 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Decision making process
Name of the case study
E.C.U.B. project
Decision making process - stages
In 1998, AIR bought the site and entered into partnership with JM Ghislain to create ARTIM.
As they get interested in environmental aspects, they decided to add an "Eco-management", energy consumption and "Eco-construction" value to the project.
In 1999, ARTIM made many preliminaries contacts with authorities in charge of different aspects of the project. During this period, the IBGE-BIM became a partner of the project to develop it as an Eco-centre where they could transfer their offices.
At the end of 2000, an architecture competition was organised for some buildings and green spaces.
During 2001 and 2002, project went on and ARTIM finalised itself the design of one building of the site.
But in November 2003, the project came definitely to an end. The site was dismembered and sold.
Stages of tool use in the decision making process
Decision making process - levels
In this case, different tools were used by different actors to assist the decision-making procedure from the inception of the project to design assessment. This procedure includes both political and technical decisions. (see diagram above)
Decision making process - sources of information
Some tools (and the knowledge they included) are used to assess the project technically; others are used to define objectives and to better take the local context into account.
Decision making process - who are the decision makers
The 3 main decision-makers are the 3 stakeholders already identified : ARTIM (private developer), IBGE-BIM (public partner) and Anderlecht Municipality(public authority)
Decision making process - who made the final decision for project implementation
In a way, Anderlecht Municipality will take the final decision as it will grant or not the town-planning license.
Nevertheless, the town-planning license does not considered really sustainable goals. The development of the sustainable characteristics of the project depends more on the initiative of the developers (ARTIM) and its partner (IBGE-BIM).
Name of tool
B.R.E.E.A.M. (self-made adapted version)
Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
In 1998, ARTIM was created and the project started.
As they get interested giving an eco-building value to the project. They have their first contact with tools but no real evaluation have been made at this time.
In 1999, ARTIM made many preliminaries contacts with authorities in charge of different aspects of the project. They received advices, get aware of aspects to respect and regulations in force and sustainable concepts.
Progressively, they discovered new tools that helped them at the conception/design stage clarifying goals and finding part of solution.
During this period, the IBGE-BIM became a partner of the Eco-centre project. They stressed on the sustainable characteristics the project should have, promoting some tools (raw material list, etc.) and analysing more in depth the social connections between the project and the neighbourhood (their services developed a socio-town-planning analysis).
In 2000, when the architecture competition was organised for some buildings and green spaces, they used tools (HQE, BREEAM) to assess different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants.
During 2001 and 2002, ARTIM use of tools became more systematic. They applied them to finalise the design of their own building.
In November 2003, the project came definitely to an end.
As they got interested in sustainable tools very early in the process, tools influenced the inception of project idea and the design stage providing ARTIM with knowledge about sustainability:
® Sometimes, it clarified first intentions and provided the program with new ideas. For example: many aspects of the park, the connections with the district and its inhabitants, etc. were discussed and adapted during the Social-town planning analysis.
®Sometimes, tools gave practical answers to the developers´ aims. For example: T-RNSYS simulations helped to develop an efficient heat management of the buildings.
Tools have also been used to assist design assessment of projects
®For example, during the architectural competition, assessments of projects have been made with H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M.
®Some tools are constrained by regulations in force and authorities would use them to assess the project and grant the corresponding license. For example, the PRAS is used to check if prescriptions on zones are respected.
Brainstorming helped them to better understand the local context and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
After a long period of inception, project´s goals have been summed in 10 points. Some of these goals are in between quantitative and qualitative.
1. Eco-management. All the actions in the project may be thought in an "Ecological care" way. The main tool used is HQE, as it focuses on the sustainability of the process.
2. Energy consumption decrease. For an efficient management of the energy consumption, the main tools used were T-RNSYS, BREEAM, they enable comparisons with European standards in force.
3. Application of Eco-construction principles. Criteria on materials and techniques to use have been defined; comparisons have been made with raw materials list defined at the European level (DBA associate study)
4. Insertion of the project in its social context (open the site to its immediate surroundings, mix functions, etc.). To better understand these objectives, a socio-town-planning analysis was developed by the IBGE-BIM.
5. Implication of: "Social integration companies" in the project. It was an initiative of the IBGE-BIM.
6. Public information. Developers mentioned brainstorming help them to better understand the local context, and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
N.B.: For this kind of project, a public enquiry is mandatory.
