ETH Zurich – Institute for Urban Design
HIL H44.1 – Stefano-Franscini-Platz 5 – 8093 Zurich
contact
More detailed information on
The afternoon session 3 of the symposium of the 4th of April 2014
14h-15h30
Moderated Workshops – From the practice of urban design and planning
90 minutes
______
Workshop 1
Mobility in the city region
Mobility infrastructure is one of the driving forces of the regional development, integration, and identity. What are the related strategies and instruments? Do these instruments steer the urban development the region through regional mobility and infrastructure projects in an effective way? And do these grand projets feed into the the overall vision or strategy (Kantonaler Richtplan, SVIR)? Should some instruments be adjusted in order to be more effective and efficient?
Instruments: Agglomerationsprogramme, kantonaler Richtplan, regionale Richtpäne; SVIR, Structuurvisie Amsterdam 2040, Strategisch plan fase 2: 2010–2020
• Case studies: Glattalbahn-Limmattalbahn; Zuidas
• Moderation: Simon Kretz (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich), kretz@arch.ethz.ch
• Minute keeper: Fabian Willi
• Input lecturers: Dr. Stan Major (Center of Urban Studies, Universität Amsterdam) – Input on Zuidas: "The upcoming second city center of Amsterdam?"; Dr. Andreas Flury – Input on the Glattalbahn
• Guests: Cees Geldof (Urban Designer Zuidas, DRO Amsterdam)
______
Workshop 2
Densification and urban redevelopment in polycentric city region
The city region of Zürich expects another 200,000 people until 2030. Which instruments, processes and policies can help to define and develop the municipalities in the polycentric network as regional centers with important functions? How do we steer the quality densification and redevelopment of the city region? Do we have the right mix of instruments to achieve the successful translation from strategy (Richtpläne, Structuurvisies) into project implementations (Testplanung, Sondernutzungspläne, Architekturwettbewerbe; bestemmingplannen)?
Instruments: Richtpläne, Testplanung, Mehrwertabgabe; Structuurvisie Amsterdam 2040, bestemmingsplannen met en zonder uitwerking
• Case studies: Regensdorf-Watt; Buiksloterham
• Moderation: Hans-Georg Bächtold (Geschäftsführer SIA)
• Co-moderation: Dr. Benedikt Boucsein (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich)
• Minute keeper: Anne Mikoleit (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich)
• Input lecturers: Max Walter (Gemeindepräsident Regensdorf, Präsident Planungsgruppe Furttal (tbc) – Input on the Regensdorf-Watt (tbc); Dr. Sebastian Dembski (Center of Urban Studies, University of Amsterdam)
• Reflection Panel: Mirjana Milanovic (DRO Amsterdam); John Smit (DRO Amsterdam); Paul Bauer (Stv. Direktor Grün Stadt Zürich); Toine van Goethem (DRO Amsterdam); Prof. Dr. Barbara Zibell (Geschäftsführerin FSU)
______
Workshop 3
Diversity in the polycentric city region
A region, its main city and the communities in its agglomeration are political actors with often distinct and, occasionally, even contradictory normative goals and competing visions. Furthermore, even if there is consensus regarding a certain objective, these different actors might see the shared target from diverse perspectives. This antagonism is often reflected in the strategies and legally binding instruments and codes provided by the different levels of administration.
The desire for social and use diversity is a good example for a goal being widely shared, yet interpreted and implemented by the region, the city and smaller municipalities differently.
Based on evaluating experience from Zurich and Amsterdam, this table will discuss the capacity of different planning instruments towards fostering diversity and towards synthetizing the aims of the different political actors / levels in this regard.
Instruments: Richtpläne, Regio-ROK, lokale Bau- und Zonenordnungen; Structuurvisie Amsterdam 2040, bestemmingsplannen met en zonder uitwerking
• Case studies: Glattal; Nieuw-West
• Moderation: Daniel Kiss (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich), kiss@arch.ethz.ch
• Minute keeper: Arpad Hetey (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich)
• Input lecturers: ; Dr. Jos Gadet (DRO Amsterdam) – Input on Amsterdam Nieuw-West: "Arrival City?"; Marcel Angele (Municipality Opfikon) – Input on Opfikon-Glattal
• Guests: Bernhard Krismer (Mayor of Wallisellen, Vice-President of the planning group Glattal); Toine van Goethem (DRO Amsterdam); Rahel Nüssli (ETH Zürich); Balthasar Thalmann (Canton of Zürich), Philipp Krass (berchtoldkrass)
______
Workshop 4
Landscape! Integral part or blind spot of polycentric city regions?
