on the surrounding region and
on the wider environment. However, steering the development process
is more complicated than in the American model, increasing the
challenge faced by city developers and managers who have to combine
successfully the demand for city functions and the demand for a high
quality living environment.
Given the sustainability challenge, however, city managers have little
choice. To accommodate the numerous functions required by urban
dwellers whilst retaining a high quality of life they must face up to using
their land more intensively than at present. To paraphrase a well-known
saying: “I have seen the future of urban development, and it is MILU!”
Page 6 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
WHAT IS MULTIFUNCTIONAL INTENSIVE LAND USE (MILU)?
Multifunctional intensive land use (MILU) is the intensive use of land for
a number of different functions, and at different times. MILU offers cities
the possibility of (re)development of urban areas for a number of
functions that, in combination, can offer residents, workers and visitors
high quality services and local environment.
MILU is made up of the components ‘multifunctional’ and ‘intensive’
that, when put together, form multifunctional intensive land use. These
components are examined in more detail below.
NL Pavilion EXPO 2000
[Foundation Holland World Fairs]
Multifunctional land use
Multifunctional land use combines different functions on the same piece
of land. In urban areas, this leads to projects where office, residential,
leisure, and retail functions are put together. Multifunctional land use
can be subdivided into three types with combinations being possible as
shown in Figure 1 [Wilde, 2002a].
Multifunctional land use
mixed land use
multifunctional land use
multifunctional use in time
Figure 1: Different forms of multifunctional land use
Mixed land use: In a project of mixed land use or ‘mixed use
development’, different functions are combined within a limited site
[Coupland, 1997]. Mixed land use always implies multifunctional
land use, as by definition different functions are included. Mixed
land use within the city walls is common in historic city centres.
Multifunctional land use: A more developed form of mixed land use
is multifunctional land use. In multifunctional land use different
functions are layered, using the land more than once. It must be
possible to operate the functions independently, but the synergy
between them forms an important factor of success.
Multifunctional use in time: A building or a public space can have
different functions at different moments. This is called
multifunctional use in time. Multifunctional use in time, however,
has limited applicability for regular urban functions.
Page 7 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
Viewed from a higher level, every city or city district has more than one
function: residential, commercial, educational and recreational. But on a
lower scale, cities are often subdivided into single-use areas
(residential, industrial estate, retail park) and single-use buildings. This
creates an enormous need for people to move around the city to reach
other areas and buildings with different functions.
Intensive land use
High urban density, realised through intensive land use, means either
that the required surface area of a development site can be smaller, or
fewer development sites have to be found. But what is intensive land
use?
Perception of intensity of land use depends partly on personal opinion
and culture. For example, what someone in the USA sees as intensive
land use might be regarded as ‘normal’ in Europe, and what a
European views as intensive land use might be seen as ‘normal’ in
Japan. It all depends on the space that is available and how many
people have to make use of it.
Manhattan
[Stephan Edelbroich]
An objective way to determine if a development site is used intensively
or not does, however, exist. This is the so-called floor space index
(f.s.i.) which expresses the total floor area realised on an area of land.
A high f.s.i. means that per square metre of ground surface there is a
high ratio of floor space realised. For example, an f.s.i. of 2 means that
on one hectare of land (10,000 sq.m.) 20,000 sq.m. of floor space is
realised. Use of the floor space index allows comparison between
development sites both within and between cities. The f.s.i. of
Manhattan is approximately 6.0 and as early as 1965 there was already
an area in Tokyo with an f.s.i. of 10. [Wilde, 2002b]. In European cities,
the floor space index is generally much lower.
As with multifunctional land use it is also possible to have intensive
land use in time. Put simply, an area is used more intensively if there
are activities going on there during the whole day, and not only at a
specific part of the day. For example, one can think of using schools as
educational centres during the day and for other functions during the
evening or weekend. This phenomenon is a growing aspect of our
cities in the 24-hour economy.
Multifunctional Intensive Land Use (MILU)
Multifunctional intensive land use is a combination of the above
concepts. There are four ways to achieve MILU:
(1) Interweaving: using the available land for combining functions that
individually need a lot of space, thus saving on the total land use;
(2) Intensifying use of space for one function;
(3) Layering: using the third dimension of space, e.g. the underground,
using the land for as many purposes as possible on a site that is as
small as possible;
(4) Using the fourth dimension of space, i.e. time: using the land for
more than one purpose at any one time, and for different purposes
at different times of the day.
