Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Payam Tabrizian I H02N1a I Strategic Spatial Planning I Final assignment Department of Architecture, Urbanism and Planning Katholieke Univeristeit Leuven I Spring 2011
ABSTRACT Realization of an International Development Plan (IDP) by the regional government at the end of 2007 reveals a significant shift in urban policies in Brussels. Highlight- ing ten Strategic sites in the city, IDP marks essentially the formalization of a relatively new framework for Brussels aiming development of significant portions of the regional territory for the purposes of private real estate developments of a speculative character. Conceived to operate as strategic levers of marketing and urban revitalization IDP seems to be transparent in regarding its impact on the social fabric particularly on the low-income central neighborhoods of the city.This research aims to categorize IDP as a model for a project based planning which been realized to establish the exceptionality measures in planning and policy procedures of the city and finally, it encourage rehabilitation of citys historic centres intensify- ing the social and spatial divisions. In the first part, the paper elaborates a theoreti- cal framework based on previous case studies as a lens to inspect relationships between local and global dimensions of IDP as a large scale urban development project. This as an analytical method will be employed in the second part to analyze the political, social and institutional dynamics and socio-economic processes of polarization/exclusion in different spatial scales. Keywords: International development plan, Brussels, Large scale urban development projects, Social exclusion and inequalities, Entrepreneurial policy, city branding
pieces of vacant land, a qualified and multilingual workforce, Enhanced architectural heritage, etc.). The organization Enhanced architectural heritage, etc.). The organization of events with wide media coverage or the realization of large-scale real estate projects (e.g. museums, stadiums, blocks of flats or office towers, stations or air terminals, etc., adorned with the signature of a worldfamous architect) are recurring characteristics of such new urban policies.
International Development Plan for Brussels (IDP), launched in 2007 by the Brussels Government pushed such new type of urban political action into the foreground forming new priorities in political, social and economic order of the city. Through introduction of the IDP, Brussels inscribed within a rationale based on interurban competition, and narrowed its ambitions down to consoli- dating its place within international business ranking. (Van criekingen, 2008) Today, most studies comparing the competitive position of European cities place Brussels between the 4th and the 6th position. The maintenance of this situation is not guaranteed. (Feuille de route, p.1) The primary objective of the regional government within the framework of IDP is expanding the regions tax basis through Valorization of large territories within the Brussels region (BCR) and implementation of large-scale supra- regional facilities (such as a shopping mall, a football stadium, exhibition spaces, congress and concert halls). Focusing on certain areas within of the territory designated as strategic sites, these developments are thought to be conduct- ed by new public-private coalitions, and framed by ad hoc planning procedures (e.g. speeding-up the procedures for granting building permits) (Van Criek- ingen, 2009). The primary plot of the Plan for Interna- tional Development of Brussels (PWC- report) presented in August 2007 and its approved successor Fuille the route (the road map) released in January 2008.The PWC report has been elaborated by a
worldwide known consultancy office Price Water Coopers, under the authori- ty and launched by the Brussels Govern- ment. The first chapter of the plan is an evaluation of Brussels international position. Through benchmarking analysis and interviews with 55 experts, this international role is assessed by indica- tors referring to its international busi- ness-climate. Outlining 5 directive guidelines, the IDP states that a future vision should be based upon the SWOT- analysis that resulted from the previous benchmarking analysis and expert- interviews. The second chapter puts forth a city-marketing strategy for achieving this vision. In the third chapter, the report highlights ten strategic areas for the future of Brussels (Feuille de route, p.6) announcing several major projects, including a conference centre (3,000 seats), an exhibition hall (15,000 m2), a concert hall (15,000 seats), a stadium which would meet FIFA standards (in the framework of a possible Belgian-Dutch bid for the 2018 football World Cup) and a new shopping centre (60,000 m2). New office areas and housing are also an- nounced in most of these areas (figure 1). This concerns large sites which are uninhabited or emptied of their inhabit- ants (e.g. West station and Tour and taxis), whose (re) development cannot take place by simply accumulating individual building renovation opera- tions, but requires the injection of a large amount of capital. Together, these ten areas represent a combined surface area of about 7% of the regional territory, and cover the main part of the Regions last remaining land stock (Van Criekingen, 2008,Vermeulen, 2009). The budget allocated for development of strategic areas of the IDP was 130 million as a
result
of
a
cooperation
agreement
between
the
Region
and
the
federal
state
(Beliris,
amendment
n10,
period
2008- 2010).