7. Project´s financial viability. The financial outcomes are difficult to assess as ARTIM had to dismember the site and sold it.
8. Formalisation of the Brussels Corporate Eco-dynamism Label and Charter (see Description of tool, other tools implemented). This was not a goal defined for the project but an issue the IBGE-BIM was interested in.
9. Management of the green areas surrounding the buildings, using them as an urban park reinforcing the existing Brussels green network. This goal could not be assessed as the project felled through.
10. Preservation and valorisation of the cultural architectural heritage of the site. This is a qualitative goal including technical decisions that are supported by national rules and laws.
At different steps of the decision making process, tools were used to support argumentation.
Tools´ influences are described in detail above. We can nevertheless insist on some examples:
• Tools have been used to assist the design assessment stage. During the architectural competition, H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M were used to assess the projects and their different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants
• Some tools are constrained by regulations in force. Authorities use them to grant the corresponding license, and to argue their choice. For example, the PRAS is used to check if the prescriptions on defined zones are respected.
Name of tool
H.Q.E. (self-made adapted version)
Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
In 1998, ARTIM was created and the project started.
As they get interested giving an eco-building value to the project. They have their first contact with tools but no real evaluation have been made at this time.
In 1999, ARTIM made many preliminaries contacts with authorities in charge of different aspects of the project. They received advices, get aware of aspects to respect and regulations in force and sustainable concepts.
Progressively, they discovered new tools that helped them at the conception/design stage clarifying goals and finding part of solution.
During this period, the IBGE-BIM became a partner of the Eco-centre project. They stressed on the sustainable characteristics the project should have, promoting some tools (raw material list, etc.) and analysing more in depth the social connections between the project and the neighbourhood (their services developed a socio-town-planning analysis).
In 2000, when the architecture competition was organised for some buildings and green spaces, they used tools (HQE, BREEAM) to assess different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants.
During 2001 and 2002, ARTIM use of tools became more systematic. They applied them to finalise the design of their own building.
In November 2003, the project came definitely to an end.
As they got interested in sustainable tools very early in the process, tools influenced the inception of project idea and the design stage providing ARTIM with knowledge about sustainability:
® Sometimes, it clarified first intentions and provided the program with new ideas. For example: many aspects of the park, the connections with the district and its inhabitants, etc. were discussed and adapted during the Social-town planning analysis.
®Sometimes, tools gave practical answers to the developers´ aims. For example: T-RNSYS simulations helped to develop an efficient heat management of the buildings.
Tools have also been used to assist design assessment of projects
®For example, during the architectural competition, assessments of projects have been made with H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M.
®Some tools are constrained by regulations in force and authorities would use them to assess the project and grant the corresponding license. For example, the PRAS is used to check if prescriptions on zones are respected.
Brainstorming helped them to better understand the local context and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
After a long period of inception, project´s goals have been summed in 10 points. Some of these goals are in between quantitative and qualitative.
1. Eco-management. All the actions in the project may be thought in an "Ecological care" way. The main tool used is HQE, as it focuses on the sustainability of the process.
2. Energy consumption decrease. For an efficient management of the energy consumption, the main tools used were T-RNSYS, BREEAM, they enable comparisons with European standards in force.
3. Application of Eco-construction principles. Criteria on materials and techniques to use have been defined; comparisons have been made with raw materials list defined at the European level (DBA associate study)
4. Insertion of the project in its social context (open the site to its immediate surroundings, mix functions, etc.). To better understand these objectives, a socio-town-planning analysis was developed by the IBGE-BIM.
5. Implication of: "Social integration companies" in the project. It was an initiative of the IBGE-BIM.
6. Public information. Developers mentioned brainstorming help them to better understand the local context, and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
N.B.: For this kind of project, a public enquiry is mandatory.
7. Project´s financial viability. The financial outcomes are difficult to assess as ARTIM had to dismember the site and sold it.
8. Formalisation of the Brussels Corporate Eco-dynamism Label and Charter (see Description of tool, other tools implemented). This was not a goal defined for the project but an issue the IBGE-BIM was interested in.
9. Management of the green areas surrounding the buildings, using them as an urban park reinforcing the existing Brussels green network. This goal could not be assessed as the project felled through.
