gui town planning & participation by users & residents _regulation & recommendations _hqe2r2003

8/14/2019 GUI town planning & participation by users & residents _regulation & recommendations _hqe2r2003

1/134

!"#$%&'%()*+ ,*'-.%$&-'+ -/+ ("&)0&'1

-,+#"#$%&'%()*+'*&12(-",2--0#+

3-'$,%4$+'5+6789:3;:


2/134

HQERSustainable renovation of buildingsfor sustainable neighbourhoods

Contract nJ EVK4 CT 2000 00025

Participation by residents and users:

legal and regulatory context

and recommendations?%@+


3/134

Participation by residents and users: legal and regulatory context, and recommendations BC*)&.*,%()*+D>E+ HE2R

3La Calade - CSTB

CONTENTS

ASTRACT 7

MEMORANDUM: THE HE2R APPROACH 7THE FINDINGS OF THE PROECT 7

The objectives of the HQER project ................................................................................. 71.2 - The HQE2R approach and the expected project results .............................................8

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 11

DESCRIPTION FOR EACH COUNTR 16

I - DENMARK 16I.1 - The legislative context.............................................................................................. 16

I.1.1 - The plan law ...................................................................................................... 16I.1.2 - The law of environment protection ...................................................................17I.1.3 - The law of open administration......................................................................... 18I.1.4 - The urban regeneration law ............................................................................... 18

I.2 - Local Agenda 21....................................................................................................... 19I.2.1 - Albertslund ........................................................................................................ 19I.2.2 - Stevns................................................................................................................. 19I.2.3 - Haslev ................................................................................................................20I.2.4 - Hillerd..............................................................................................................20

I.3 - National and local programmes ................................................................................ 21

I.4 - Synthesis with respect to the 21 SD targets.............................................................. 22I. 5 - Recommendations ................................................................................................... 23

II - FRANCE 24II.1 - The legislative context ............................................................................................ 24

II.1.1 - The Bouchardeau Law (12th July 1983).......................................................... 24II.1.2 - The Barnier Law (2nd February 1995).............................................................. 25II.1.3 - The Voynet Law (25th June 1999).................................................................... 26II.1.4 - The Chevenement Law (12th July 1999) .......................................................... 28II.1.5 - Solidarity and urban renewal law (S.R.U.)(13th December 2000) ...................28II.1.6 - The proximity democracy law (27th February 2002) ......................................30II.1.7 - Synthesis........................................................................................................... 32

II.2 - Local Agendas 21.................................................................................................... 32II.2 - Local Agendas 21.................................................................................................... 33

II.2.1 - Presentation ...................................................................................................... 33II.2.2 The example of Autun (Sane-et-Loire) ......................................................... 33II.2.3 - The example of Bouguenais (Loire-Atlantique) ..............................................35II.2.4 - The example of Romans-sur-Isere (Drome)..................................................... 36II.2.5 - The example of Lille (Nord) ............................................................................ 37

II.3 - The national and local programmes of action ........................................................ 38II.3.1 Contrat de Ville and Grand Projet de Ville (Great City Project, G.P.V.) 39II.3.2 - Projects for urban development........................................................................ 40

II.3.3 - Local participation charter ............................................................................... 41II.3.4 - The districts participative instances ................................................................42


4/134


4La Calade - CSTB

II.3.5 - The participative budgets ................................................................................. 49II.3.6 - The principal obstacles encountered ................................................................50

II.4 Recommendations .................................................................................................. 51

III - GERMAN 54III.1 - Introduction............................................................................................................ 54III.2 - Formal participation...............................................................................................54

III.2.1 - Legal regulations for participation.................................................................. 54III.2.2 - Implementation of the legal regulations ......................................................... 55III.2.3 - Steps towards real participation ..................................................................56

III.3 - Informal participation ............................................................................................ 57III.3.1 - Participation .................................................................................................... 57III.3.2 - Co-operation ................................................................................................... 59III.3.3 - Problems ......................................................................................................... 59

III.4 Local Agenda 21 ................................................................................................... 60III.4.1 National state of the art ..................................................................................60

III.4.2 LA 21 in Dresden ...........................................................................................61III.5. Practice of participation in respect of the HQE2R targets for neighbourhoodsustainability..................................................................................................................... 62III.6 - Recommendations.................................................................................................. 62

IV - ITAL 64IV.1 - The legislative context........................................................................................... 64

IV.1.1 - LAW 1150/42 ................................................................................................. 64IV.1.2 - LAW 167 (18th April 1962) ............................................................................ 64IV.1.3 - DPCM 27th December 1988 ........................................................................... 64IV.1.4. - LAW 241(7th August 1990)........................................................................... 65IV.1.5 - LAW 499/97 and Ministry of Public Works Decree 22nd October 1997 ....... 66

IV.1.6 - DPR n.447 (20th October 1998) ...................................................................... 66IV.1.7 - Legislative decree n.267 (18th August 2000).................................................. 67IV.1.8 - Evaluation of the Italian legislative context towards participation ................ 67

IV.2 - Local Agenda 21: the example of Biella Province ................................................ 68IV.2.1 - Case studies .................................................................................................... 68IV.2.2 - Period of implementation: .............................................................................. 68IV.2.3 - Objectives ....................................................................................................... 68IV.2.4 - Actors involved...............................................................................................68IV.2.5 - Laws concerned .............................................................................................. 69IV.2.6 - General description......................................................................................... 69IV.2.7 - SD Target concerned ......................................................................................69IV.2.8 - Procedures envisaged for participation...........................................................69IV.2.9 - Limits.............................................................................................................. 71IV.2.10 - Prospects ....................................................................................................... 71IV.2.11 - Results / fall-out from the action compared with initialobjectives/actions/instruments used: ............................................................................ 72

IV.3 - The national or local programmes: opportunities and best practice in Italy.......... 72IV.3.1 - The Savonarola Quarter Neighbourhood Contract (Padua)........................ 72IV.3.2 - Neighbourhood contract for S.Eusebio (Cinisello Balsamo ) ........................ 76IV.3.3 - Urban Rehabilitation Programme (PRU) at Acilia-Dragona (Rome) ......... 80

IV.3 - Barriers to the participation in Italy....................................................................... 82

IV.4 - Recommendations.................................................................................................. 82


5/134


5La Calade - CSTB

V. THE NETHERLANDS 84V. 1 - Legislative context ................................................................................................. 84V. 2 - Local initiatives and Agenda 21............................................................................. 85

V.2.1 Synthesis of local initiatives / The Leidsche Rijn approach .............................. 85V.2.2 A representative case: the Thermie-plus approach in the City of Utrecht ......... 87

V.2.3 Agenda 21 in the Netherlands: the Apeldoorn and Zoetermeer case................91V. 3 - Recommendations.................................................................................................. 92

VI. SPAIN 94VI.1 - The legislative context........................................................................................... 94

VI.1.1 - Introduction..................................................................................................... 94VI.1.2 - The participation of inhabitants in the municipal general plan ......................94VI.1.3 - Two ways / motives of participation .............................................................. 95VI.1.4 - Two moments of participation........................................................................ 95VI.1.5 - The new Catalan law of urbanism 2/2002 ...................................................... 96

VI.2 - The Local Agenda 21............................................................................................. 97

VI.2.1 - What is an Agenda 21? ...................................................................................97VI.2.2 - Description about an Agenda 21. The pattern of Manresa as an example ..... 97VI.2.3 - The participation progress in an Agenda 21 - The pattern of Barcelona as anexample ...................................................................................................................... 102

VI.3 Recommendations............................................................................................... 106