A
closer
inspection
of
IDP
scheme
reveals
its
fundamental
orientation
in
favour
of
marketing
real
estate
stakes
and
inter- ests.
Perhaps,
initiation
of
the
IDP
can
associated
with
the
current
situation
of
the
Brussels
real
estate
market.
For
instance
the
renewal
of
existing
vacant
and
relict
offices 2
can
be
regarded
as
important
stake,
in
particular
in
the
city
centre
(administrative
quarter,
European
quarter,
e.g.).
This
paper
argues
that
IDP,
cannot
be
simply
perceived
as
another
comprehensive
plan
for
the
city,
it
marks
a
significant
transition
toward
new
forms
of
governance
(economic
and
urban)
and
establishes
a
new
relationship
between
the
strategic
projects
and
political,
social
and
economic
power
relation
in
the
city
(Moulaert
et
al,
2003).
2
THEORITICAL
FRAMEWORK:
Neo- liberal
urban
policy
and
bypassing
strategies
As
a
result
a
comparison
between
13
large-scale
development
projects
in
Europe
(URSPIC-research),
Moulaert,
Swyngedouw
and
Rodriguez
(2003)
developed
an
model
to
analyze
the
2
In
this
respect,
the
office
market
shows
obvious
signs
of
oversupply,
with
almost
2
million
m2
of
unoccupied
space
in
the
regional
territory
(general
vacancy
rate:
18%),
of
which
only
just
over
one
third
is
available
on
the
market.
The
remainder
(i.e.
the
empty
offices
which
are
not
on
the
market)
13
doubled
between
1994
and
2008
(i.e.
from
600,000
to
1.2
million
m2),
whereas
the
total
stock
of
offices
only
increased
by
37%
during
the
same
period
(AATL
and
SDRB,
2009).
dynamics between global economic dynamics and transforming urban policies and changing political priorities between most North-American and Western European cities (Moulaert et al,2003).There they identify contributing elements of the contemporary shift from the former classic (modernist/fordist) comprehensive plan and their statutory legislation to the post-fordist emblematic project.The post-fordist project, they argue, relies on marketing purposes, benefits from flexibility, targeted actions and symbolic capacity to mobilize economic growth and mutates segments of the city into emblems of restructuring, improvement and economic suc- cess(Vermeulen,2009). The main objective of these projects is to obtain higher social and economic returns and to revalue prime urban land, and to re- enforce competitive positions of the economy of a city. (Swyngedouw et al, 2002) Such Large scale urban development projects (UDPs), like museums, sport stadium, Concert venues etc., are often represented as emblematic projects in a spatially targeted area, Intimately in touch with real estate development and realized through privatization of public funds, but often executed by local authorities. The main argument of URSPIC-research is that: Large-scale UDPs have increasingly been used as a vehicle to establish exceptionality measures in planning and policy proce- dures(Swyngedouw et al, 2002). It is argued there that exceptionality is a fundamental component of the the new urban policy a project-based urbanism, as noted above. UDPs normally, replace existing planning instruments and
legislation. Furthermore, the primary conception, design and implementation of them, is often situated at the margins of formal planning structures. Decision- making therefore, is equally positioned in the area of non-democratic decision- making, bypassing statutory procedures (Swyngedouw et al, 2002, Van criekengen, 2008, Vermeulen, 2009,). Shifting political priorities and govern- mental justifications range from scale issues, the emblematic character of the operation, timing procedures, the need for more flexibility, efficiency criteria, etc. On the practical level, these measures of exceptionality, encompass the following by-passing strategies:(a) Freezing of conventional planning tools, (b) Bypass- ing of statutory regulations and institu- tional bodies, (c) Changes in national or regional regulations and (d) emergence of project agencies with special or excep- tional powers of intervention in decision- making (Swyngedouw et al, 2002, Moulaert et al, 2003). These results as an analytical model will serve this research to understand mentality of the transformation process, the actors, agents and institutions involved in IDP from the concept devel- opment to valorization of the plan. This would allow the paper to achieve its main premise which is examining the IDP effectiveness in addressing /intensifying the process of social polarization and exclusion in Brussels. Two official documents, The basic scheme (PWC, 2007) and the revision (Fuille the route, 2008) will be central as sources in this paper.
