1. Metamorphological spaces Those hot spots where planning policy really addresses societal transformations Hans Leinfelder Flemish Government – Spatial Planning and Urbanism December 16, 2011

2. Content 1. Context 2. Structural transformations and spatial transformations 3. Introducing the idea of “metamorphological spaces” 4. Detecting metamorphological spaces: about dream and reality

3. 1. Context

4.  Spatial Structure Plan for Flanders (1997) Strategic planning document = policy document after 20 years without real visioning of very liberal building permit policy Major policy options = control of sprawl containment of residential and industrial claims (urban and harbour contours) protection of open space (green and agricultural contours)

5. = Physical or technical approach in spatial planning allocation of space to land uses strict book keeping of spatial claims

6.  Visionary document (2009) on consumption and claims of space 2020-2050 Product of Policy Research Centre Spatial Planning and Housing Start of debate on development of new spatial policy document Exploration of the context Major challenges Definition of spatial claims Mix of different functional logics Diversity in transformations with permanent impact Evaluation of (new) spatial claims in relation to current use of space New impulses concerning content and process of spatial planning Lines of thought on participatory processes, visioning, scenario building and concept of ‘metamorphological spaces’

7.  Development of new Spatial Policy Plan Flanders (Green Paper -2011) Subsidarity approach Focussing on visioning on and realisation of elements of Flemish strategic importance Selective approach Not comprehensive Territorial approach Metamorphological spaces → Strategic programmes of action Strategic themes Strategic spaces →Aiming for concrete realisation

8. 2. Structural transformations and spatial transformations

9. TRANSFORMATIONS (societal, ecological international, economic, political, …) SPATIAL TRANSFORMATIONSSOCIETAL ACCEPTANCE changes in use of space (sectoral, of debate on spatial policy functional, mixed) SPATIAL VISIONVISION ON PLANNING POLICY SUGGESTIONS

10.  Structural transformations Spatial transformations Diversity in spatial transformations depends on but is not linealy explained by structural tranformations in society Explained by strategic behaviour (economic, ecological and socio-cultural ambitions) of consumers of space (individuals, groups, …) Ambitions expressed in terms of “biodiversity”, “health”, “prosperity”, “employment”, “climate proofness” - Sectoral consumption of space - Conflict and synergy between functional spatial logics - Mixed land use  Structural transformations Societal acceptance Societal acceptance of debate on spatial planning is explained by transformations in - Social relations - Social practices - Value systems

11.  Vision and concepts of spatial planning policy address spatial expression of these transformations, but are not almighty Ambition op spatial planning policy is that each of these spatial claims develops in a sustanaible way  Simultaneous structural transformations at the same location Interfunctional spatial planning Tuning of spatial logics or expressions of different transformations Interscalar spatial planning Positioning spatial transformations at local, regional, national and international level Intertemporal spatial planning Mixing low and high dynamic transformations and claims

12. A vision on Flanders should try to define/sketch the interfunctional, interscalar and intertemporal conditions or preconditions within which a diversity of transformations can occur rather than allocating these transformations to well defined areas  Dynamic transformations ≠ static spatial phenomena within clearly defined of defineable areas Determined by non-spatial, but economic, ecological, social, cultural, … transformations, logics and individual and group strategies Impossible to be ‘encapsulated’ in political concepts ‘urban areas’, ‘settlements’, ‘specific economic nodes’, ‘economic network’, ‘harbours’, ‘Flemish Ecological Network’, ‘intact landscapes’, … Impossible to be allocated to land uses through functional zoning

13. 3. Introducing “metamorphological spaces”

14. Planology → fluviology (Boelens) VERSUS Planning is essentially territorial (Zonneveld) No longer a territorium-covering political division of Flanders, based on territorial characteristics, in order to regulate land uses But a layered strategic policy framework for actions, measures and instruments in order to ‘spatially’ accomodate transformations a vision and conceptual framework on central values of planning policy more detailed goals and perspectives in relation to the spatial expression of prior transformations at Flemish level more detailed area specific goals and perspectives for a limited number of prior ‘metamorphological spaces’ at Flemish level

15. Metamorphological spaces Characterized by transformations Flemish government wants to anticipate on because of their importance for Flemish spatial structure expected complexe interference of divergent, perhaps contradictory, transformations and strategies at supra local level ≠ spaces without policy constraints ≠ spaces where planning policy simply fulfills the needs/claims ≠ spaces without long term decisions ≠ spaces without quality ambitions

16. Prior ‘metamorphological spaces’ because of their importance for Flemish spatial structure Internationally important natural areas (EU-habitat) Harbours and related areas Change/transformation can be very limited Prior ‘metamorphological spaces’ because of complexe interference of transformations at supra local level Parts of large urban areas New perspectives for brownfields or labor class neighbourhoods Urban fringes Urban expansion in relation to sustainable use of open space fragments

17. 4. Detecting metamorphological spaces: about dream and reality

18. A simple question in theory is a complexe challenge in practice Obstacles Selectiveness Scale Engagement for realisation Strategic Planning > Strategic Projects Struggle Flemish Master Builder Team Spatial Policy Plan

19. Coast, Lille-Kortrijk, Brussels fringe, MAHL, Antwerp- Rotterdam

20. River valleys, Brussels fringe+urbanized Antwerp-Brussels, Lille-Kortrijk, Coast, Harbour network, Three Corners Park