Search

On January 1st 2024, the Environment and Planning Act (EPA) took effect in the Netherlands. This legislation aims to simplify existing environmental legislation for spatial projects by combining them into one. An important pillar of the EPA, specifically of the environmental permit, is public participation. However, the safeguarding of this in the law is limited since its organization is not regulated. In general, the methods for involving the public in environmental decision-making remain contentious, which has previously led to research into principles that define good public participation processes. The majority of the literature assumes that all parties involved in a process share the same principles, while it may be the case that stakeholders hold differing views on what constitutes a good process. In the EPA, a conscious choice was made to prohibit municipalities from imposing requirements on initiators on how they implement participation, the reason for this being enabling local customization. Yet, this uncertainty regarding the best practices for public participation can make it difficult for an initiator to set up participation for their project. This research aimed to gain insight into what constitutes a good public participation process by determining if and how stakeholders characterize this differently, specifically for real estate construction in residential areas. Therefore, the research question was as follows: What perspectives exist on what constitutes a good public participation process for real estate construction projects in residential areas and what characterizes the stakeholders within these perspectives? Q-methodology was used to extract stakeholders' views on successful participation from the results of a survey. This resulted in the identification of four perspectives, representing four different collective views on good participation shared by several stakeholders. Perspective one, a trusted process leading to influence by the ri, Civil Engineering | Construction Management and Engineering

Urban renewal is seen as an opportunity to improve the environmental and socio-economic performance of cities. Yet, it appears hard to tackle the social challenges by a focus on spatial interventions only. A more participating society and more user involvement could help to improve the social environment. Dutch urban area development, such as urban renewal, is becoming more private-led, while the government is trying to shift responsibilities. The Environment and Planning Act is a tool to ensure the involvement of users during private-led developments. In theory, an involvement process can contribute to the objectives of the most important stakeholders in urban renewal projects: the government, users and private developers. Since these potentials in practice are often not achieved, literature advises to involve users early and intensively in the development process and to develop with flexibility along the process. However, for each project, boundaries limit the development options for a private developer and therefore, as well the options to involve users. It seems that private developers do not have enough room for involvement to align the involvement process with the objectives of the three stakeholders. This study explores that hypothesis. Considering the perspective of the private developer, the main question of this research is: to what extent do the development boundaries leave enough room for private developers to align user involvement with the objectives of users, the municipality and the developer themselves? The research is conducted through a case study analysis of three private-led urban renewal projects in which users were involved. Developers, municipal officials and users were interviewed to gain insights. The analyses show how development boundaries are defined, what room is left for user involvement and how the involvement process aligns with the objectives of the three parties. By considering the developers perspective, it is explored why the cur

RIVM rapport:De zorg voor de kwaliteit van het grondwater valt nu onder de Wet bodembescherming, maar gaat in de toekomst deel uitmaken van de Omgevingswet. Vanwege deze overgang worden de regels voor het beheer van de grondwaterkwaliteit op termijn herzien. Het RIVM presenteert daarom een aantal opties voor de herziening van het beoordelingskader. Ze zijn bedoeld als inhoudelijke bijdrage voor discussie en voor toekomstige besluitvorming. De opties betreffen een actualisatie en vereenvoudiging van het normenkader en de aansluiting bij de doelen en verplichtingen van de Europese Kaderrichtlijn Water (KRW). Ook is geconstateerd dat de stoffenlijsten voor normen van aanpalende milieudomeinen, zoals voor bodem en oppervlaktewater, onderling verschillen en meer synergie daarin gewenst is. Een belangrijke optie is om meer aandacht te geven aan de beoordeling van de kwaliteit van grondwater in de gebieden waar drinkwater wordt gewonnen. Onderdeel van de voorgestelde kwaliteitsbeoordeling is het model GRADE (Groundwater Risk Assessment near Drinking water Extractions) dat het risico van een verontreiniging voor de winning van drinkwater berekent. Dit model is momenteel in ontwikkeling en houdt rekening met de kwaliteitseisen die aan de winning van grondwater worden gesteld en de mate waarin stoffen worden verdund en afgebroken in het grondwater. Dit kan een oplossing bieden voor de huidige problematiek in grondwaterbeschermingsgebieden, die wordt veroorzaakt door het verschil tussen normen voor grondwater nabij winningen en normen voor de aanpak van grondwaterverontreiniging vanuit bodembeheer. Aanbevolen wordt om de verschillende opties samen met de betrokken overheden uit te werken en het GRADE-model verder te ontwikkelen en te valideren., Ensuring the quality of groundwater is currently part of the remit of the Soil Protection Act, but in future will come under the Environment and Planning Act. Because of this transition, the rules relating to the management of the quality of groundwater are being reviewed. The National Institute for Public Health and the Environment is therefore presenting a number of options for the revision of the assessment framework. They are intended as a contribution towards the discussion and towards future decision making. The options involve a modernisation and simplification of the framework of standards and are more closely in keeping with the aims and obligations of the European Water Framework Directive. It has also been noted that the lists of substances for standards of adjacent environmental fields, such as for soil and surface water, are not consistent and that therefore greater synergy is needed in these areas. An important option is to focus more strongly on the assessment of the quality of groundwater in areas where drinking water is extracted. Part of the proposed quality assessment is the GRADE (Groundwater Risk Assessment near Drinking Water Extractions) model, which calculates the risk of contamination when extracting drinking water. The model, which is currently under development, takes account of the quality requirements relating to the extraction of drinking water, and the degree to which substances are diluted and degradated in the groundwater. This represents a possible solution to the current problems in groundwater protection areas that arise as a result of the differences between the standards that apply to groundwater near extraction areas and those applied by soil management bodies when tackling groundwater contamination. It is recommended that the various options be examined in greater detail in partnership with the relevant government bodies, and that the GRADE model be developed further and validated.