3 DYNAMICS OF IDP/ BYPASSING STRATEGIES AND PATTERNS OF EXCLUSION 3.1The new urban / economic policies The UDPs reflect and embody a series of processes that are associated with chang- ing spatial scales of governance; these changes, in turn, reflect a shifting geome- try of power in the governing of urbaniza- tion. (Swyngedouw et al, 2002) The first and the most important aspect of IDP as a statutory reform is its significant contradiction with the planning models that has been employed during the post- war period of strong economic growth in Brussels. Introduced as a vehicle for steering the regional policies in the years to come (Feuille de route, p.1), IDP adopts an entirely different approach from the former comprehensive plan of Brussels Regional Development Plan (RDP) and renders a significant change in political priorities of the government. IDP can be conceived as a shift towards a full- fledged entrepreneurial policy by attracting international investors, foreign visitors, tourists or conference delegates, and whatever extra-local clienteles of consumers and residents by opening up vacant lands and brownfield sites to speculative real estate development projects. Contrary to the revitalization Strategies of RDP, which is based on the vision of the local middle classes as the true city saviours and mediums of Social mix (Van Criekingen, 2008). IDP recon- ceptualise social mix (as well as multi- culturalism) as a vehicle for marketing towards extra-local clients (investors, tourists and).
These
marketing
policies
aiming
to
establish
exceptionality
measures
addressing
the
well-to-do
customers
mark
a
noticeable
increase
in
polarization
and
inequalities
between
social
groups
(OECD
2008)
and
territories
(Marcuse
&
van
Kempen
2000,
Moulaert
et
al.
2003,
Berry-Chikhaoui
et
al.
2007,Van
Criek- ingen,
2008).
Regarding
the
liberal
character
of
renting
regulations
in
Brussels3
and
since
many
of
the
designat- ed
strategic
sites
are
located
in
the
low- income 4
neighbourhoods
(Molebeenk,
Anderlecht,
Schaerbeek
etc.),
gentrifica- tion
and
spatial
reorganization
of
the
vulnerable
social
fabric
will
be
a
inevita- ble
consequence
of
this
process.
For
instance
increased
impoverishment
of
certain
local
populations
(e.g.
due
to
the
increased
rent
within
the
household
budget)
or
the
eviction
of
certain
inhabit- ants
of
revitalized
neighborhoods
(Van
Criekingen
2006).
In
this
regard
IDP
seems
be
completely
ignorant
in
regard- ing
the
social
externalities
of
gentrifica- tion
policy.
It
even
encourages
forcing
the
working
classes
out
of
inner
city
neigh- bourhoods.
"
[The
plan
advocates
to]
develop
a
city
marketing
strategy
at
the
neighborhood
scale
notably
for
the
most
impoverished
neighborhoods,
in
order
to
increase
their
value
as
well
as
to
prevent
their
negative
3
i.e.
very
little
social
housing,
an
ineffectiveness
of
the rules for limiting an increase in rent between two leases, and housing benefits limited to very small segments of the total amount of housing available for rent. 4 These neighborhoods accommodate a relatively high percentage of unemployed inhabitants with average of 45 percent unemployment of young . 37 percent of the earn inhabitants below the the average income of Brussels .
image from transcending their boundaries and harming the international image of the city ("Bronx" effect) Social mix must be a main thread of urban development in Brussels. One must enforce both outgoing flows from priority zones [i.e. inner working-class neighborhoods] in order to avoid the concentration of poverty in social ghettos, and ingoing flows into these zones by stimulating the installation of middle class populations" (Price Water house Coppers, 2007: 72-3 Translation Van Criekingen, 2009). Another remark on IDP urban vision can regard its downscaling the urban vision from regional development to project base local regeneration. Locating 10 development zones selected in the IDP, the spatial process of polycentric devel- opment is visible. This might indicate segmentation of labour market and further decentralization of current socio- economic pattern of the Brussels region. The choice of such a rather de-centralized development increases polarization within urban policy itself. While urban actors choose to continue with the development of neighbourhood contracts (area-based local interventions to improve social cohesion and adaptation of the labour market, a noticeable concern will be the increasing separation between remaining local communities and the incoming workforce. 3.2 The Actors and instruments of bypassing strategy The other necessary step in understand- ing the intentions and mentality behind IDP is looking at the contributing actors and agents in the decision-making or implementation process. As discussed
before, The IDP plan is basically initiated by economic elites pushing neoliberal agendas, that is, as argued by Wilson, Supporting strategies "[dedicated to] resuscitate cities a sites for capital accumulation" (Wilson, 2004). More precisely, it has been founded based on contributions from a selected panel of city actors, among which real estate business- es (i.e. developers, investors, consultants) and federations of enterprises were predominant (Van Criekingen, 2009, Vermeulen, 2009). Among these, real estate operators (brokers, consultants, developers, investors) were best repre- sented (12 out of 45 institutions inter- viewed), followed by employers federa- tions (Brussels-based, Belgian and European 7 out of 45 institutions), seven semi-public institutions in charge of the economic and commercial devel- opment of the city, five architectural firms, major performing arts institutions five and higher education institutions. Trade unions or local communities and associations were not included neither the simple inhabitants. (Van Criekingen, 2008). The adoption of the IDP seems thus to indicate the formal emergence of a new "glocal" growth coalition in Brussels, operating in three different dimensions: First is, a coalition between the regional political elites and the trans -nationalized economic elites operating Brussels and pushing forward a fully-fledged neoliberal urban project (Van Criekingen, 2008,Swyngedouw et al 2006). Conse- quently, the parties who were traditional- ly advocating the "revitalization" agenda have been consciously kept out of the elaboration of the new "international development" strategy. (Van Criekingen, 2009).