VII. UNITED KINGDOM 107VII.1 - National situation: Legislation and Guidance in the UK ................................... 107

VII.1.1 - The culture of local governance in the UK ................................................. 107VII.1.2 - Participation in planning ............................................................................. 107VII.1.3 - Sustainable development strategy ............................................................... 108VII.1.4 - Sustainable development and participation................................................. 108

VII.1.5 - Participation in local government................................................................ 109VII.1.6 - Participation in regeneration ....................................................................... 109

VII.2 - Examples of LA21 in the UK............................................................................. 110Bristol : Local Agenda 21 strategy for the city of Bristol..........................................110

VII.3 - Participation in relation to the HQE2R targets for Sustainable Development.... 112VII.3.1 - Planning....................................................................................................... 112VII.3.2 - Regeneration................................................................................................ 112

VII.4 - Recommendations .............................................................................................. 113VII.4.1 Planning ......................................................................................................... 113VII.4.2 Regeneration .................................................................................................. 113

EUROPEAN SNTHESIS 115

I- SNTHESIS 115

II OPTIONS TO IMPROVE PARTICIPATION 118II.1 Enabling participation through awareness raising and learning........................... 118II.2 Participation as a continuous process ...................................................................119II.3 Institutional change to allow participation to influence policy at the neighbourhoodand city level .................................................................................................................. 119II.4 To agree upon participation rules ......................................................................... 120II.5 To make participation a knowledge acquisition process ...................................... 121II.6 Participation versus individualism?...................................................................... 122


6/134


6La Calade - CSTB

APPENDIW 1: PORTO ALEGRE, EWAMPLE OF PARTICIPATION THE CASE OF

THE PARTICIPATOR UDGET 123

APPENDIW 2: LIST OF THE HER PARTNERS 127

APPENDIW 3: ASTRACTS OF THE DELIVERALE 132


7/134


7La Calade - CSTB

ASTRACT

ENGLISH ASTRACTThe participation of inhabitants in the management of the city, of neighbourhoods, of built spaces, etc.,

seems to be a fundamental element of democracy. Urban planning laws, sustainable developmentprojects and social action programmes constantly refer to inhabitants' participation. But the practice isoften far from the intentions. Participation and all its versions consultation, empowerment areoften overused words.It is true that participation requires an act of will on the part of decision-makers, town councillors orbuilding owners, rules defining its limits and a culture. Participation is continual learning and alsoconsists of a process of acquiring knowledge and culture, the culture of those with whom we share orwe negotiate.The sustainable development approach and resident participation require training and educationalprocedures. Urban renewal projects have to engage with educational approaches, in advance of theprojects and alongside them. Sharing in the analysis of the region concerned is a particularly importantstep which aims to define common short-, medium-, and long-term issues and priorities. It is thenpossible to base the definition of plans for action on a truly integrated and participatory process.This deliverable describes the procedures for improving participation by residents and other users: themain legal provisions, local agenda 21, national and local programmes (such as an Urban Policy) andthe practices in each country; it then presents recommendations for the countries involved in theproject, and a European synthesis.

MEMORANDUM: THE HE2R APPROACH

AND THE FINDINGS OF THE PROECT

GHe refuse lDide quDil y a dDun cKt la lumire et de lDautre les tnbres, lDhomme et lafemme, moi et lDautre, le bien et le malF He cherche un lieu oM ces contradictions puissent Ntre

rsoluesF CDest une quNte sans illusion OP

1 Qurale, Qahmoud Aar;ich, dition ctes Sud

THE OECTIVES OF THE HERPROECT

Sustainable Renovation of Buildings for Sustainable Neighbourhoods or HQER is a projectpartly funded by the European Commission under the Fifth Framework R&D Programme.The project started in September 2001 and will continue until the end of March 2004.Co-ordinated by the CSTB (Centre Scientifique et Technique du Btiment), France, itcombines research and demonstration aspects with the co-operation of 10 European research

partners and demonstration partners (local authorities or social buildingowners) working upon14 neighbourhoods2.The objective of the project is to develop a ne methodology or approach together iththe necessary methods and tools to promote sustainable development and the quality oflife at the urban neighbourhood level. HQER aims at providing decision aid tools formunicipalities and their local partners, focussing on neighbourhood inhabitants and usersconcerns. With its integrated approach, it aims at providing a framework, which can begenerally applied to European cities. The project uses case studies as neighbourhood models

1I refuse the idea that there is a side for the light and another one for the darkness, the man and the woman, me and theothers, the good and the bad ones. I look for a place where contradictions can be solved. That is a quest without illusion.2 See the list of the partners in Appendix or at the end


8/134


8La Calade - CSTB

for which the tools are elaborated and in which the approach or the different tools can betested.The elements taken into account in the development of this approach towards sustainable developmentand its tools are:

Improvements in the quality of the buildings and non built elements, which are

closely linked with needs expressed by the actors concerned (users), especially as regardimprovements in comfort and reductions in the costs-in-use and maintenance ofresidential and non-residential buildings (energy savings, reduced water consumption,optimisation of the use of raw materials).

Improvements in the quality of life through urban development, which respects theenvironment: reduced urban sprawl, more effective use of public spaces, and the creationof cycle-ways, pedestrian areas and green spaces. Developing coherence and synergy

between the neighbourhood levels and the conurbation. Encouraging work in partnershipand building the capacity of the local community to achieve meaningful participation.

Controlling costs and applying management methods, hich allo all categories of

actors to share expenses. Controlling urban spral and commuting by managing the economy and

environmental impact of space use and also by managing mobility and the use of publictransport at the scales of the neighbourhood, the town and the conurbation.

The aim of HQE2R project is thus to allo local authorities to implement regenerationaction plans in their neighbourhoods and renovation of their buildings toardssustainable development. It is a question of providing operational tools for a concreteanalysis and evaluation, which are open to public (and private) debate and to action.

1.2 - THE HE2R APPROACH AND THE EWPECTED PROECT

RESULTS

Today cities are being rebuilt, buildings are being rehabilitated, and neighbourhoodsrevitalised. To assure sustainability, this regeneration must go beyond technical solutions,taking social trends, changes in behaviour, environmental and economic development intoaccount.To define concrete action plans, sustainable development requires an iterative way ofachieving a decision, because of the necessity of taking the various principles of sustainabledevelopment into account all together at once. As the market law only takes into accounteconomic factors, and principally only in the short-term, sustainable development requiressustainable development principles: the integration of the long-term, global impact ofdecisions on environmental and social factors, with less hierarchical forms of participationthan usual market practices.

The HE2R methodological frameork for sustainable neighbourhood analysis and

development is structured as an ideal regeneration neighbourhood projects into 4 phases: adecision phase, an analysis phase - identifying priorities, definition, discussion, anassessment of scenarios phase and finally the setting up of the action plan for theneighbourhood).The methodological framework is furthermore based on F+#"#$%&'%()*+0*.*)-GH*'$+G,&'4&G)*#at the city scale, and then a system of 21 sustainable development targets under 5 mainobjectives (see the list next page) and backed up by a set of 51 key issues with their 61

indicators for the neighbourhood and its buildings (I!CI!+#@#$*H).


9/134


9La Calade - CSTB

The HQE2R project results are specific tools for local communities and for their localpartners (see also the diagram below):

- The choice of 6 sustainable development principles at the scale of the city and adefinition of sustainability for the neighbourhood scale.

- The definition of an overall methodological framework with 5 main globalsustainable development (SD) objectives, their 21 targets, 51 key issues or subtargets and then 61 indisputable indicators at the neighbourhood and buildingscales (the ISDIS system).

