A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Negotiations Between Developers and Planning Authorities in Urban Development Projects
Policy changes have resulted in a shift of focus from greenfield to brownfield development, leading to densification and transformation of the urban fabric. Planning decisions are necessary steps towards implementation. However, such decisions do not necessarily mean that development projects materialise. From there, public authorities can choose an active role, as in greenfield urban expansion, or a passive role leaving the implementation of the plan to private developers.
Despite obvious shortcomings, zoning is still the common statutory instrument of land-use planning. Traditional flat, exclusionary zoning has been under attack and is claimed to be inflexible and narrowly focused. However, adaptability has been a principal feature of zoning, evolving as a system from rigid zoning to case-by-case approvals. Consequently, modern zoning decisions are often made in direct negotiations with developers.
Still, it is claimed that the statutory planning system leaves too little room for negotiations. Hence, informal strategic land-use planning has been adapted as an additional framework for negotiations. Norwegian planning has followed this international trend, introducing flexible zoning instruments and negotiations between planning authorities and developers and local public authorities rely on private property development as a means of urban development. The purpose of this article is to examine how municipal authorities and developers conduct negotiations on detailed zoning plans for the implementation of brownfield transformation projects in the existing urban fabric. The study is based on four cases in Oslo, where municipal authorities and developers have negotiated the content of the zoning plans for the implementation of primarily residential development. The findings indicate that statutory and legally binding planning could work just as well as informal planning as the basis for integrative negotiations if statutory master plans are made more generic and allow for a necessary degree of flexibility. However, it seems that the parties’ ability to trust each other is even more fundamental for both the opportunity to establish integrative negotiations and for the outcome of the negotiations.
Negotiations Between Developers and Planning Authorities in Urban Development Projects
Policy changes have resulted in a shift of focus from greenfield to brownfield development, leading to densification and transformation of the urban fabric. Planning decisions are necessary steps towards implementation. However, such decisions do not necessarily mean that development projects materialise. From there, public authorities can choose an active role, as in greenfield urban expansion, or a passive role leaving the implementation of the plan to private developers.
Despite obvious shortcomings, zoning is still the common statutory instrument of land-use planning. Traditional flat, exclusionary zoning has been under attack and is claimed to be inflexible and narrowly focused. However, adaptability has been a principal feature of zoning, evolving as a system from rigid zoning to case-by-case approvals. Consequently, modern zoning decisions are often made in direct negotiations with developers.
Still, it is claimed that the statutory planning system leaves too little room for negotiations. Hence, informal strategic land-use planning has been adapted as an additional framework for negotiations. Norwegian planning has followed this international trend, introducing flexible zoning instruments and negotiations between planning authorities and developers and local public authorities rely on private property development as a means of urban development. The purpose of this article is to examine how municipal authorities and developers conduct negotiations on detailed zoning plans for the implementation of brownfield transformation projects in the existing urban fabric. The study is based on four cases in Oslo, where municipal authorities and developers have negotiated the content of the zoning plans for the implementation of primarily residential development. The findings indicate that statutory and legally binding planning could work just as well as informal planning as the basis for integrative negotiations if statutory master plans are made more generic and allow for a necessary degree of flexibility. However, it seems that the parties’ ability to trust each other is even more fundamental for both the opportunity to establish integrative negotiations and for the outcome of the negotiations.
Negotiations Between Developers and Planning Authorities in Urban Development Projects
Holsen, Terje (author)
disP - The Planning Review ; 56 ; 34-46
2020-07-02
13 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
Unknown
A new era for developers and planning authorities?
| British Library Online Contents | 2003
Self-organizing in urban development : developers coordinating between construction projects
| BASE | 2023
Self-organizing in urban development: developers coordinating between construction projects
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2024
Community Benefits: Developers, Negotiations, and Accountability
| Taylor & Francis Verlag | 2024
Investment Constraints in Urban Regeneration: Property Developers and Local Authorities Perspective
| DOAJ | 2016