10. Preservation and valorisation of the cultural architectural heritage of the site. This is a qualitative goal including technical decisions that are supported by national rules and laws.
At different steps of the decision making process, tools were used to support argumentation.
Tools´ influences are described in detail above. We can nevertheless insist on some examples:
• Tools have been used to assist the design assessment stage. During the architectural competition, H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M were used to assess the projects and their different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants
• Some tools are constrained by regulations in force. Authorities use them to grant the corresponding license, and to argue their choice. For example, the PRAS is used to check if the prescriptions on defined zones are respected.
Name of tool
P.R.A.S. (Regional Ground Assignment Plan of Brussels´ Capital Region)
Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
In 1998, ARTIM was created and the project started.
As they get interested giving an eco-building value to the project. They have their first contact with tools but no real evaluation have been made at this time.
In 1999, ARTIM made many preliminaries contacts with authorities in charge of different aspects of the project. They received advices, get aware of aspects to respect and regulations in force and sustainable concepts.
Progressively, they discovered new tools that helped them at the conception/design stage clarifying goals and finding part of solution.
During this period, the IBGE-BIM became a partner of the Eco-centre project. They stressed on the sustainable characteristics the project should have, promoting some tools (raw material list, etc.) and analysing more in depth the social connections between the project and the neighbourhood (their services developed a socio-town-planning analysis).
In 2000, when the architecture competition was organised for some buildings and green spaces, they used tools (HQE, BREEAM) to assess different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants.
During 2001 and 2002, ARTIM use of tools became more systematic. They applied them to finalise the design of their own building.
In November 2003, the project came definitely to an end.
As they got interested in sustainable tools very early in the process, tools influenced the inception of project idea and the design stage providing ARTIM with knowledge about sustainability:
® Sometimes, it clarified first intentions and provided the program with new ideas. For example: many aspects of the park, the connections with the district and its inhabitants, etc. were discussed and adapted during the Social-town planning analysis.
®Sometimes, tools gave practical answers to the developers´ aims. For example: T-RNSYS simulations helped to develop an efficient heat management of the buildings.
Tools have also been used to assist design assessment of projects
®For example, during the architectural competition, assessments of projects have been made with H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M.
®Some tools are constrained by regulations in force and authorities would use them to assess the project and grant the corresponding license. For example, the PRAS is used to check if prescriptions on zones are respected.
Brainstorming helped them to better understand the local context and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
After a long period of inception, project´s goals have been summed in 10 points. Some of these goals are in between quantitative and qualitative.
1. Eco-management. All the actions in the project may be thought in an "Ecological care" way. The main tool used is HQE, as it focuses on the sustainability of the process.
2. Energy consumption decrease. For an efficient management of the energy consumption, the main tools used were T-RNSYS, BREEAM, they enable comparisons with European standards in force.
3. Application of Eco-construction principles. Criteria on materials and techniques to use have been defined; comparisons have been made with raw materials list defined at the European level (DBA associate study)
4. Insertion of the project in its social context (open the site to its immediate surroundings, mix functions, etc.). To better understand these objectives, a socio-town-planning analysis was developed by the IBGE-BIM.
5. Implication of: "Social integration companies" in the project. It was an initiative of the IBGE-BIM.
6. Public information. Developers mentioned brainstorming help them to better understand the local context, and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
N.B.: For this kind of project, a public enquiry is mandatory.
7. Project´s financial viability. The financial outcomes are difficult to assess as ARTIM had to dismember the site and sold it.
8. Formalisation of the Brussels Corporate Eco-dynamism Label and Charter (see Description of tool, other tools implemented). This was not a goal defined for the project but an issue the IBGE-BIM was interested in.
9. Management of the green areas surrounding the buildings, using them as an urban park reinforcing the existing Brussels green network. This goal could not be assessed as the project felled through.
10. Preservation and valorisation of the cultural architectural heritage of the site. This is a qualitative goal including technical decisions that are supported by national rules and laws.
At different steps of the decision making process, tools were used to support argumentation.
Tools´ influences are described in detail above. We can nevertheless insist on some examples:
• Tools have been used to assist the design assessment stage. During the architectural competition, H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M were used to assess the projects and their different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants
• Some tools are constrained by regulations in force. Authorities use them to grant the corresponding license, and to argue their choice. For example, the PRAS is used to check if the prescriptions on defined zones are respected.
