 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
  |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Opinion of tools
Name der Fallstudie
Regeneration Project for a Historical Quarter in the town centre
Projekt zur Erneuerung eines innerstädtischen historischen Viertels von Berkovitza
Name of tool
Expert Evaluation of local needs and potential
Opinion of tool - argumentation for choosing the tool
The tool was implemented because the municipality entrusted a urban design private company for formation of the new development plan for the quarter after a procedure of direct negotiations. Declared owners´ preferences on future activities to be sheltered in the houses and investment potential by owners in the restoration process were analysed. </p>
<p>The tool was decided upon and developed by the project team. The main reasons for choosing Expert Evaluation was the lack of: (i) previous experience of the Municipality for negotiating with private owners; (ii) relevant documentation on the historical development of the quarter and the current state of the building structures; (iii) clarity about real motivation of owners to take investment initiatives.</p>
<p>The project team assessed this tool to be most appropriate because of the peculiarities of the case – lack of traditions in public participation, changed private-public relationships, etc. There was neither financial resource nor motivation at the Municipality for searching for other tools.</p>
Opinion of tool - barriers for the tool implementation
The scope of the interviews initiated by the project team was quite modest due to the very limited financial resource available (no financial support from the Municipality was possible).
Opinion of tool - assessment by tool users
As a result of applying expert evaluation, the regeneration project regulated the relations between owners, businessmen and Municipality concerning commitments, obligations, resources available and needs. The implementation of the project guaranteed protection of the cultural monuments in the long-term development of the quarter.
There were also a number of spin-off's or unintended consequences as a result of applying the tool:
? The tool facilitated the solution of architectural, functional and infrastructure problems;
? The owners became aware of the benefits provided by the project improved site accessibility and technical characteristics of the quarter; trust was built to planners and the Municipality;
? It was not really effective in attracting the interest of a broader range of investors and in motivating local private initiative.
A general view of the tool would be that the Experts? assessment would be flexible enough to adjust to different situations, but at the same time it is strongly dependant on the personality of the experts and thus a subjective one.
In terms of future use, the tool is applicable to similar situations with changes derived from local peculiarities where there is no previous experience in the analysis of local needs and investment potential. The number of experts involved at present (architects, economists and sociologists) is estimated to be insufficient. A closer consideration of economic aspects could be recommended. Methods to provide experts? with more efficient communication with the public at all the stages of the process should be further developed.
Opinion of tool - reviewer\'s assessment
The tool is appropriate to apply when the actors involved in the process have limited previous experience in public debate.
In this particular case the quarter is in the town centre, therefore taking a broader range of considerations within the local community would effectively contribute to preventing potential conflicts related with the future use of the public service facilities at the ground level of the buildings.
Welche Tools wurden verwendet, um Nachhaltigkeit zu beurteilen?
Expert Evaluation of local needs and potential
Weiterführende Informationen (nur auf Englisch):