- A shared SD diagnosis method for SD (with an integrated analytical grid for theprevious inventory) adapted to the neighbourhood scale.

- Evaluation tools for scenarios or neighbourhood projects as decision aid tools forassessing different scenarios before the final action plan for the neighbourhood is

chosen (3 models with the support of 3 analytical grids):

3 models:- INDI (INDicators Impacts) a model of sustainable regeneration impact using

indicators and allowing the development of different environmental andsustainable development profiles

- ENVI (ENVironmental Impact)- ASCOT(Assessment of Sustainable Construction Technology Cost), a

model of global cost of energy efficient technologies from an environmental point of view at thebuilding scale.

- Recommendations for improving participation in neighbourhood regeneration projects.- Recommendations for taking SD into account in urban planning documents (for eachpartner country).

THE HQER APPROACH TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE

NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT

THE HQER APPROACH TOWARDS SUSTAINABLE

NEIGHBOURHOOD DEVELOPMENT

2. Strategic decision

for sustainable

regeneration of theneighbourhood

7. Evaluation of

the scenarios

against SDtargets (INDI,

ENVI, ASCOT)

6. Generation of

scenarios

(to identify options

for SD action)

4. Shared SDdiagnosis of the

neighbourhood

(potential,

dysfunction,

cohesion)

3. Inventory based on the21 targets and the

integrated SD indicators

system (ISDIS)

Participation of residents and users

Partnership (public / private)

Local Governance

12. Monitoring andevaluation of the

project : SDmonitoring

indicators

8. Action plan for

the neighbourhood

9. Urban planningregulations includingSD recommendations

11. Projects uponthe neighbourhoodwith SD

specifications

10. Projects for

Sustainable Buildings

(new & existing) with

SD specifications

5. Strategic

priorities for theneighbourhood and

definition ofobjectives for SD

1. Identification ofproblems (social,

environmental, technical)that need actions

PHASE 1 : DECISION PHASE 2 : ANALYSIS

PHASE 3 : DECIDING UPON THE ACTION PLANPHASE 4 : ACTION and EVALUATION

Source: HQER Project (http://hqe2r.cstb.fr) SD: Sustainable Development

2. Strategic decision

for sustainable

regeneration of theneighbourhood

7. Evaluation of

the scenarios

against SDtargets (INDI,

ENVI, ASCOT)

6. Generation of

scenarios

(to identify options

for SD action)

4. Shared SDdiagnosis of the

neighbourhood

(potential,

dysfunction,

cohesion)

3. Inventory based on the21 targets and the

integrated SD indicators

system (ISDIS)

Participation of residents and users

Partnership (public / private)

Local Governance

12. Monitoring andevaluation of the

project : SDmonitoring

indicators

8. Action plan for

the neighbourhood

9. Urban planningregulations includingSD recommendations

11. Projects uponthe neighbourhoodwith SD

specifications

10. Projects for

Sustainable Buildings

(new & existing) with

SD specifications

5. Strategic

priorities for theneighbourhood and

definition ofobjectives for SD

1. Identification ofproblems (social,

environmental, technical)that need actions

PHASE 1 : DECISION PHASE 2 : ANALYSIS

PHASE 3 : DECIDING UPON THE ACTION PLANPHASE 4 : ACTION and EVALUATION

Source: HQER Project (http://hqe2r.cstb.fr) SD: Sustainable Development


10/134


10La Calade - CSTB

- Recommendations for specifying sustainable development in the building process- Recommendations for specifying sustainable development for non built elements

- Indicators for the different phases of a project state indicators, pressure indicatorsand then monitoring indicators.

Elaboration ofassessment and

monitoring indicatorsfor projects andneighbourhoods,

regarding SD

Recommandations tointegrate SD in urban

planning documents

Elaboration of decision a id tools

to evaluate scenarios or potentialurban planning projects (design

contract for example)

Source: HQE2R project (http:hqe2r.cstb.fr) * See the scheme The shared SD diagnosis method for setting priorities

Choice of 5 SD

objectives, 21SDtargets, 51 SD key

issues and indicators (atthe neighbourhood a ndbuildings scales): the

ISD ID system

Elaboration of decision a id tools

to evaluate scenarios or potentialurban planning projects (design

contract for example)

Recommendations to improve

and to promote inhabitants andusers participation :

- to identify and collect their needs

- to improve procedures andpractices

Development of a shared SD

diagnosis method enabling theidentification of territorial SD

stakes*

Definition of 6 SD

principles at thecity scale

RESULTS OF THE HQER PROJECT:an approach with methods and tools

for sustainable neighbourhood regeneration

-Recommendations

for briefingdocuments taking

into account SD fornew and existing

buildings

- Recommendations

for non builtelements SD Sustainable Development


11/134


11La Calade - CSTB

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, adopted unanimously by 178 States

represented in 1992, evokes in one of its 27 principles the participation of citizens as a fundamentalaspect of sustainable development.

The Tenth principle is indeed so stated: the best ;ay to consider environmental questions is to*'#",*+$2*+G%,$&4&G%$&-'+-/+%))+$2*+4&$&J*'#+4-'4*,'*0, at the appropriate levelF t the national level,each individual must have %44*##+ $-+ &'/-,H%$&-' relative to the environment held by publicauthorities, including information relative to dangerous substances and activities in theircommunities, and (*+ %()*+ $-+ G%,$&4&G%$*+ $-+ $2*+ 0*4&-'+ G,-4*##F The states must facilitate andencourage the public in becoming more concerned and participating by putting information at theirdisposalF n excessive access to -udiciary and administrative actions, namely legal redress andappeals, must be ensuredFD

The HE2R programme is directly concerned with the participation methods in use in each of thecountries involved in the process since the rehabilitations beginning nowadays have to take greatlyinto account social dynamics, as major components of sustainable development (with the usualmodifications, the taking into account of the Environment and the economical development). Theinvolvement of inhabitants and users in the life of their districts and of their citiesbenefits indeedgreatly to local social dynamics.

The participation of inhabitants is also recommended for several reasons:

- the crisis of the elective democracy (usually observed throughout the Western countries),confronting politicians was such that the latters answer was to give the right to decide in localaffairs back to electors (Alain Jupps speech at the French National Assembly in February

2001). The expected plan is that an increased participation of inhabitants in local affairs wouldbe a lever for an increase in the elections participation rate and would give politics greaterlegitimacy;

- the complexity of decisions: a renewed city is no longer the city which expands;developments are more and more carried out in collaboration with inhabitants and directlyinfluence their daily life as well as the users of the city; the renewed city can modify customsand the way of living, implying a compulsory increase in the inhabitants participation;

- the multiplication of legal appeals, made possible by laws and texts dealing with theassessment of the public benefit3, arousing greater caution of the elected representatives andrequiring a better participation of the people concerned.

It then appears important to know the methods of putting in practice participation of each of thecountries intervening in the HE

2R project. Each country, i.e. Germany, Denmark, Spain, France,

Italy, the Netherlands and Great Britain, will present here in the first instance the existing lasevoking participation, secondly the Local Agendas 21 put in place and finally the national andlocal programmes favouring the association of inhabitants to local decisions.

We will then take interest here in las, Local Agendas 21 and national and local programmesexisting and evoking participation of inhabitants and users to city policies, their applications as wellas the participation procedures they imply or suggest will be describe and we will try to situate themon a scale of participation.

