|
|
European Cooperation in the field of Scientific and Technical Research - COST Action C11 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Spatial Planning in Germany National
data on planning systems Spatial
Planning in Germany Bettina
Opperman Germany Challenges
for Greenstructure Planning in
Germany: some points
for discussion 1
Brief description of the planning
system 2
Special goals regarding
Geenstructures 1
Brief description of the planning
system German planning
system The German
Federal Nature Protection Law of 1976 aims at the
protection and sus-tainable
development of landscape both in rural and urban
areas. According to
the law, nature conservation must consider the
biotic and abiotic factors
of nature as well as the impacts of land use on
the environment.
This includes the design and development of urban
green structures. Landscape plans
are the main instrument to achieve these goals.
These plans are
complementary to comprehensive plans on each level
of the planning system: from
landscape programmes for the Länder, regional
landscape plans down to local
land-scape plans on the municipal level and open
space plans on the level of
master planning. According to the German
Nature Conservation
Law, there is also a re-quirement to mitigate the
impacts of developments
and to compensate for inevita-ble impacts.
Mitigation and compensation
are required for site developments as well as on
the level of master
planning. Therefore,
these plans need to be based on scientific
information about the ecologi-cal
functions of the area in question. The plan has
also to be approved by
political decision makers, who can follow the
advice of the experts or
reject their sugges-tions and give more weight to
other considerations. Landuse- and
masterplan (Flächennutzungs- und
Landschaftsplan) The local level
of planning is the most important for
greenstructure planning
be-cause it is here where the possibilities and the
limits to use land, build
houses and protect natural areas are set. Within
these limits formally
described in a land use and a complementary
landscape plan (scale 1:10 000 to
1:5000) every private household or firm can build
according to the land-use
zones determined in the plan. Detailed master
plan and design of the open space
(Grünordnungsplan) The permission
to build is also determined on the next step of the
planning process on a
more detailed level. The scale of the master- and
open space plan is 1:2500
to 1:1000. Here negotiations are possible, but
again, limits are set by the
municipality. These can be very prescriptive in
detail (e.g. choice of tree
species, type of fences / hedgerows) but often they
do not achieve to
conserve / strengthen the overall char-acter and
qualities of a neighbourhood. The plan is
implemented by private, institutional and public
landowners. There is no
possibility to force a private land owner to build
the ideas of the planning
commis-sion. However, the municipality can
encourage the realisation of
a plan by economic or other incentives. This part
of the more informal
bargaining and planning process is permanently
discussed among experts but
rarely documented or scientifically
analysed. The
informal planning and design process Beside the
formal planning process, new forms of planning
arise. A master plan de-signed
to last 10 years does no longer absorb all the
discussion but many
project-oriented activities are undertaken at the
same time. One of the advantages of
this planning approach is that conflicts can be
solved pragmatically.
A well determined project can be realised more
easily and be seen and
marketed in the public. The problem with this way
of planning is, that a variety
of projects will not automatically form a
systematic programme for
the development and shaping of the greenstruc-ture.
Typical projectes are:
Garden festivals (Stuttgart), special exhibitions
(Expo Hannover) or
land art projects. Design and planning competitions
aim to bring spe-cial
issues such as places, views, the riversides etc.
to the attention of
the people, media and local politicians. More and more
the citizens are encouraged by the politicians and
the administrative
body to become a player in the game of urban
development. The engagement and
commitment of the citizens is thought to facilitate
the realisation of
project ideas. This is why public participation
and cooperation are
more and more discussed and practised as well. The
experts involved hold a
strong position because they have the knowledge
required. But at the same
time they are often discontent because lay people
talk about things they do
not understand or these are unable to organise
themselves in an effective
way. Therefore,
planning managers and environmental or urban
mediators are engaged now
more frequently. However, their professional
standards are not well defined
and it is not yet clear if they will become
accepted by the administration,
politicians and citizens. Because of the formal
restrictions of the German
Law a simple 1:1 adoption of Anglo-American skills
and instruments in
environmental and urban me-diation or facilitation
will not solve the
problems at stake. Instead, a careful adapta-tion
and implementation
of new instruments into the well-developed planning
sys-tem is
required. 2
Special goals regarding
Greenstructures In the Federal
Law for Nature Conservation there are three main
issues for the
pro-tection, restoration and development of
greenstructures: § Species
and habitats, §
Environmental services: Soil, water, air and
climate, §
Landscape character, nature and landscape related
recreation. These tasks can
only be successfully accomplished if the role
of greenstructure
for preserving, restoring and enhancing
environmental quality is well
understood. Habitat surveys have been carried out
in many German cities and
towns. These pro-vide a good information basis for
urban planning. This
information has been very useful for site
designations. However,
knowledge of the overall performance of
greenstructure, i.e. improving
climates, reducing storm water runoff, and serving
as corridors for wildlife,
is still poorly understood. A recent review
of habitat corridor planning in German cities and
towns revealed that
this concept has only been applied in a small
number of cities (Froehlich et
al., 2000). Where the concept has been used it is
rarely supported by
strong scientific evidence but is rather
pragmatically applied. Compensation
requirements are now increasingly applied by cities
on the strategic level
of land use planning to facilitate the development
process on the site
level. A pool of compensation areas ("ecologi-cal
account") is built up in
advance by the municipality and these are balanced
then with impacts on new
development sites. This would allow developing
coherent greenstructures
and placing compensation areas for the highest
ecological benefit.
