Recreational planning and mapping for enlargement of the green Structure of Greater Copenhagen Development of planning and management in order to increase health and well being Ole Hjorth Caspersen & Anton Stal Olafsson University of Copenhagen
The psychological aspect Attraction from nature The Physical The Social Colours Sound Scents Common experiences Peaceful View Exercise Accessibility Being Together Family Friends Challenge
Objectives The project aims to contribute to increase quality of life and health through activation of local landscape and cultural resources Development of new methods in regional and municipal planning that facilitates healthcare demands by an increased knowledge and use of landscape and nature facilities
Planning bodies: 60 years of regional planning - In Greater Copenhagen Planning board of Copenhagen Ministry of Housing Egnsplanrådet The Capital Council The three Counties Greater Copenhagen Authority 2005 1947 1960 1967 1974 1990 2000 Weak Plan reform 1970 Increasing strength
1954
1968
1986
1998
Access to green areas Green Fingers Green Ring Green Heart 120% Population % within specific distance from green areas 0-500 501-1000 > 1000 100% 80% 25% 21% 60% 32% 29% 30% 27% 29% 40% 66% 18% 76% 20% 48% 39% 44% 36% 29% 41% 0% Helsingfors Helsinki Greater Hovedstads Copenhagen omr. Hamborg Randstat Antwerben Milano Barcelona Stockholm Source: Busck, Caspersen, Holmes, Konijnendijk and Olafsson 2006
Present and future green areas
Stockholm Inspiration from Stockholm Regionplane- och trafikkontoret and Helsinki Tyrväinen et al 2007 Adaptation to the Danish landscape and data (GIS)
Experience values 1. Wildernes 2. Feeling of forest 3. Panoramic views, water and scenery 4. Biodiversity and land form 5. Cultural history 6. Activity and challenge 7. Service and gathering
Questionnaires and peoples wishes to landscape and forests Silence People prefer forest with variation Older beach forest are popular Commons are nearly as popular Lakes and streams Dead trees and cuttings are considered as negative experiences Source: Friluftsliv i skovene 1976-1994 Frank Søndergård Jensen & Niels Elers Koch Friluftsliv i det åbne land 1994/95 Frank Søndergård Jensen
3. Panoramic views, water and scenery Definition Locations with good viewing opportunities facilitate experiences of wide space and freedom. Hilltops, open landscapes, lake and sea shores are examples of such locations Windy day at the west coast Baunetbakke at the village of Alsønderup
Use of map based Features Class 3: Panoramic views, water and Scenery View point Lake scenery Lake minimum 6 ha. Larger open land minimum 6 ha. Objectives: The analysis should be applicable at regional level. Transparent Objective and well documented Traffic noise (road, train, airport) max. 55 db(a).
3. Panoramic views, water and scenery GIS Analysis Data Analysis Feature Analysis Feature KMS; Lake, sea Selection lake (min 6 ha), sea Feature (Sea & Lake) Buffer (50 m) Feature (Sea & lake shore) KMS; Topo 1:25.000 & DEM Digitalising hilltops Feature (Potential viewpoint) Experience map class 3 3. Wide views, water and scenery State dep.: Road, rail traffic noise Buffer (Attribute 55 db) Traffic noise 55dB Counties: Air noise Union & Selection (55 db) HUR; Urban zone KMS; Urban, forest, lake Merge and aggregate No open land Erase & selection (min 6 ha) Open land min. 6ha
Vestskoven an example
Vestskoven and the future enlargement The plan from 1967
Ownership Vestskoven Nature centre During the first 25 years 1328 ha was purchased by the state
Class 2. Feeling of forest
3.Panoramic views water and scenery
Class 6. Activity and challenge
Trafic density
Traffic Noise 55 db(a)
Traffic Noise 45 db(a)
Future infrastructure
Conclusion A detailed view of recreational potential and existing facilities Conflicting interests make the future enlargement difficult The question of ownership is important Uncertainties: The regional body has been abolish
Dissemination Green structure WEB GIS
Thank you for your attention Ole Hjorth Caspersen & Anton Stal Olafsson University of Copenhagen
By: Anne Juul Sørensen Line Jeppesen Verification public participation Experience mapping Questionnaire Focus group Interview How many realized the experience? Why did they get the experience? Why not? Biodiversity Culture history Statistics To which degree do have the expected experience Qualitative results Factors that increase the experience or reduce it Noise Smell Accessibility