3 Nicole Questiaux, Lutilit publique aujourdhui, Conseil dEtat, La Documentation Franaise, 1999


12/134


12La Calade - CSTB

As with many considerations of participation in public affairs, our approach starts with ArnsteinsLadder of Citizen Participation (1971). The ladder was designed with specific reference toAmerican federal social programmes, and it describes eight levels of participation, starting withmanipulation by the authorities, and progressing to citizen control:

8. Citizen control7. Delegated power6. Partnership5. Placation4. Consultation3. Information2. Therapy1. Manipulation4

The two bottom rungs are described as non-participation, they represent a situation where theauthorities deliberately manipulate citizens, or attempt to modify attitudes and behaviour. Rungs 3 to 5represent degrees of tokenism, where there is exchange of information, but no obligation on the partof the authorities to respond actively. Included here is the one-way transmission of information

through leaflets and reports; consultation where dialogue is initiated, where feedback from thecommunity may or may not be taken on board; and placation which may involve co-opting a citizenonto an advisory board, without giving them decision making power. Degrees of citizen power aredescribed by rungs 6 to 8, where citizens have increasing levels of influence and responsibility.The concept of different levels and types of participation is useful in a number of ways. It provides astructure for thinking about what types of participation are feasible, desirable and effective in differentcircumstances. It also helps us to think about participation in a European context, where differentpolitical, cultural and legislative contexts result in a very broad spectrum of practice. Arnsteins ladderis a useful starting point from which to adapt a participation scale relevant for Europeanneighbourhood regeneration schemes. Burns et al (1994)5 propose a Ladder of CitizenEmpowerment, within the context of British local government. They raise some important issues thatwill help us to analyse the participation context in our partner countries and case studies. The first is to

consider different spheres of citizen participation, within which people might engage with and hope toinfluence the public authorities:

1. The individual sphere, access to and quality of services delivered to the individual or household

2. The sub1local sphere of the estate, neighbourhood, programme, site or facility

3. The sphere of local government administration

4. The sphere of national government (Burns et al, p. 158)

We should note that a citizen might gain considerable power within sphere 2, for example, withoutbeing able to influence policy in sphere 3, the local authority. Likewise, a citizen might be excluded

from local decision-making in spheres 2 and 3, whilst exerting some influence at level 4 through anational lobbying organisation. Participation at the neighbourhood level, in sphere 2 is the mostrelevant to our project, however we should bear in mind that many important decisions aboutneighbourhood regeneration will occur in sphere 3. Burns et al(p. 160) also break down the differentareas of decision-making to which local groups and individuals might be given access:

1. Uperational practices; issues relating to the quality and delivery of public services.

2. Expenditure decisions; relating to budgets delegated to the local level, or major capital budgets atthe local authority level.

4 Arnstein, S.R. (1971) A ladder of citizen's participation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners,

35: 216-2245 Burns, D., Hambleton, R. & Hoggett, P. (1994), The olitics of Aecentralisation, London, Macmillan


13/134


13La Calade - CSTB

3. olicy maWing; The strategic objectives of a service, facility or neighbourhood.

These areas are clearly interconnected. Citizens influence over operational and expenditure issueswill always be constrained if they have no access to strategic policy-making. As with the spheres of participation described above, groups and individuals might gain access to one area while beingexcluded from another. We might argue that the HQE2R shared diagnosis aims to involve residents in

strategic objective setting for their neighbourhood.Burns et al also raise the important point that the rungs on the ladder of participation are notequidistant. Referring to Arnsteins ladder, it may be relatively easy to climb from rung 1 to 5, even inthe absence of significant institutional change or community capacity building. To move through theupper rungs would require much more time, and both institutional change and community capacitywould be preconditions. Bearing this in mind, we propose the following scale of participation to betested at the neighbourhood level, the definitions for the terms we have chosen are set out below(starting with the bottom of the scale):

- Coercion: Residents are given no access to decision making. Information is withheld, or usedto direct behaviour according to the interests of the local authority. Equates to manipulation

and therapy in the Arnstein ladder.- Information: Information is transmitted to the recipients of a service or redevelopment to

keep them up to date with decisions. There is no dialogue and residents have no access todecision making.

- Aareness raising: Information is given to residents with the aim of helping them tounderstand the issues and objectives of the regeneration programme from the point of view ofthe local authority. In the case of a sustainable development project (e.g. recycling or energyconservation), this might include education about the purpose and relevance of the initiativethey are being asked to co-operate with. Residents do not have access to decision-making,although the presentation of good quality information is a pre-requisite of developingparticipation.

- Consultation: Residents opinions are sought to inform the decision makers, who might takethese views into consideration, but are under no obligation to do so. Typical forms ofconsultation include questionnaires and public meeting. The contribution that consultation canmake to participation is entirely dependent upon the weight given to responses by theauthorities, it can thus be very disempowering for residents. A frequent problem is thatconsultation occurs too late in the regeneration process to affect major decisions. Earlyconsultation thus has greater potential.

- Empoerment: Empowerment of individuals and groups within a neighbourhood is aprecondition of effective participation. Communities cannot take an active part in their owngovernance if they lack the skills, knowledge and organisational capacity to do so.Development in this area is often referred to as community capacity building. This point onthe scale of participation might thus be seen as a developmental one which helps communitiesto advance towards the higher levels of participation. Equally important is the institutionalchange within local authorities that is necessary to enable them to respect and respond to anexpanded governance role for neighbourhood residents.

- Co-operation: The upper portion of our participation sale is divided into three sections, whichequate with the partnership, delegated power and citizen control rungs of Arnsteinsladder. Participation at this level is characterised by the involvement of citizens in bothprocess and decision. A key principle is that the local authority should always be clear aboutthe scope and limits of a participatory process; which decisions or budgets are open fordiscussion, or can be managed by residents and which cannot.

- Partnership: residents are involved in on-going joint working, as distinct from one-off orperiodic consultation. Project development is transparent and open to resident representativesthroughout. Decisions are negotiated between partners.


14/134


14La Calade - CSTB

- Delegated poer, or joint management: Local politicians delegate a specific area ofresponsibility to residents, accepting that they will be tied by decisions taken outside of theircontrol. The participatory budget of Porto Alegre is a well-known example of this mode ofparticipation.

- Self-management: A project, service, budget or property (e.g. a social housing block or

estate) is managed directly and independently by the community.

This scale of participation will be used to help analyse the national regulatory contexts presented inthis deliverable, and the HQE2R case studies presented in other documents. Through this analysis, wewill also test the applicability of this categorisation to neighbourhood regeneration across Europe. Wewould reiterate the point that the different levels of the scale are not equidistant. Progression fromcoercion to consultation might occur relatively easily; progress through this part of the scale wouldrequire the investment of time and money on the part of the local authority, but would not necessarilyrequire significant institutional change. The achievement of empowerment and forms of co-operationrequire both institutional change and the existence of organisational and individual capacity within thecommunity.

Our ultimate goal in analysing national structures and local case studies with the aid of this scale is toprovide advice to decision makers at the local government level. We must therefore raise questionsabout how the scale might be used. Two very different possibilities present themselves. On one handwe might argue that to increase participation and redistribute power is an ethical choice, thereforeregeneration projects should always aspire to reach the top of the scale. On the other hand, the scalemight be seen as a menu, from which the level of participation could be chosen which was most suitedto a given situation. To address this question, we must ask a further question; what is participation for?Stoker (in Hambleton et al19976), analyses the range of different motivations for participation. Thefirst is the instrumentalist view; citizens will engage in a participatory process if they believe it willhelp them to defend their interests and achieve their goals. Participation thus requires a degree ofconfidence in the process and its sponsor (usually local government), and is likely to be sporadic inresponse to relevant issues. For local government, an instrumentalist view would be the use of participation to find better solutions for regeneration challenges, and to enhance the legitimacy ofdecision making. The other perspective is a participatory one; expressing a belief that democracyrequires high levels of citizen participation. Participation is seen not as a matter of instrumentalcalculation but is rather about a concern for the collective, the community of which the person is apart, (Stoker, p 164). This point of view also sees participation as having value in developing theskills and capacities of individuals and community organisations. Morrissey (20007 p.62) argues thatthe instrumentalist view is becoming outdated:

the more traditional top-down meaning of citizen participation that citizens involvement can leadto successful projects is being replaced by a bottom-up concept of participation that promotes realchange and empowerment in the communities. The goal is to redress the inequitable distribution ofresources and power that underlie poverty and distress.