However, the choice of compensation areas is not
only driven by ecological
criteria but by land ownership and
availability. Compensation
can become disconnected from the impact, both
spatially and as re-gards the
type of impact. For instance, loss of green space
with primarily
climatic functions on a development site may be
compensated by restoration of
a wetland somewhere else. Nature and
natural areas are also regarded as a resource for
recreation. The en-hancement of
physical and emotional wellbeing is also a function
of the greenstruc-ture
and a task for the "green"
administration. In our society
we realise a strong shift into a more
industrialised structure for
rec-reation, a kind of a new industrial sector with
big festival events
(Olympic games, etc.) or a Disney-like design of
parks and open spaces.
For these parks we have the investors but not for
the type of green structure
to be used everyday by everyone at low prices.
Ecological and
environmental issues play a lesser role now in the
discus-sion about urban
development and greenstructure planning. The main
difficulties regarding greenstructures resulting
from the German planning system
can be characterised as follows: § Because
of the low economic potential to exploit green
structures, it is the
responsibility of the public sector. In times when
this sector is poorly funded and is
forced to search economic success, greenstructures
are often planned but
rarely realised. The budgets of the green
departments are so low that sometimes
they are unable to care for well designed areas
with the effect that
greenstructures may loose their positive appeal to
the public. § If a
plan has a good quality and sets strong regulations
it is still a problem to find
an investor willing to implement it. Very often the
green spaces that
sur-round houses, bank towers and other buildings
are only taken into
consideration at the end of the planning and
construction process. As a consequence,
the quality of the greenstructure is often very
poor, not because
landscape architects cannot do a good job but
because the green is structurally
not weighted as important as the "brown / grey
structures". § Only
very few people understand, that the ecological
system is not deter-mined by
municipal borders or populated and not populated
areas: Many people agree to
preserve nature outside the cities but not in the
city centre. And
verbally everybody enjoys the greenstructures but
disagrees to protect them if
personal gains are at stake. The NIMBY-Phenomenon
(Not in my back yard!),
which was brought up to explain the problems with
"locally unwanted land
uses (LULUs)", fits perfectly also to describe the
challenge to build up
greenstructures. The main
ecological challenges for greenstructure planning
may be summarised as: § To
safeguard environmental and ecological quality in
the compact city. While compact
cities may reduce the pressure on surrounding
countryside, densifi-cation
can impair environmental performance and reduce
biodiversity in the city.
This is in particular of relevance in strongly
developing city regions in
South Germany where pressure on open spaces in the
city is strong. This
can lead to further loss and fragmentation of
greenstructure. § To
restore environmental and ecological quality in old
industrialised city re-gions by
developing new types of greenstructures. Derelict
land often have developed
into valuable habitats for wildlife, but need to
be integrated into
greenstructure planning and urban
development. § To
develop greenstructures for urban expansion. Cities
are becoming more and more city
regions. Concepts for planning and
implementing greenstruc-tures
are required to define the role of landscape on
this level and these
con-cepts need to be proactive, e.g. to help define
the future roles of
agriculture and forestry in an urban
context. Other
challenges relate to the instruments of landscape
planning. The intensive
discussion on their efficiency has highlighted the
need for § a
clearer definition of ecological / environmental
goals and targets ("envi-ronmental
quality standards"). Standards for greenstructure
planning on the whole
city and neighbourhood levels might in turn help to
strengthen the role of
open space in master plans for implementing
greenstructures. §
improving public involvement in the planning
process. Landscape plans, in-cluding
urban landscape plans need to become more
management and im-plementation
led. But the crucial point of this discussion is,
that it is not clear how
the roles in the democratic system will change and
who will be the win-ner or
the loser in this negotiation. A tension exists
between the representa-tive
democratic system, with elected politicians who
have the right to
decide, and, participatory approaches where lay
people become active in
planning and development of their greenstructures.
The latter should be asked
about their own ideas and goals but they also need
to understand the
formal plan-ning system to get any
influence. All
rights reserved - © COSTC11, 2001 updated 31 Oct
01 To add your own definitions or ideas just email Anne Beer. |
Meetings Background Meetings Background Meetings Background Meetings Background |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Click button
to return to COST C11 - WG1B home page