RIVM rapport:Met de Omgevingswet wordt het omgevingsrecht vereenvoudigd en toegankelijker gemaakt. Het idee is om hiervoor tien Informatiehuizen op te zetten (geluid, lucht, bodem, water, afval, cultureel erfgoed, natuur, externe veiligheid, bouw en ruimte) waarin informatie per domein wordt ondergebracht. Wanneer wordt besloten de informatiehuizen te realiseren, gaan zij informatie leveren aan het Digitale Stelsel Omgevingswet. Dit stelsel wordt ontwikkeld om de uitvoering van Omgevingswet te ondersteunen. Met de Informatiehuizen wordt de beschikbaarheid en kwaliteit verbeterd van de gegevens die nodig zijn bij de processen van de Omgevingswet, zoals vergunningverlening en planvorming. Het RIVM heeft in 2016 de opdracht gekregen om de ontwikkeling van de Informatiehuizen te begeleiden in de eerste zogeheten analysefase. Dit is de eerste van de drie fases die bepaald zijn om de Informatiehuizen op te zetten. In dit rapport wordt het werk dat hiervoor is verricht vastgelegd en verantwoord. Zo is een opzet gemaakt om de standaard Informatiehuizen in te richten (referentiearchitectuur). Daarnaast is een studie verricht over de kwaliteit van de gegevens. Deze en andere onderliggende studies zijn als bijlage toegevoegd. Daarnaast zijn extra werkzaamheden verricht, die ook in dit rapport zijn beschreven. Dit betreft ondersteuning en advies aan het interbestuurlijke beslisorgaan voor de implementatieprogramma 'Aan de slag met Omgevingswet' (Programmaraad/ Opdrachtgevend Beraad), hulp bij de opdrachtverlening en de uitwerking van een Werkplan voor 2017. Het RIVM constateert dat het proces minder snel verloopt dan gewenst is en geeft daarover enkele adviezen. Zo wordt aanbevolen het momentum in het werk aan de informatiehuizen te benutten en de richting te expliciteren om concrete stappen te kunnen nemen in de totstandkoming van de Informatiehuizen., The Environment and Planning Act simplifies environmental law and makes it more accessible. The idea is to establish 10 so-called 'Information Houses' for various domains (noise, air, soil, water, waste management, cultural heritage, nature, external safety, construction, and spatial planning) and to store information per domain in each Information House. Once a decision is taken to establish the Information Houses, these houses will supply information to the Digital Systems Environment and Planning Act (DSO) for each domain. This framework is being developed in order to facilitate the implementation of the Environment and Planning Act. The Information Houses will improve the availability and quality of the information that is needed for the Environment and Planning Act processes, such as the granting of permits and development of plans. In 2016, RIVM was tasked with supervising the development of the Information Houses in the initial so-called analytical phase. This is the first of the three phases that were formulated for the purpose of establishing the Information Houses. The report at hand describes and accounts for the work carried out in this first phase. The design of the standard Information Houses (reference architecture) has been defined. In addition, a study was carried out on the quality of the information. These and other underlying studies are contained in the appendix. This report also describes other activities carried out to facilitate the work at hand. This includes providing support and advice to the intergovernmental decision-making body for the implementation programme 'Environment and Planning Act in practice' (Programme Board/Commissioning Body), assistance in the granting of orders, and working out the details of a Work Plan for 2017. RIVM has noticed that the process is not proceeding as quickly as desired and gives several recommendations in that regard. For example, the momentum of the work carried out on the Information Houses until now s