Clearly, an instrumentalist view of participation would lead a local council to interpret the scale ofparticipation as a range of options, and to choose an approach according to their goals. By contrast, aparticipatory view would see participation as an end in itself and the local council would aim to climbup the scale as a way of developing a healthy local democracy. The lesson to be drawn from thesecontrasting viewpoints is perhaps that local councils should aim for the highest point on the participation scale that is possible in a given set of circumstances. A local council may wish to

6 Hambleton, R., Davis, H., Skelcher, C., Clarke, M., Taylor, M., Young, K., Rao, N., and Stoker, G. (1997),

e; erspectives on Yocal Zovernance, York, York Publishing Services.7 Morrissey, J. (2000), Indicators of citizen participation: lessons from learning teams in rural EZ/ECcommunities, Community Aevelopment Hournal, Vol 35 No.1 pp. 59-74.


15/134


15La Calade - CSTB

promote tenant involvement in the management of public housing, for example. In some countries, itmay be possible to consider transferring ownership to a tenant-controlled trust, whereas in othersnational laws may prevent this. Where a local council is considering relatively minor physicalimprovements, such as re-decorating a public building, well managed consultation might be moreappropriate and efficient than a more advanced form of participation.

This report aims at analysing the role of the population participation (residents and users) in thedifferent regulations and national programmes in regards to urban planning and urbanreneal, and suggesting some recommendations and best practices in order to improve the levelsof participation, convinced that it is a crucial issue to ensure the democracy and the sustainability inEurope.


16/134


16La Calade - CSTB

DESCRIPTION FOR EACH COUNTR

I - DENMARK

I.1 - THE LEGISLATIVE CONTEWT

In an urban political description directed to the Parliament in May 2001 by the Danish Urban andResident Ministry of the past government it was clarified that the objective of the government was tomake development of the towns present for everyone and that the residents gain an real influence onenvironment that affect their city.

Development of towns, residents and buildings shall be expanded with outset in participation from anactive citizen involvement.

In the central laws about urban regeneration rules about citizen involvement/participation are included.

The Plan Law implies that the municipalities as part of the elaboration of a municipality plan publish aplan strategy. The plan strategy can be utilised for the communication with residents, users and the

superior authorities.The Law of Urban Regeneration implies a high degree of citizen participation. In the large areas thathave been improved by urban regeneration many municipalities have obtained experiences with usingopen co-operation with the residents and others for evolving the progresses of the towns.

Moreover the international convention about the environmental rights of the citizens has also beenimplemented in the Danish Law.

I.1.1 - The plan la

The purpose of the Plan Law is to assure that the planning unites the social interests in the use of areaand contributes to protect the nature and the environment of the country, so the social development

can take place on a sustainable base in respect for living conditions for human beings and for thepreservation of animal and plant life.

Special law aims are:

1. From a planning and social economic general view an appropriate development in whole countryand in the individual counties and municipality shall take place.

2. Valuable buildings, urban environments and landscapes shall be created and maintained.

3. The open coasts shall continuously constitute an important nature and landscape resource.

4. The pollution of air, water and earth and noise inconveniences shall be prevented.

5. Participation: The general public shall as much as possible be involved in the planning.

The Plan Law divides the responsibility for the planning in Denmark between the EnvironmentMinistry, The Greater Copenhagen Development Council, county councils and municipalitycommittees. The current Plan Law was activated in 1992 but is based on planning experiences and lawfrom several decades ago.

In the period from 2nd World War till 1980ies the cities and new built area have grown considerably.In the same period of time the Danish planning tradition has developed strongly as well. Till themiddle of the 70ies the town growth was regulated by town development committee, which in somespecial town development planes lay out zones for new town growth. Municipalities developed adistribution planning for the cities and several places in the country region planes were createdvoluntarily.


17/134


17La Calade - CSTB

The number of municipalities and counties were reduced significant at the municipal dividing reformin 1970. An important part of the activities of the public sector are placed under the responsibilities ofthe municipal committee and county council. Because of the municipal reform the Parliament couldaccept new plan laws in the beginning of 1970ies that established the current plan system. The PlanLaw from 1992 is a compilation and modernisation of the laws from 1970.

The ground rules of sustainable development with outset in preservation and development of the localenvironmental qualities has replaced the more growth oriented planning of earlier decades.

K%,$&4&G%$&-'+G,-4*0",*#+

As a governing principle the citizens shall be involved in the planning process, before a new plan isapproved. Therefore a new plan proposal and its presumptions have to be publicized before it may beapproved by the authority. At least 8 weeks must be allowed for citizens to comment, protest or bringin new ideas. If the proposal involves larger changes in region- or municipal plans a debate has to beheld before the authorities are allowed to develop a concrete proposal. By changes in the regionalplans the main questions has to be described and for the municipal plans an overall strategy has to bepresented. The rule of at least 8 weeks for debate, protests etc. also applies for new local area plans orchanges to existing plans. Also after the final approval of a local area plan by the town council it has

to publicized. This happens trough public websites, presentation at the local library and a possibility toread the plan at the town hall.

It is emphasised that the requirements for participation in the plan law are minimum requirements.

I.1.2 - The la of environment protection

The law (most recently update in 2001) will participate in protection of nature and environment so thecivilisation development can take place on a sustainable base in respect of living conditions for humanbeings and for preservation of animal and vegetarian life.

The purpose of the law is:1. To prevent and oppose the pollution of air, water, earth and subsoil and vibration and noise

disadvantages.

2. To provide hygienic grounded rules that are significant for the environment and for human beings.

3. To restrain use and spill of raw materials and other resources.

4. To promote use of unpolluted technology.

5. To promote reuse and restrain problems in connection with waste removal.

The law includes:

1. All corporations that by sending out solid, liquid or gas materials, by sending out micro organismsthat can damage environment and health, or by producing waste that can lead to pollution of air,water, earth and subsoil.

2. Vibration and noise.

3. Products or goods that in connection with preparation, use, transportation or removal can lead topollution.

4. Means of transport and other mobile plants that can lead to pollution.

5. Draft animals, vermin and other relations that can lead to hygienic difficulties or significantdisadvantages for the surroundings.

The law includes as well corporation that concerns risk taking processes and storing of materials with

dangerous properties so that stoppages or accidents can lead to near danger for pollution as mentionedabove.


18/134


18La Calade - CSTB

K%,$&4&G%$&-'+G,-4*0",*#+

The law requires publicizing of decisions with 4 weeks to file complaints.

I.1.3 - The la of open administration

The law of open administration (of 1985) covers all public authorities: governmental, county,municipal and besides energy supply companies, especially:

1. Electricity providing companies that produce, transmit or distribute electricity of 500 volt orabove.

2. Societies, institutions, unions etc, that run natural gas supply company.

3. Collective heat supply plants that are included in the law of heat supply and have a capacity ofmore than 10 MJ/s.

K%,$&4&G%$&-'+G,-4*0",*#+

The participation aspect of this law is that according to this law anyone can demand to be informed

about and allowed to read documents that are entered to or established by an administration authorityas a part of administrative case work in connection with work carried out by the authority.