Page 8 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
If this is still a little vague it may help to give a simple example. Say a
kitchen is a small city in itself with room for different functions in
different areas: to cook, bake, wash, freeze, store, prepare and to eat
food. So the kitchen as a whole is multifunctional, but it is made of
single-use areas. To save space you could put a microwave on top of
the oven to create a multifunctional area. You could also replace the
two pieces of equipment by a single combination-microwave. This is
then MILU, because space is being used intensively and for different
functions. Furthermore, it is even possible to use the same space for
the two different functions at the same time.
Different forms of MILU
[Habiforum]
Multifunctional intensive land use in cities can take a number of forms.
In many cities it means looking for (re) development opportunities, such
as abandoned (industrial) sites, within the city instead of building on
greenfield sites on the edge of town. Many of these so-called
‘brownfield’ sites can be redeveloped to offer a higher building density
than is currently the case. Another way of using space more intensively
is by creating multifunctional areas by layering different functions on top
of each other. Familiar examples are the use in city centres of the floors
above shops for offices and housing, with perhaps parking below
ground. But far more use could and should be made of the possible
combination of different urban functions to achieve not only more
intensive land use as such, but to realise all the other benefits that
accompany multiple land use.
Benefits and limitations of MILU
MILU has many benefits to offer to cities as a whole and to different
parties within cities. Benefits include energy-saving potential, reduction
in unnecessary journeys and social inclusion possibilities offered by
combining housing, shopping, work, transport, recreation, cultural, and
social functions within one area.
However, realisation of multifunctional land use demands integration of
planning between different levels of government. In the highly
institutionalised planning systems common to most industrialised
countries where national, regional and local plans are drawn up, such
an approach, even if sometimes difficult, should be possible. At the
same time, clearly not all land use combinations are technically
possible or even desirable from a safety or health point of view. In
addition, many complications can arise in terms of legal, financial and
construction issues, to name but a few.
And yet, at the same time MILU projects already exist in many different
parts of Europe, and beyond. In order to help other cities meet the
sustainability challenge, the innovative instruments and policies which
successfully favour multifunctional land use in one place should be
disseminated to others. The key is to learn from both successes and
failures in order to help all meet the challenge of sustainable urban
development. This is where MILUNET comes into its own.
Page 9 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
MILU METHODOLOGY
MILUNET activities are centred around 2 series of bi-annual network
workshops in different regions. Workshops start with a seminar,
followed by a study visit to the case study areas selected by the Host
partner and an implementation laboratory. Meetings are well prepared
with documentary papers and studies, and are structured in such a way
that it will provide all partners, but in particular host partners, with
practical suggestions for dealing with MILU problems. At each
workshop relevant reference cases of other partners are presented.
These cases are dealing with similar problems and/or provide useful
solutions and are inspirational input for the Implementation Lab.
Implementation Lab
Core of the 3 days workshop is the Implementation Lab. The
Implementation Lab is meant to give momentum to a local/regional
project, by implementing MILU concepts into practice. The
Implementation Lab is a ‘Laboratory’ or ‘Pressure Cooker’. All partners
work together with the Host partner on a regional MILU case, for which
the Host partner is responsible. The ‘real problem’ situation will seduce
the MILUnet partners to produce the best of their knowledge on MILU.
The need to help solve a practice problem will tap off the maximum of
the partnerships know how. The case area is an area in the region of
the Host partner that will go through a (re)development process with
special opportunities for MILU solutions.
The Laboratory is an interactive session in which stakeholders in the
region of the Host partner will work together on the spot with the
MILUNET project partners and members of the Innovation Board. The
main goal is to go a step forward in the process of realization and come
to recommendations for the case area. This includes spatial solutions,
environmental risk management concepts, architectural ideas, solutions
for social problems and crime prevention, process organisation,
financing and policy strategies.
Six considerations
Aim of the MILUnet Implementation Lab is to investigate as a group
both new and persistent urban problems as they relate to Multifunctional
and Intensive Land Use (MILU).
