PLPR - Book of abstracts

摘要: The (mono)functional zoning in land use planning has already a long record of service and finds its roots an historical political societal ambition separating functions activities space. But above all, the continuous success this type is linked to legal security it creates. Although decrease still seems invincible problem, technique functional spatial increasingly being questioned. An alternative discourse ‘open space as public space’, about open fragments urbanised context I developed my PhD-dissertation (Leinfelder, 2007 2009), for instance incompatible with ... but also three other discourses relation between city countryside discussed dissertation do not result entities that are inspired by uses, differences dynamics, environmental impact meaning places. Based on these observations, ‘rediscovery’ plan – ‘strategic’ necessary. addition indicates more active, realisation oriented selective approach than today’s comprehensive passive zoning. strategic no longer related allocation zones one or refer much possible (societal) purposes involved. name tries express most relevant characteristics desired concerning vulnerability, meaning, And juridical rules define conditions which maybe yet unknown projects can take place without mentioning uses name. In words, development management become dominant traditional Undoubtedly, landscape holistic frame integration becoming importance such plans. (Selman, 2006) be considered indicative temporary reference private actors through decision making specific measures coordinated even when choices at moment different those design plan. (Van Ark, 2005) References Leinfelder, H. (2007) Open ruimte als publieke ruimte, dominante en alternatieve planningsdiscoursen ten aanzien van landbouw een (Vlaamse) verstedelijkende context. (Open space, agriculture (Flemish) urbanising context). Academia Press, Gent. (2009, forthcoming) Zoning rather uses. In: Van der Valk, A. & Dijk, T. (eds.) Out open. Routledge, London. Selman, P. (2006) Planning scale.