I.1.4 - The urban regeneration la

According to this law it is expected from the municipal council to participate in:

1. Creating properly functioning city areas and improvement of general living conditions by a overallcontribution directed to residences, buildings, free spaces, residence social and area relatedconditions.

2. Creating properly functioning residences and residence areas by repairing and recreatingresidences that are seriously worn out, establishment of free spaces and fitting in of new build.

3. Obviating seriously worn out residences.

4. Promoting ecological, resource and environment related and proper architectural solutions in theurban regeneration.

5. Participation: Including residents and owners in planning and implementation.

6. Giving the municipals an opportunity for goal oriented urban regeneration effort by choosing themost appropriate decision type and support form.

K%,$&4&G%$&-'+G,-4*0",*#+

The general plan law requirements to participation apply. However, a special chapter on holisticneighbourhood regeneration has been added to urban regeneration law (in 1998) with higher ambitionsfor participation of the citizens. The formal requirement of 8 weeks to present complaint, comments orsuggestions are still the legal requirement, but in many cases experiments with different ways toimprove the participation has been carried out. Recently, some of these experiments have beenevaluated and the results presented, see ref. 4. The main conclusions from this report are brieflypresented:

Urban development is categorised according to the nature of the development, that is: (1)improvement of existing situation or (2) reshaping and urban growth and two phases: (A) theconcept/idea development phase and (B) actual action/project development phase. Generally the mostpositive experiences has been found to be with participation in the concept/idea development phase forurban improvement project. Partnership methods seem to be more suitable for urban reshaping andgrowth areas.


19/134


19La Calade - CSTB

I.2 -LOCAL AGENDA 21

Denmarks local authorities, which include 14 counties and 275 municipalities, have a decisive role inlocal Agenda 21. They have initiated a partnership with the general public to carry out what waspledged at the Earth Summit. All Denmarks counties and 70% of the municipalities are working on

various projects under the auspices of local Agenda 21, and the ideas are spreading like wildfire. Themunicipality or county often functions as a sparring partner, adviser and co-ordinator for the citizens,organisations and companies that initiate local Agenda 21 activities. Many municipalities have createdan environmental centre or an Agenda 21 centre or employed an Agenda 21 co-ordinator, often underthe division of technical services in the municipality or county. People can contact their municipalityor county if they have ideas for local Agenda 21 initiatives.

The Ministry of Environment and Energy, the National Association of Local Authorities in Denmarkand the Association of County Councils in Denmark have been partners since 1994 in a joint campaignon local Agenda 21. They have held courses and conferences and published reports, brochures andother written material. In addition, they issue a newsletter about six times per year.

Some examples from best practises concerning local Agenda 21 from different municipals are broughtup below.

I.2.1 - Albertslund

The municipality of Albertslund is very popular for their local Agenda 21 planes. This includesespecially citizen participation.

Agenda Centre Albertslund (ACA) is a local environment centre in Albertslund Municipality with 5-6regular workers. The most important job for ACA is to support the environment work in the manydifferent resident areas. This is partly done by forming local Agenda plans.

ACA has installed solar cells and do consultant works, organise courses, urban ecological tours andmake presentations in Denmark and abroad.

There is a general wish in the resident areas to do something about their waste handling and ACA willtherefore employ waste workers.

ACA has been participating in the following work:

Hiring waste workers

Establishing a recycle yard and a recycle shop

Offering courses for property employee and volunteers at the recycle yards

Offering the resident areas guidance to use of environment friendly built materials in connectionwith renovation

I.2.2 - Stevns

In summer 1999 municipal of Stevns decided to assure proper participation by including more thanever before residents in future planning. The municipal wanted to make a municipal plan, lan $P,where the development of the municipal plan should be integrated with an Agenda 21 plan.

The municipal wanted this Plan 21 process to be transferred from technical administration to theresidents which should take place through an arrangement of a [uture \orWshop. The municipallaunched at the beginning this process as a public hearing. Later on the public hearing was suited tothe Future Workshop. The municipal called this the Stevns-model for participation.

65 of Stevns residents listed themselves at the Future Workshop but only 50 of them were selected.CASA was responsible for selection of participants and for opinion poll of attitude and engagement ofthe participants before and after the arrangement of the Future Workshop.

The Future Workshop was arranged on a course premises from Friday to Saturday. The main themewasAevelopment of the [uture in Stevns but beside that there were no themes decided in advance. The


20/134


20La Calade - CSTB

participants chose them themselves and it happened without the interruption from politicians andexperts. Only the mayor was allowed to make a short welcome speech.

On this weekend the 50 residents managed their eight self chosen themes that covered a very widefield. Some of the themes were:

Securing the tax foundation.

The strengthening of local responsibility and initiative. Transportation.

Residence and business politics.

Development of a green profile for the municipal.

The test shall be marked as being a success. The report shows among other things the great joy theparticipants showed for the idea about Future Workshop. Many of the participants indicated the valueof the new network that was created at the workshop. The network will in the future lead to thatdifferent activities in the future will be bounded together in a new way. At the same time the FutureWorkshop has been effective in increasing the interests of the participants for local questions. Even

those who in the beginning had shown scepticism have joined new work groups.Hereby the municipality has obtained what it wished for and found a method for citizen participationin the planing process.

According to the CASA report the disadvantage of the Stevns model is that there is no representativesection of the population in the Future Workshop.

On the other side this selection means that the notified persons have energy for the generaldevelopment in Stevns.

I.2.3 - Haslev

In the municipality of Haslev participation is adopted as an important issue as the co-operationbetween residents and municipality is highly developed. The town council set aside each year 50.000dkr for an Agenda 21 pool which is administrated by the Agenda 21 group chosen by the residents.

The board contains of a volunteer, unpaid and non political circle. The object of the board is to workfor implementation of the goals set on the RIO Conference 1992 for local Agenda 21 operation.

The municipality has also hired a worker who works with Agenda 21 in the municipality and inspiresthe residents to work with Agenda 21. The Agenda 21 worker has prepared Green Accounts for theinstitutions of the municipality and participated in making traffic and environment action planes in themunicipality.

Moreover there have been established The Nutritional Group under Agenda 21 in Haslev. The groupsupports the fact that Haslev municipality is making a food politic. In the suggestion it is suggested to

buy ecological products and that the goods are produced locally.Further more Vegetable Box has been initiated that weekly brings out ecological fruits andvegetables to houses.

I.2.4 - Hillerd

The municipality of Hillerd started in 1996 working with Agenda 21. The municipality of Hillerdhas during all the years worked with Agenda 21 in relation to the people and the companies of themunicipality and Agenda 21 internally in the municipality. During the past years the work basicallyhas been placed internally in relation to the local authority organisation and the many institutions of

the municipality. The reason why the Agenda 21 work basically has been placed internally is thatHillerd municipality want to demonstrate themselves as a good example.


21/134


21La Calade - CSTB

Since 1996 several Agenda 21 projects have been accomplished. E.G. there environment and bicyclecampaigns, support to private initiatives and participation in environment forum for companies.Internally in the municipality there have been a lot of work with environment management and a greatenvironment project named Green Institution has been started.

All these projects have on their own each way participated in promoting a sustainable development in

Hillerd Municipality.In June 1996 the Hillerd city council decided to work actively with Agenda 21 and the first projectswere started.