Landscape and leisure-space planning are usually not considered to be within the competences of urban designers and planners. Primarily agriculture and forestry authorities are the main actors in this field. But with increasing urbanisation, the landscape comes more and more into the center of attention: Landscape and leisure-space planning seems — along with mobility and infrastructural planning – to be more effective to steer regional development than conventional settlement planning. On the basis of examples from the metropolitan regions of Amsterdam and Zurich the performance of existing planning instruments will be discussed. Do they contribute to the qualification of the contemporary urban landscape? Should competences be redefined? And how could liable supra-municipal commitments be established?
Instruments: ROK, Regio-ROK, Richtpläne, regionale Planungsgruppen; Structuurvisies Noord-Holland en Amsterdam 2040, provinciaal inpassingsplan
• Case studies: Siedlungsnahes Freiraumnetz Metropolitanraum Zürich, Metropolitan Landscape Region Amsterdam: Looking for a continuous counterbalance
• Moderation: Michael Wagner (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich), wagner@arch.ethz.ch
• Minute keeper: Dominik Thurnheer (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich)
• Input lecturers: Patricia Bijvoet (DRO Amsterdam),Christian Leisi (Fachstelle Landschaft, Amt für Raumentwicklung, Kanton Zürich)
• Guests: Prof. Mark Michaeli (TU München); Reto Camenzind (Bundesamt für Raumentwicklung, Sektion ländliche Räume und Landwirtschaft), Prof. Dr. Felix Kienast (Zentrum für Landschaft WSL), Mirjam Arnold (Bundesamt für Landwirtschaft), Martina Voser (mavo Landschaftsarchitektur)
______
Workshop 5
Images of the future for the poly-centric city-region
One of the greatest challenges today is the transformation of existing urban structures: New infrastructure is expensive, greenfields scarce–and politically highly contested, as recent public votes in Switzerland show. Images of the future excert great influence on relevant political decision-making, but also on everyday production of space. This table will discuss experiences with images of the future and address three main question:
1 Who drafts images of the future (and how)?
2 Who is the audience (and who listens)?
3 Are they effective (and if so, how)?
Instruments and case studies: Metrobilder Zürich, RES, Structuurvisie Amsterdam 2040
• Moderation: Dr. Christian Salewski (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich), salewski@arch.ethz.ch
• Minute keeper: Myriam Züger (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich)
• A conversation between Koos van Zanen (DRO Amsterdam), Frank Argast (AfS), Matthias Loepfe (RZU), and Markus Schaefer (Hosoya Schaefer)
Reference: Salewski, Christian: Die Kunst des Konsenses
______
Workshop 6
Envisioning the polycentric city region – participation and identity
The population is one of the constant factors in the long run, compared to political terms, which are usually four years. How can we better integrate the population in the construction of visions and strategies (> Workshop 5). How can we ensure a professional and widely shared vision for the future urban development, which then again guarantees the implementation of the visions and strategies? And how can participation processes become more strategic and hence effective?
Case studies:
Each of the four workshop guests will present at the beginning a project that contains from the point of view of the speaker and with regard to the theme of the workshop, "identity and participation" an exemplary approach. Each project presentation should furthermore answer the following three questions:
1 Who participates – and who and what was the trigger?
2 How does the final result (scenario, vision, implemented project) reflect the participatory approach?
3 What are the lessons learned for upcoming participatory approaches and projects?
• Moderator: Dr. Thomas Noack (Leiter Planungsinstrumente SIA)
• Co-Moderator: Fabienne Hoelzel (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich), hoelzel@arch.ethz.ch
• Minute keeper: Ana Pereira (Prof. Christiaanse, ETH Zürich)
• A conversation between NSL-Keynote speaker Prof. Zef Hemel (DRO Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam), Prof. Dr. Stefan Kurath (ZHAW, urbaNplus, Zürich), Dr. Markus Nollert (Nextzürich), Sabeth Tödtli (Nextzürich), and Dr. Martina Baum (STUDIO . URBANE STRATEGIEN, Karlsruhe)
This website has been archived and is no longer maintained.