The
second
form
of
a
coalition
is
between
public
and
semi-public
actors,
for
instance
between
regional
government
and
SNCB
(the
national
rail
way
company
of
Belgium)
in
the
case
of
4
sites
along
the
rail
way
line
namely
Tour
and
Taxis,
Schaerbeek,
West
station
and
South
station.
The
decision
making
for
launch- ing
the
projects,
negotiations
for
selling
the
lands
to
private
stakeholders,
are
usually
made
by
steering
committees
and
boards
of
directors
of
SNCB
in
forms
of
private
meeting
and
kept
from
public
scrutiny.
The
third
type
of
coalition
forms
as
public-private
partnerships
PPPs 5
to
share
the
risks
of
developing
ten
large- scale
projects,
which
requires
injection
of
a
large
amount
of
capital.
As
mentioned
before,
office
renewal
strategy
is
an
important
stake
for
the
public
sector.
This
hand
in
hand
with
on-going
increase
in
private
housing
projects
realized
for
high- end
clients
(e.g.
expatriate
company
executives)
and
the
emerging
interest
of
young
middle
class
households
wishing
to
settle
in
the
city
on
the
other,
has
attract- ed
private
investments
towards,
hybrid
complexes
composing
offices,
shops
and
housing,
community
facilities
(stadium,
event
hall,
cultural
facilities,
etc.)
or
re- using
the
vacant
office
plots
into
exclusive
housing.
Evidently,
realization
of
such
projects
requires
new
vacant
sites,
easier
access
to
permits
or
the
opening
of
infrastructure
markets
to
be
obtained
in
a
public-private
partnership
(museums,
stadiums,
schools,
prisons,
etc.)(Van
Criekingen,
2008,
Aveline-Dubach
2008).
5
In
a
broad
partnership
across
institutional
boundaries
or
borders
public
/
private
(Price
water
coopers,
2007,p.27).
These forms of coalition-formation at the level of project formulation and imple- mentation mark a sharp division between actual governance and civil society in terms of alliance of public /private interests in one side and growing group of marginalized on the other (Swyngedouw et al,2002). On the other side, these kind of partnerships sometimes results in freezing the projects in different stages, either due to continual disagreements between different private and public partners as with Tour et Taxis (whose formulation procedure lasted two Years), or due to the realization of lengthy technical feasibility studies which were imposed belatedly on the consultancy firm, as in the case of the West Station (where the finalization and adoption of project has been pending since January 2008). 3.3 The Institutional reorganization of the bypassing strategy As discussed before, and also mentioned by Swyngedouw ,Moulaert and Rodriguez, the new system of governance(alliance between public sector and economic elites) goes hand in hand with estab- lishment of centralized and more auto- cratic forms of management, which privileges direct appointments (Swyngedouw et al ,2002) and marks new form of institutional reorganization both in project formulation and imple- mentation procedure .The Establishment of ATD can be a clear instance of such interventions. Aligned with the bypassing agenda and in order to accelerate the revitalization of the highlighted strategic sites, a non- profit institution established directly
supervised by the national state executive power. This institution is called ATD (The Agency for Territorial Development and introduced as the operational tool for regional strategic plans, in charge of the management of major projects such as the facilities included in the IDP (Feuille de route, p. 18). ATD is responsible to valorize land, with an explicit priority to those areas selected in the IDP. ATD takes Strategic missions, which are either new (city marketing, e.g.) or transferred from the regional administration. In this respect, the IDP announces the possibility of establishing special procedures for the issue of permits for certain strategic areas at European and international level (Feuille de route, p. 18), which is a task included in the current organisational and statutory reform of the Code Bruxellois de lAmnagement du Territoire (COBAT) (Van Criekingen, 2009,Vermeulen, 2009). In principle local municipalities are in charge of these permits. Now, the regional government can operate autonomously to develop the zones delineated in the IDP in a more flexible way. It seems compulsory to observe that these forms of coalitions or better say family ties-in favour of private elites can result to high level of freedom given to private developers in project formulation and implementation phase. This often allows the real estate developers take over the development and putting the public authorities outside the picture. This as a risk previously mitigated by an institution called SAF. (Socit dAcquisition Foncire, SAF) founded 2005 and was in charge of buying strategic grounds from the landowners such as Belgian National Railway Company (SNCB) in the Leverage areas or areas of regional interest. This