In the past years Agenda 21 work has resolved:

Support to those citizen groups that want to participate and work with Agenda 21 projects

A project about ecological food in the local authority institutions

More projects about the introduction of environment management in local authority institutionsand departments

Working in the environment conditions in political decisions

Adoption of a green purchase policy

Introduction of green account for Hillerd Municipality Several citizen oriented campaigns about among others traffic and pesticides

Activities for business community e.g. through Frederiksborg Environment Forum

And much more

In 1999 the city council decided for a superior environment policy for whole municipality. At thesame time the city council decided for an environment plan where concrete goals have been set out forthe environment work in the municipality till year 2003.

I.3 - NATIONAL AND LOCAL PROGRAMMES

Denmark has a long tradition of advanced work on environment and development, and Denmark hasachieved much in carrying out Agenda 21.

The Municipality of Albertslund was one of the first in Denmark that opened an Agenda 21 centre,and the Municipality has made substantial progress in reducing resource consumption and negativeenvironmental effects. For example, all municipal divisions and institutions have preparedenvironmental action plans, and all child care centres serve organic food. The Municipality uses nopesticides, and many businesses meet and exchange ideas in the Albertslund Environmental Forum forTrade and Industry.

In the Municipality of Slagelse, a Green Family movement co-operated with the Municipality to startan organic supermarket.

The Ikast Environmental Council was created as a network for associations, businesses, institutionsand individuals involved in and participating environmental work in Ikast. Similar to other areas ofDenmark, the Council has employed an environmental guide to promote activities.

The Municipalities of Vejle, Kolding, Horsens, Fredericia and Middelfart, Vejle County and 200 businesses co-operate in the Green Network on improving the environmental performance of businesses. Work is focused on each individual business and on creating networks related to theenvironment. The Green Network has helped to initiate the Environmental Forum Denmark, a nation-wide network of 50 local environmental networks.

Storstrm County and agricultural organisations co-operate in reducing the leaching of nutrients and

pesticides, tending natural areas and protecting the wetlands around the Tubk River. All 150 farmersin the area are being offered consultation and instruction in environmental and resource management.


22/134


22La Calade - CSTB

Many other municipalities and counties are taking initiatives. For active participation networks arebeing created between public authorities, organisations, businesses and grassroots associations

These are some of the effects of local Agenda 21 in Denmark. The United Nations will becomprehensively reviewing Agenda 21 implementation in 2002.

The Environmental Protection Agency campaign about the environmental rights of thecitizensIn 1995 the European environment ministers met in a Pan-European Environment Minister Conferencenamed Environment for Europe in Sofia and decided some direction lines for environmental rightsfor the citizens.

As follow-up on Sofia Conference a workgroup was decided that was able to prepare a convention ofenvironmental rights of the citizens, which was a judicial binding agreement between the membercountries from Europe and North America.

The superior goal with the convention is to assure the rights of the citizens for participation onenvironmental area. The convention covers countries from Atlantic Ocean in west to Central Asia inEast.

Three main areas is covered by the convention:1. Access to information

2. Access to participate in decisions

3. Access to complain and get decisions proved by the law-courts

The convention was signed by representatives of the countries by the fourth Environment MinisterConference held in Aarhus the 23rd 25th June 1998 where more than 50 environment ministers fromall over Europe participated. The convention came into force when 16 countries had ratified, whichhappened in October 2001.

The Environment Ministry tried in autumn 2001 to initiate two experiments about citizen participation

in environment policy, the collecting of used batteries and efforts to avoid dangerous materials ingeneral. Hereby the Environment Ministry obtained concrete suggestions to how the future collectionof batteries can take place easiest possible. Moreover the plan of abolishing the environment damagingmaterials before 2020 was supported by several people.

The background for the two projects of the Environment Ministry was the Aarhus Convention aboutthe citizens environmental rights and a general wish for dialogue with the world about environmentaldecisions.

Both projects shows that there is great engagement from the citizens if their input is taken seriously.

I.4 - SNTHESIS ITH RESPECT TO THE 21 SD TARGETS

With respect to the 21 SD targets defined in the HQER project most emphasis has been on theenvironmental issues 1-4 and 6 of To preserve and valorise Heritage, and on To improveEnvironmental Quality, especially to improve air quality - target 10 and to reduce noise pollution target 11, and of course also an the emphasis has been on the social aspects, target 20-21 of Toreinforce Social Life. The general aim of the Urban Regeneration Law covers the targets 16-19 of toimprove the Integration.


23/134


23La Calade - CSTB

I. 5 - RECOMMENDATIONS

From the proceeding chapters it appears that the environmental legislation, the plan law and the lawwith respect to the implementation of Agenda 21 in Denmark and the national and local programmesall support the principle of participation. On the basis participation has been an element in many

planning processes and urban renovation projects over the past decade. The experience shows that inreality participation in planning processes has been rather limited, whereas it has been quite significantin many urban renewal projects. One problem that has been identified is that there is a risk in the urbanrenewal processes that the important decisions are taken in closed fora, or by a few active citizens.Another way of stating this problem is that it is difficult to engage the weaker citizens.

As many experiences are gathered in the many different urban renewal project it could be very usefulto initiate a collection of these experiences followed by an evaluation with respect to the efficiency ofthe different methods and tools used to engage the citizens in participating in the projects. The resultwill then be a guideline with a set of evaluated tools to be used in future projects.

One particular problem that could need additional attention is the decision processes when a

neighbourhood is above a certain size. For those it can be difficult to develop a specificneighbourhood identity. Work to develop democratic decision processes for larger, maybe evencomplex (with many different interest groups) neighbourhoods could be initiated.

LITERATURE AND FURTHER INFORMATION1. Planloven i praksis, Miljministeriet, 2002.

2. Agger, A. et al., Borgerdeltagelse og inddragelse i byomdannelsen, SBI-Meddelelese no. 126,2000.

3. Larsen, J.N., Borgerdeltagelse i kvarterlft, By- og Byg Dokumentation 008, 2001.

4. Byudvikling i 8 kommuner partnerskaber og borgerinddragelse, Erhvervs- og Boligstyrelsen,

2003.

Forfurther information, please contact:

!"Ministry of Environment and EnergySpatial Planning DepartmentHjbro Plads 4, DK-1200 Copenhagen K, DenmarkTelephone +45 33 92 76 00, Telefax +45 33 32 22 27E-mail [email protected]

!"National Association of Local Authorities in DenmarkDepartment of Technical and Environmental ServicesGyldenlvesgade 11, DK-1600 Copenhagen KTelephone +45 33 70 33 70, Telefax +45 33 70 30 60www.kl.dk

!"Association of County Councils in DenmarkDampfrgevej 22, Postbox 2593, DK-2100 Copenhagen Telephone +45 35 12 27 88


24/134


24La Calade - CSTB

II - FRANCE

II.1 - THE LEGISLATIVE CONTEWT

How do current laws favour the participation of inhabitants and how does this participation operate ?

II.1.1 - The ouchardeau La (12th uly 1983)

+ IILDLDLD+M+C*#4,&G$&-'+

The Bouchardeau8 law is relative to the democratisation of the public enquiries and to theprotection of the environment.

It stipulates that the realisation of developments and orks operated by public or private peoplemust be preceded by a public enquiry when, because of their nature, their consistence or the characterof the areas in question, these operations are susceptible of affecting the environment. Thethresholds and the technical criteria defining these questions can be modulated in order to take into

account the sensitivity of the surrounding environment and the areas benefiting, in the name of theenvironment, from a legislative or statutory protection.

