AVS. Arkitektúr verktækni skipulag - 01.09.2004, Side 28

skólkW
Vesturlands-
vegur
ínusvædi
Rammaskipúlag Blikastaðalands. Höfundar Teiknistofan Arcus.
/ Outline plan for the Blikastaðir area by Teiknistofan Arcus.
sional, informed appraisal by the
public and professionals of the pros
and cons of planning proposals in
their early stages. The presenta-
tion of planning proposals and the
discussion takes place in comfort-
able and quiet surroundings which
makes it possible for the partici-
pants to think about their evaluation,
unlike the excitement which often
prevails at open presentation and
discussion meetings about planning
issues. By using this methodology it
is more likely that people will agree
to the final pianning proposal as
more people have been involved
in the process of finding possible
faults. In addition the APP method
can help in choosing between differ-
ent alternatives in planning individual
areas and is particularly appropriate
when new development in old dis-
tricts is contemplated.
Appraisal of the plan
for Blikastaðir, 2004
Last winter the author of this article
worked with representatives from
the building firm ÍAV in developing
the above model to appraise the
outline plan for the Blikastaðir area.
The Blikastaðir area is around 100
ha and it is intended to build there
2000 flats which will be built dur-
ing the next 10 to 15 years (see
photo). It is important, both for the
people at ÍAV and the local authol-
ity, Mosfellsbær, that the planning
of this area will be successful where
two primary schools are proposed.
Meetings with in-depth groups were
held at the offices of ÍAV during last
April and May. The writer of this
article chaired these meetings and
a representative from ÍAV explained
the outline plan.
Four in-depth groups
were used:
1) People aged 24 - 38 living
near to the Blikastaðir area
i.e. Grafarvogur, Árbær and
Mosfellsbær districts, 10 people.
2) People aged 30 - 45 living in the
capital area, 10 people.
3) Specialists in planning, three
architects, one landscape architect,
three engineers or technicians, two
or district and even about differ-
ent choices about planning and
housing types.
B) Discussion part: This part starts
by a discussion about the qual-
ity of housing areas in general
terms. Then a planning proposal
is explained and finally discussion
(debate) about the proposal or
proposal of different alternatives
are being contemplated. Material
is provided for scrutiny; photos,
areal photographs and drawings
that participants can use to eval-
uate the planning proposal.
After the meeting the chairman
prepares a report describing the
main points in the answers of each
group to the questionaire and from
the discussion. This information is
also extracted from all the groups
and the main proposals as to how
the planning proposal should be
changed. In most cases it should be
sufficient to hold three - four meet-
ings to obtain well based propos-
als as to what aspects of the plan
could be improved upon. It also
supports this analysis if one of the
study groups contains professional
people with experience in the design
of housing areas and real estate
agents. If the attitudes of a larger
group are wanted towards a certain
question these questions can be
answered by Gallup or other com-
panies who do attitude surveys.
The benefits of this appraisal are
that through it is obtained a profes-
28 avs