Name of tool
Raw materials list (environment friendly)
Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
In 1998, ARTIM was created and the project started.
As they get interested giving an eco-building value to the project. They have their first contact with tools but no real evaluation have been made at this time.
In 1999, ARTIM made many preliminaries contacts with authorities in charge of different aspects of the project. They received advices, get aware of aspects to respect and regulations in force and sustainable concepts.
Progressively, they discovered new tools that helped them at the conception/design stage clarifying goals and finding part of solution.
During this period, the IBGE-BIM became a partner of the Eco-centre project. They stressed on the sustainable characteristics the project should have, promoting some tools (raw material list, etc.) and analysing more in depth the social connections between the project and the neighbourhood (their services developed a socio-town-planning analysis).
In 2000, when the architecture competition was organised for some buildings and green spaces, they used tools (HQE, BREEAM) to assess different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants.
During 2001 and 2002, ARTIM use of tools became more systematic. They applied them to finalise the design of their own building.
In November 2003, the project came definitely to an end.
As they got interested in sustainable tools very early in the process, tools influenced the inception of project idea and the design stage providing ARTIM with knowledge about sustainability:
® Sometimes, it clarified first intentions and provided the program with new ideas. For example: many aspects of the park, the connections with the district and its inhabitants, etc. were discussed and adapted during the Social-town planning analysis.
®Sometimes, tools gave practical answers to the developers´ aims. For example: T-RNSYS simulations helped to develop an efficient heat management of the buildings.
Tools have also been used to assist design assessment of projects
®For example, during the architectural competition, assessments of projects have been made with H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M.
®Some tools are constrained by regulations in force and authorities would use them to assess the project and grant the corresponding license. For example, the PRAS is used to check if prescriptions on zones are respected.
Brainstorming helped them to better understand the local context and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
After a long period of inception, project´s goals have been summed in 10 points. Some of these goals are in between quantitative and qualitative.
1. Eco-management. All the actions in the project may be thought in an "Ecological care" way. The main tool used is HQE, as it focuses on the sustainability of the process.
2. Energy consumption decrease. For an efficient management of the energy consumption, the main tools used were T-RNSYS, BREEAM, they enable comparisons with European standards in force.
3. Application of Eco-construction principles. Criteria on materials and techniques to use have been defined; comparisons have been made with raw materials list defined at the European level (DBA associate study)
4. Insertion of the project in its social context (open the site to its immediate surroundings, mix functions, etc.). To better understand these objectives, a socio-town-planning analysis was developed by the IBGE-BIM.
5. Implication of: "Social integration companies" in the project. It was an initiative of the IBGE-BIM.
6. Public information. Developers mentioned brainstorming help them to better understand the local context, and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
N.B.: For this kind of project, a public enquiry is mandatory.
7. Project´s financial viability. The financial outcomes are difficult to assess as ARTIM had to dismember the site and sold it.
8. Formalisation of the Brussels Corporate Eco-dynamism Label and Charter (see Description of tool, other tools implemented). This was not a goal defined for the project but an issue the IBGE-BIM was interested in.
9. Management of the green areas surrounding the buildings, using them as an urban park reinforcing the existing Brussels green network. This goal could not be assessed as the project felled through.
10. Preservation and valorisation of the cultural architectural heritage of the site. This is a qualitative goal including technical decisions that are supported by national rules and laws.
At different steps of the decision making process, tools were used to support argumentation.
Tools´ influences are described in detail above. We can nevertheless insist on some examples:
• Tools have been used to assist the design assessment stage. During the architectural competition, H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M were used to assess the projects and their different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants
• Some tools are constrained by regulations in force. Authorities use them to grant the corresponding license, and to argue their choice. For example, the PRAS is used to check if the prescriptions on defined zones are respected.
Name of tool
Socio-town-planning analysis
Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
In 1998, ARTIM was created and the project started.
As they get interested giving an eco-building value to the project. They have their first contact with tools but no real evaluation have been made at this time.
In 1999, ARTIM made many preliminaries contacts with authorities in charge of different aspects of the project. They received advices, get aware of aspects to respect and regulations in force and sustainable concepts.