MILUnet Implementation Labs focus on six considerations, that
integrate social, economical, political, structural and ecological issues
and have been developed to think “out of the box”:
Identity
Do the project areas have their own identity? How can this identity be
enhanced and improved? Are there local aspirations that can be
capitalised?
Critical Mass
Does each site have the development, infrastructure and resident
population to maintain a coherent community? What additional
elements are needed to reach and support desired critical mass?
Connections
Page 10 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
What links does each site have with its surrounding natural and manmade
environment? How can these connections be further enhanced
and developed? What land uses and infrastructure are required to
integrate the sites into the surrounding urban and natural fabric?
Human Scale
Do the existing developments fit with diverse human scale activities?
Are scale and relationships of public spaces supportive to their
intended use? What adaptations can be made to support better social
interaction between various uses on each site?
Promotion & Marketing
How are existing (mixed) uses promoted? How effective are these
efforts? What types of promotion could improve or create community
image or a better sense of place? By what means can local decision
makers and/or policy makers be encouraged to lend their support to
MILU? What short-term solutions should be considered to trigger
action?
Process
How to organise an effective planning and implementation process?
Proceedings
The chairman introduces the implementation lab proceedings and after
this the participants split up into four subgroups.
Figure 2: IL Schedule
Part I
Dimensions of the problem
The first part of the implementation lab is focused at a better
understanding of the cases presented before starting to work on their
improvement. The aim is to specify the problem – if necessary – before
working on finding solutions.
Part II
Observations and MILU and policy suggestions
Page 11 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
Part III
Commenting workshop II results.
Groups nerge, local group moves to room of other local group and so
do the regional groups, the moderators briefly explain the results of the
former subgroup and the merged groups continue.
Plenary presentation of the findings of the merged subgroups by the
moderators. Additions and comments can be made. Chairman draws
conclusions about the topics that will be picked up for further
elaboration in the working programs for taskforces that will be agreed
upon.
Part IV
Taskforces
Continuation of the Implementation Lab in four taskforce groups, ligning
up ideas and drawing of maps.
Finalisation
Plenary session:
- The moderators present work of the task forces
- Conclusions are drawn by the chairman
- Wrap up of the Implementation Lab
- Presentation of results to the local/regional stakeholders (e.g.
politicians and administrators).
- Comments from stakeholders
- General discussion.
Page 12 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
REFERENCE CASES
From all the cases (about 60) in the database we made a first quick
selection by asking ourselves: is this really MILU?
This first shift gave us a list of about 30 cases. Since we want to have
all types of cases in the guide we then looked at: type of MILU, themes,
scale and also at the six considerations of MILUnet. This resulted in 14
cases we want to describe in this first version of the guide.
We describe the cases in three parts: general information, a short
description and the analysis of the case with the six considerations of
MILU with the lessons learned.
Finally we decided to think from a practitioner’s point of view on what
geographical situations they find in their work and came up with four
situations:
- City centres
- Suburbia
- Urban-rural
- Recycling former utility areas
Recycling former utility areas can be situated in all geographical
situations but since these areas usually require their own specific
solutions and even can help finding solutions from their special
character they are dealt with in a separate category. When the solution
or problem in a specific case was more related to the geographical
location you will find it there.
This resulted in the following list of cases:
City centres
- Budapest, Ráday Street: rehabilitating city centre
- Sanok, Revitalising old city into a green city for tourism and
recreation
- Stockholm, New housing in Central Stockholm
Suburbia
- Canraso Tudela, Canraso Eco City
- Munich, Messestadt Riem/ Trade Fair City Riem
Urban-rural
- Birmingham, New Hall Valley Country Park
- Delft, Urban agriculture
- Radstock, Norton Radstock Regeneration
Recycling former utility areas
- Amsterdam, Diemerzeedijk
- Bristol, Floating Harbour
- Copenhagen, Havnestaden - Harbour city
- Dublin, Renewal of Dublin Docklands
- Oslo, Aker River Environmental Park
- Vienna, Cable & Wire Factory
The description of the cases can be found in separate files.
Page 13 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Alexander, C. et al. (1977) A Pattern Language. Towns, Buildings,
Construction. Oxford University Press, New York.
Bourdeau, P. & Stanners, D. (1995) EUROPE’S ENVIRONMENT The
Dobrís Assessment. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
Coupland, A. (ed.) (1997) Reclaiming the city, mixed use development.