was allowing the public sector to obtain a pivotal role in the future development of these sites in order to avoid the territorial fragmentation and controlling the land rent growth. In the framework of IDP there is no policy regarding the necessity of involving SAF in development of the strategic sites. Consequently huge portions of strategic sites are being negotiated directly with the international real-state developers for speculative projects. For instance, The Association Project T&T signed a buying agreement with SNCB for developing tour and taxis. The concept development and project formulation normally happens in atmos- phere of global competition between the worlds leading architects and engineering consultancies with slight preference (and sometimes biased) in selection of Belgian firms. These international competitions are held aligned with branding strategy of cultural capital , and mobilizing the political power positions at local, regional and national level. For instance tour and taxi development competition held between several national and interna- tional firms (Vigano and secchi , Bereau Bas Smets , etc.) Two other institutions, both subsidized by regional government, namely Brus- selse Raad voor het Leefmilieu (BRAL) and Inter-Environnement Bruxelles (IEB) appointed to establish the dialogues directly with the inhabitants as a participatory process.It obvious then to observe that the participation of inhabit- ants, which was so widely heralded a priori and spoken so highly of a posterio- ri, did not lead to the expected outcomes either due to a lack of clearly defined objectives, methods and limits or ambigu- ity of the presentation models and plans .
In a much more obvious way, as regards the projects related to the Tour and Taxi and the West Station, one would have to look hard to find evidence of demands made specifically by citizens in terms of content proposals such as those regarding the transparency of procedures. Finally, for each of the projects studied, the participation of inhabitants was organised essentially in the form of information meetings or workshops by BRAL (for the state administrative district and Tour et Taxis) and IEB (for the West Station and the European quarter), which were given this mission by the public authorities, in consultation with the selected consultancy firms. The latter sometimes had to learn to 'communicate' about relatively abstract projects and above all to justify in real time the decisions made with politicians as regards the orientation of these projects.
4
CONCLUSION
In previous section we observed that how IDP and its parallel interventions can be an instance for bypassing-strategies typical for neo-liberal urban policy. Establishing exceptionality measures through realizing emblematic projects and branding strategies, mobilizing land stock by speculative real state projects through new forms of coalition, freezing conventional planning tools and institu- tions, introduction of new forms of autocratic management through the project agency ATO and the adaptation of regional planning regulations the COBAT). The paper also tried to reveal the inefficiency of IDP as a successful integra- tive plan to address the neighbourhood problems specific to Brussels and relatively intensifying the citys spatial and social divisions in different dimen- sions: Geographically how it leads to spatial fragmentation of deprived neighbourhoods in relation other neighborhoods and with the larger urban region as a whole. Socio -economically, how it results in exclusion in accessing the urban labor market and housing market and finally how it delimits the neighborhood from obtaining access to the decision making process and finding a democratic expression for their political demands. For Brussels the challenge still remains: to find an ambitious and integrated development strategy planning that addresses both qualitative building projects with a sustainable urban plan for the city as whole, that evaluates local impacts and anticipates upon eventual negative effects, that involves all actors during the planning and design process of the projects proposed by the plan.
REFERENCES
AVELINE-DUBACH
N.
(2008)
Immobilier
-
L'Asie,
la
bulle
et
la
mondialisation,
Paris,
CNRS
Editions.
BEGG,
I.
Cities
and
Competitiveness.,
(1999),
Urban
Studies,
Vol.
36,
No.
5-6,
pp.
795-809.
CORIJN
E.,
VANDERMOTTEN
C.,
DECROLY
J.
-M.,
SWYNGEDOUW
E.
(2009)
"tats
gnraux
de
Bruxelles.
Bruxelles,
ville
internationale",
Brussels
Studies,
Note
de
synthse
n13
DECLROY
J,
VAN
CRIEKEGEN
M.