Progressively, they discovered new tools that helped them at the conception/design stage clarifying goals and finding part of solution.
During this period, the IBGE-BIM became a partner of the Eco-centre project. They stressed on the sustainable characteristics the project should have, promoting some tools (raw material list, etc.) and analysing more in depth the social connections between the project and the neighbourhood (their services developed a socio-town-planning analysis).
In 2000, when the architecture competition was organised for some buildings and green spaces, they used tools (HQE, BREEAM) to assess different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants.
During 2001 and 2002, ARTIM use of tools became more systematic. They applied them to finalise the design of their own building.
In November 2003, the project came definitely to an end.
As they got interested in sustainable tools very early in the process, tools influenced the inception of project idea and the design stage providing ARTIM with knowledge about sustainability:
® Sometimes, it clarified first intentions and provided the program with new ideas. For example: many aspects of the park, the connections with the district and its inhabitants, etc. were discussed and adapted during the Social-town planning analysis.
®Sometimes, tools gave practical answers to the developers´ aims. For example: T-RNSYS simulations helped to develop an efficient heat management of the buildings.
Tools have also been used to assist design assessment of projects
®For example, during the architectural competition, assessments of projects have been made with H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M.
®Some tools are constrained by regulations in force and authorities would use them to assess the project and grant the corresponding license. For example, the PRAS is used to check if prescriptions on zones are respected.
Brainstorming helped them to better understand the local context and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
After a long period of inception, project´s goals have been summed in 10 points. Some of these goals are in between quantitative and qualitative.
1. Eco-management. All the actions in the project may be thought in an "Ecological care" way. The main tool used is HQE, as it focuses on the sustainability of the process.
2. Energy consumption decrease. For an efficient management of the energy consumption, the main tools used were T-RNSYS, BREEAM, they enable comparisons with European standards in force.
3. Application of Eco-construction principles. Criteria on materials and techniques to use have been defined; comparisons have been made with raw materials list defined at the European level (DBA associate study)
4. Insertion of the project in its social context (open the site to its immediate surroundings, mix functions, etc.). To better understand these objectives, a socio-town-planning analysis was developed by the IBGE-BIM.
5. Implication of: "Social integration companies" in the project. It was an initiative of the IBGE-BIM.
6. Public information. Developers mentioned brainstorming help them to better understand the local context, and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
N.B.: For this kind of project, a public enquiry is mandatory.
7. Project´s financial viability. The financial outcomes are difficult to assess as ARTIM had to dismember the site and sold it.
8. Formalisation of the Brussels Corporate Eco-dynamism Label and Charter (see Description of tool, other tools implemented). This was not a goal defined for the project but an issue the IBGE-BIM was interested in.
9. Management of the green areas surrounding the buildings, using them as an urban park reinforcing the existing Brussels green network. This goal could not be assessed as the project felled through.
10. Preservation and valorisation of the cultural architectural heritage of the site. This is a qualitative goal including technical decisions that are supported by national rules and laws.
At different steps of the decision making process, tools were used to support argumentation.
Tools´ influences are described in detail above. We can nevertheless insist on some examples:
• Tools have been used to assist the design assessment stage. During the architectural competition, H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M were used to assess the projects and their different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants
• Some tools are constrained by regulations in force. Authorities use them to grant the corresponding license, and to argue their choice. For example, the PRAS is used to check if the prescriptions on defined zones are respected.
Name of tool
T-RNSYS (energy management)
Decision making process - tools in decision-making process
In 1998, ARTIM was created and the project started.
As they get interested giving an eco-building value to the project. They have their first contact with tools but no real evaluation have been made at this time.
In 1999, ARTIM made many preliminaries contacts with authorities in charge of different aspects of the project. They received advices, get aware of aspects to respect and regulations in force and sustainable concepts.
Progressively, they discovered new tools that helped them at the conception/design stage clarifying goals and finding part of solution.
During this period, the IBGE-BIM became a partner of the Eco-centre project. They stressed on the sustainable characteristics the project should have, promoting some tools (raw material list, etc.) and analysing more in depth the social connections between the project and the neighbourhood (their services developed a socio-town-planning analysis).
In 2000, when the architecture competition was organised for some buildings and green spaces, they used tools (HQE, BREEAM) to assess different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants.