E & FN Spon, London.
Deelstra, T. et. al. (2000) Getting there: towards places that last. In:
Urban lifestyles: spaces, places people. Benson, J. Roe F. and Maggie,
H. (Eds.) A. A. Balkema, Rotterdam.
Deelstra, T. & Biggelaar, M. van den & Boyd, D. (2001) Multifunctional
Land Use An opportunity for promoting urban agriculture in Europe. In:
Urban Agriculture Magazine July 2001.
Deelstra, T. & Boyd, D. eds. (1998) Indicators for Sustainable Urban
Development. IIUE, Delft.
Deelstra, T., Boyd, D.M.G. (1999) Let’s Reflect on Water. The
International Institute for the Urban Environment, Delft.
Deelstra, T., Boyd, D.M.G. (2001) W.A.T.E.R. The International
Institute for the Urban Environment, Delft.
DURA VERMEER (ed.) (2002) Haalbaarheidsonderzoek Drijvende
Kassen. Samenvatting resultaten oktober 2002. Vermeer Infrastructuur
Ontwikkeling, Hoofddorp.
EEA (1997) Water Stress in Europe – can the challenge be met? New
year message 1997. http://reports.eea.eu.int/92-9167-025-1/en,
February 2003. European Environment Agency, Copenhagen.
European Environment Agency. (1999) Sustainable water use in
Europe; Part 1: Sectoral use of water, Environmental assessment
report No.1. Office for Official Publications of the European
Communities, Luxembourg.
European Academy of the Urban Environment (1997) Co-operation in
the water industry. EAUE, Berlin.
Expert Group on the Urban Environment. (1996) European Sustainable
Cities. Report. European commission, Brussels.
Haccoû, Huib (2003) A Quest for Partners in Research om
Multifunctional and Intensive Landuse. Report, commissioned by
Habiforum, RMNO & Innovatienetwerk Groene Ruimte, Gouda.
Kreukels, Ton & Vliet, Marinka van (2001) Verruimd perspectief Een
internationale verkenning naar ruimtelijke inrichting en meervoudig
ruimtegebruik. Rapportage van onderzoek in opdracht van Habiforum,
Gouda. Universiteit Utrecht, Utrecht.
Hoeven, K. van der (2002) Exposition – H2OLLAND architecture with
wet feet. http:// www.h2olland.nl/h2o/popupexpo.html, March 2003.
Royal Institute of Dutch Architects BNA, Amsterdam
Lang, R., and A. Armour. (1980) Environmental Planning
Resourcebook. Environment Canada Lands Directorate, Ottawa.
Lynch, K. (1991) A Theory of Good City Form. MIT Press, Cambridge,
Mass.
Sassen, S. (1991) The Global City; New York, London, Tokyo.
Princeton University Press, London, New York, Tokyo.
Spirn, A. W. (1984) The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human
Design. Basic Books, New York.
Page 14 of 15

MILUnet 3 rd Draft Practitioners Guide
Tjallingi, S.P. (1993) Water relations in urban systems: an ecological
approach to planning and design. In: Vos, C.C. and Opdam, P. (Eds.)
Landscape ecology of a stressed environment. Chapman and Hall,
London.
Wilde, Th. S de (2002a, b) Multiple use of land in railway station areas,
congress paper for ‘The sustainable city 2002: Urban regeneration and
sustainability’.
Wilde, Th. S. de (2002) UNDERGROUND SPACES AT NEW
HEIGHTS. Paper for: ACUUS 2002 International Conference, URBAN
UNDERGROUND SPACE: A RESOURCE FOR CITIES. Torino, Italy,
November 14-16, 2002. Assoiciazione Georisorse e Ambiente, Torino.
Winpenny, J.T. (1994) Managing water as an economic resource.
Routledge, London.
Wilde, Th. S. de (2002) Meervoudig ruimtegebruik en
spoorinfrastructuur, Gebiedsontwikkeling en voorbeeldprojecten.
Holland Railconsult, Utrecht.
World Health Organisation (1994) Operation and maintenance of urban
water supply and sanitation systems – a guide for managers. World
Health Organisation, Geneva.
Page 15 of 15