+ IILDLDL


25/134


25La Calade - CSTB

II.1.2 - The arnier La (2nd

February 1995)

+ IILDL


26/134


26La Calade - CSTB

mutual trust must be consolidated all along the operation by effective proves of respect of their givenword by each side.10On the other hand, if issues with the project appear in the debate, the conclusion often leads tothrowing the ball back to the government, then in charge of realising new studies (Nice Harbours casefor instance11)Finally, this type of participation is reduced to the range and duration of a given project. It is aninteresting process but a punctual one and therefore not really implying the inhabitants in the strictlyspoken city policies.

+ IILDL


27/134


27La Calade - CSTB

+ IILDLAL


28/134


28La Calade - CSTB

chosen outside the agglomeration); of active members recruited by an application call of allvolunteers (associations and citizens); of a President (President of Lyon urban Community), of adirecting committee (twenty people, of whom ten are elected amongst the members of right and theother ten amongst the active members); and of a technical committee (competent technicians broughtforward by the members of right).

The Council is not formed once and for all. The mandate is of six years, non-renewable. It holds tomeetings per year (choice of work programme and report on achieved work). Between thesemeetings, it is organised in orking groups (at the start of the year at least one per strategic item ofthe conurbation project). It is animated by the prospective mission and agglomeration strategy. Aorking budget is allocated every year and managed by this same mission.

II.1.4 - The Chevenement La (12th

uly 1999)

+ IILDL9LD+M+C*#4,&G$&-'+

The Chevenement17 Law is relative to the reinforcement and the simplification of inter-

municipality co-operation; it produces the tools in terms of municipal organisation and reinforcesterritorial solidarity.

The major dispositions are made clear in this law : initiating to communal groupings in the form ofAgglomeration Communities, Urban Communities and Communal Communities and encouraging aunique fiscal policy as for the Professional Tax.

+ IILDL9L


29/134


29La Calade - CSTB

Hence, the S.R.U.19 law introduces the Urbanism Local Plan (P.L.U.), which replaces the Land UsePlan (P.O.S.), and the Territorial Coherence Scheme (S.Co.T.), which replaces the DirectingScheme for Urban Improvement (S.D.) :

- The S.Co.T. produce strategic planningdocument which, at the conurbation level, will allowto set into place sector policies as for urbanism, housing, moving around and commercial

equipments. They must be put in place to the scale of several municipalities and take intoaccount perimeters where municipalities are grouped together and as well as Pays andconurbations and already existing planning documents. They precise the development andurbanism objectives, taking into account housing, leisure, services and infrastructurespolicies. They define the principal orientations in terms of moving around, fix the objectivesof coverage by collective transports and include a section on business and services. Thesedocuments aim to federate the Housing Local Programmes (P.L.H.), the Urban MovingAround Plans (P.D.U.) and the commercial development schemes. They must also containappreciations about the foreseeable incidences of these orientations on the environment.

- The P.L.U. is designed to ensure:

the equilibrium between urban renewal, a mastering of the urban development andrural space development on one hand and the preservation of spaces allocated to theactivities of agriculture and pertaining to forests and the protection of natural spacesand of landscapes on the other hand, in accordance with the sustainabledevelopment objectives;

The diversity of urban functions and social mixing in urban and rural housing;

An economical and balanced utilisation of natural, urban, suburban and ruralspaces, the management of necessary movements and road traffic and thepreservation of environmental quality.

+ IILDL>L


30/134


30La Calade - CSTB

For the elaboration of its P.L.U., the city of ISSY-LES-MOULINEAUX (Hauts-de-Seine) has forinstance put in place previous participation, where the population is associated to the project throughan evolving exhibition, followed by two successions of meetings in all eight neighbourhoods and withthe help of the District Committees, through a process of feeling feedback on the diagnosticfollowed by the progressive adhesion to the propositions. In addition, other types of consultationsare also led: Economical and Social Council, citizen Panel of internet users 22

+ IILDL>LA+M+;2*+)&H&$#+

These new participation methods are still largely to be invented, especially so since the law does notdefine them at all, the principal reason for this being that participation must be adapted to the project.Given that this procedure did not exist within either the P.O.S. or the S.D., it still remains hesitatingand little developed; it is suitable today to wait a little more before critically judging concertingpractice in the context of the S.R.U. law.

It must be emphasised that the term to associate, used in the wording concerning the designation ofthe people who can participate to the elaboration of urbanism documents expresses an implication

going from the association/information to the association/active participation via theassociation/consultation It seems that the obligation of an active participation is limited to theStates services. Indeed, the law foresees that other public people or consular organisations are to beconsulted at their request (a slight difference!). The constitution of a working group is then lessrestrictive and the problems linked to quorums disappear

In the absence of legislative and statutory dispositions defining precisely the participationmodalities, the information on the project/remarks of the public scheme seems so far to besufficient. As an example, a public exhibition which has enabled to collect observations taken intoaccount was estimated satisfactory.23

II.1.6 - The proximity democracy la (27th February 2002)+ IILDLFLD+M+C*#4,&G$&-'+

The Law relative to proximity democracy24 aims at :

- the larger association of citizens to local decisions,

- the reinforcement of locally elected peoples rights (namely these of opposition),

- the easier access to local mandates (namely by a better articulation of these mandates with professional activity, a reinforcement of the training of locally elected people and theimprovement of conditions of carrying out the mandates),

- the assurance of transparency of the process of elaboration of the development andequipments projects as well as the participation of the public to the elaboration of greaterprojects.

The first title is relative to the creation of District Councils, to the extension of missions ofconsultative commissions of local public services, to the reinforcement of the rights of deliberatingassemblies councillors and to the general information of the inhabitants as well as to the improvementof duty exercising conditions for the members of the economical and regional social Councils.

As for the fourth title, it particularly concerns the participation of the public to the elaboration of thegreater projects.

22Aes lans Yocaux dD^rbanisme aux gendas $P locaux, Cahier des charges, Issy-les-Moulineaux, AgenceRgionale de lEnvironnement et des Nouvelles Energies - Ile de France.23

Rencontre ationales de la Communication, Salon de lAveyron, Direction Gnrale de lUrbanisme, delHabitat et de la Construction, 26 November 200124 Loi n 2002-276.


31/134


32/134


33/134


33La Calade - CSTB

II.2 - LOCAL AGENDAS 21

II.2.1 - Presentation

Four examples of Local Agendas 21 of three municipalities of medium size (from 16 000 to 33 000

inhabitants) and of one municipality of large size (of about 200 000 inhabitants) are presented in thisreport and were chosen for the aspects linked to inhabitants participation, at different stages of theLocal Agenda 21: AUTUN, OUGUENAIS, ROMANS-SUR-ISERE and LILLE. These LocalAgendas 21 were inspired by the Agenda 21 of the Rio Conference (1992), giving priority toinformation, participation and democratic initiative.

II.2.2 The example of Autun (Sane-et-Loire)

+ IIL


34/134


35/134


35La Calade - CSTB

adopted, or not, by the Follow-Up Committee. If these projects are adopted, they will be brought upagain in the Workshops 21 to be fulfilled in practice.

Indicators will be defined and measured by participants in the Workshops, in order to evaluate thestate of progress of actions. A reading grid should also be devised in order to define the Agenda 21project for the Community of Towns (Communaut de Communes).

II.2.3 - The example of ouguenais (Loire-Atlantique)

+ IIL


36/134


36La Calade - CSTB

+ IIL


37/134

Participation by residents and users: legal and regulatory context, and recommendati

gui town planning & participation by users & residents _regulation & recommendations _hqe2r2003

Documents