During 2001 and 2002, ARTIM use of tools became more systematic. They applied them to finalise the design of their own building.
In November 2003, the project came definitely to an end.
As they got interested in sustainable tools very early in the process, tools influenced the inception of project idea and the design stage providing ARTIM with knowledge about sustainability:
® Sometimes, it clarified first intentions and provided the program with new ideas. For example: many aspects of the park, the connections with the district and its inhabitants, etc. were discussed and adapted during the Social-town planning analysis.
®Sometimes, tools gave practical answers to the developers´ aims. For example: T-RNSYS simulations helped to develop an efficient heat management of the buildings.
Tools have also been used to assist design assessment of projects
®For example, during the architectural competition, assessments of projects have been made with H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M.
®Some tools are constrained by regulations in force and authorities would use them to assess the project and grant the corresponding license. For example, the PRAS is used to check if prescriptions on zones are respected.
Brainstorming helped them to better understand the local context and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
After a long period of inception, project´s goals have been summed in 10 points. Some of these goals are in between quantitative and qualitative.
1. Eco-management. All the actions in the project may be thought in an "Ecological care" way. The main tool used is HQE, as it focuses on the sustainability of the process.
2. Energy consumption decrease. For an efficient management of the energy consumption, the main tools used were T-RNSYS, BREEAM, they enable comparisons with European standards in force.
3. Application of Eco-construction principles. Criteria on materials and techniques to use have been defined; comparisons have been made with raw materials list defined at the European level (DBA associate study)
4. Insertion of the project in its social context (open the site to its immediate surroundings, mix functions, etc.). To better understand these objectives, a socio-town-planning analysis was developed by the IBGE-BIM.
5. Implication of: "Social integration companies" in the project. It was an initiative of the IBGE-BIM.
6. Public information. Developers mentioned brainstorming help them to better understand the local context, and moreover to maximise the acceptance of the project.
N.B.: For this kind of project, a public enquiry is mandatory.
7. Project´s financial viability. The financial outcomes are difficult to assess as ARTIM had to dismember the site and sold it.
8. Formalisation of the Brussels Corporate Eco-dynamism Label and Charter (see Description of tool, other tools implemented). This was not a goal defined for the project but an issue the IBGE-BIM was interested in.
9. Management of the green areas surrounding the buildings, using them as an urban park reinforcing the existing Brussels green network. This goal could not be assessed as the project felled through.
10. Preservation and valorisation of the cultural architectural heritage of the site. This is a qualitative goal including technical decisions that are supported by national rules and laws.
At different steps of the decision making process, tools were used to support argumentation.
Tools´ influences are described in detail above. We can nevertheless insist on some examples:
• Tools have been used to assist the design assessment stage. During the architectural competition, H.Q.E. and B.R.E.E.A.M were used to assess the projects and their different sustainable aspects shown off by the participants
• Some tools are constrained by regulations in force. Authorities use them to grant the corresponding license, and to argue their choice. For example, the PRAS is used to check if the prescriptions on defined zones are respected.
Decision making process - how was the information for the dmp disseminated
Concerning the inception of the project and its design, brainstorming meetings were organised with local social associations and authorities. The communication was indirect: population did not directly participate to brainstorming as they were intended to be represented by associations and authorities.
On another part, to communicate the outcomes of the project´s design, district inhabitants´ public debates (public enquiry) were organised (direct way) as they are legally mandatory in the planning license procedure.
Decision making process - how was the public involved
The public was not directly involved in the project elaboration as, during the design stage, brainstorming meetings were organised only with local social associations and authorities.
After the design step, public debates were organised to discuss the outcomes of the project. Experts often consider these debates (legally mandatory) do not concretely involve the population, as it is already too late to change the main features of the project. These debates are used to communicate results and possibly modified details.
Public involvement was not perceived as particularly satisfactory.
Decision making process - was there public discussion over the project
See above on the dissemination of the decision making process and public involvement.
What tools were used to assess sustainability?
B.R.E.E.A.M. (self-made adapted version)
H.Q.E. (self-made adapted version)
P.R.A.S. (Regional Ground Assignment Plan of Brussels´ Capital Region)
Raw materials list (environment friendly)
Socio-town-planning analysis
T-RNSYS (energy management)
More information