The study is based on two major questions: it tried on one hand to identify reasons for leaving urbanised areas, and on the other hand to define the mechanisms that further this process and how they can be remedied. This can only be done via a transversal approach that includes the cultural, social and economic dimensions of urban regeneration. The report provides sustainable solutions to the urban crisis through proposals for an adequate use of public facilities.

 For a couple of decades urbanised areas have had to face several problems such as the loss of economic activities, suburbanisation, deterioratin of the buildings, or pauperisation. The research project takes place within this context of urban crisis. While actions for urban regeneration were implemented in the 1970s, this did not prevent a general decline of towns and cities. If we compare figures relating to rehabilitation to those relating to new buildings, we observe that costs are roughly similar: 1,322 €/m² for heavy rehabilitation, 1,303 €/m² for a new building. If we consider technical costs a developer has no particular interest in building rather than rehabilitating. However there are technical hazards in rehabilitation operations. As to the process of destruction-reconstruction, it is far most costly (1.672 €/m²) than new buildings.
It is thus essential to bring town-planning actors to realise that built areas are a patrimony that ought to be valued rather than a handicap and to support them in this valorising process.

The research project was based on both fundamental studies and on the analysis of case studies. Fundamental studies made it possible to measure the scope of the process, to define the part played by the various actors, and to understand the mechanisms involved. In its more pragmatic aspect it dealt with several Walloon cities but also with what instruments were used and what results were achieved abroad.

One of the study's major conclusions is the need to implement a better spatial modulation of current resources on the Walloon territory. There is no need for any new measures to further rehabilitation. Such modulation can be approached through a more efficient use of private sponsoring (since public resources are not sufficient). Between 1996 and 2002 for instance public operators accounted for only 4.1 % of building permits for new dwelling units and 2.5 % of transformation permits for existing buildings. Solutions can be found through the analysis of systems used abroad. We can think of public-private partnerships (PPPs) – implementing processes similar to Gap-Funding in England to remedy the real estate obstacle, or to the Caisse des Dépôts et Consignations in France to lower the financial hurdle, or to the rigorous German planning to reduce administrative difficulties.

Conférence Permanente du Développement Territorial (CPDT), Walloon Region
Belgium
http://cpdt.wallonie.be
Jean-Marie Halleux, tel. +32 4 3665327

//

//2004

LEPUR-ULg : J-M. Halleux, J-M. Lambotte, L. Kessler, V. Périn, B. Pirotte (under the direction of Prof. B. Mérenne and J-H. Gathon ). CREAT – UCL : H. Barthe-Batsalle, S. Gérard, R. Harou, L. Picard (under the direction of Prof.M.-L. De Keersmaecker )

research

Urban Policy > Urban environment

Cultural heritage, Urban renewal