(2009),The
Brussels
International
Development
Plan
(IDP):
Real
estate
development
promises
and
growing
inequalities?
,
Brussels
Studies
,issue
25,
11
may
2009.
DEJEMEPPE,
P.
(2008)
Plan
de
Dveloppement
International
Feuille
de
route,
DELMOTTE.F,
HUBERT.M
and
TULKENS.F
(2009),
The
master
plans:
what
comes
next?
Questions
about
the
future
of
urban
development
in
Brussels,
Brussels
Studies,
Issue
30
DELNOY,
M.
(2007),
La
participation
du
public
en
droit
de
lurbanisme
et
de
lenvironnement,
Brussels,
Larcier,
,
937
pp.
HARVEY
D.
(1989)
"From
managerialism
to
entrepreneurialism:
the
transformation
in
urban
governancein
late
capitalism",
Geografiska
Annaler
B.,
71,
3-17
HUTCHINSON,
A.
Gewestelijk
Ontwikkelingsplan
I.
1995.
[Regional
Development
Plan].
KESTELOOT,
Chr.
LOOPMANS,
M.
(2010)
,Social
inequalities
,Brussels
Studies
,Symosion
no
15
LOOPMANS
M.
(2008)
"Relevance,
Gentrification
and
the
Development
of
a
New
Hegemony
on
Urban
Policies
in
Antwerp",
Belgium,
Urban
Studies,
45,
12,
2499-2519
MOULAERT
F.,
RODRIGUEZ
A.,
SWYNGEDOUW
E.
(eds.)
(2003)
The
Globalized
City.
Economic
Restricting
and
Social
Polarization
in
European
Cities,
Oxford
Oxford
University
Press
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS,
Plan
de
Dveloppement
International
Schma
de
base.
Rapport
final,
31
August
2001.
[PWC-report]
SWYNGEDOUW,
E,
MOULAERT,
F.
AND
RODRIGUEZ,
A.
(2004)
`
Neoliberal
Urbanization
in
Europe:
Large-scale
Urban
Development
Projects
and
the
New
Urban
Policy
',
Anti- pode
34
(3):
54277
VAN
CRIEKINGEN,
M.
(2008).
Towards
a
geography
of
displacement.
Moving
out
of
Brussels
gentrifying
neighbourhoods.
Journal
of
Housing
and
the
Built
Environment,
23(3),
199-213
Van
Criekingen,M.
and
Decroly,
J.M.
(2009),
Het
Plan
voor
Internationale
Ontwikkeling.
Belofte
van
vastgoedprojecten,
maar
toenemende
ongelijkheden?,
Brussels
Studies,
Vol.
25
2009,
pp.1- 16
VANDERMOTTEN,Chr,
LECLERCQ,E.,
CASSIERS,T.,VAYENS,B.(2009,
)
The
Brussels
Economy.
Brussels
Studies,
Synopsis
nr.
7,
26
january
2009
WILSON
D.
(2004)
"Toward
a
Contingent
Neoliberalism",
Urban
Geography,
25,
8,
771-783
ENTREPRENEUALISM
AND
PATTERNS
OF
EXCLUSION
Case
of
Brussels
IDP
10
INDEX 1
1.Heysel - shopping centre (60.000 m ), conference centre (>50.000 m ), concert hall (15.000 seats), football stadium meeting FIFA stantards 2.Tour & Taxis - housing (40%), o ces (40%), facilities (20%), park 20 ha, open-air swimming pool (MP) 3.West Station - RER-mtro-bustram station, new housing, o ces and community facilities (MP) 4.South Station neighbourhhod new housing, o ces for international businesses, hotels, 'convivial and safe neighbourhood' 2 3 5 4 9 5.Monts des Arts Brussels Information ,Point Square Meeting Centre (BIP),Magritte Museum, shops 6.Delta - new housing, o ces, urban indutries (MP) 7.European district - eco-neighbourhood with o ces ,shops, House of Europe - "mixed and convivial neighbourhood , housing(MP) 8.State Administration City o ces (35%),shops (6%), community facilities (5%) (MP) ,(53%), housing 9.Josaphat - eco-neighbourhood with o ces, housing, community facilities 10.Schaerbeek Formation logistics activities, o ces, housing, football stadium meeting FIFA standards (?) (MP)
1 10
8 7
Figure 1. The ten strategic areas of the Brussels International Development Plan. Sourcewww.demainbruxelles.be (Brussels Capital Region, 2008)
11