Přihlásit se
Přihlásit se

2/2000

OBSAH 2/2000

Názory a diskuse

  • POROVNÁNÍ ČESKÝCH A EVROPSKÝCH UKAZATELŮ ROZVOJE VENKOVA
    Ondřej Bartušek

    Comparing Czech and European Indicators of Rural Development, by Ondřej Bartušek

    The plan for the development of agriculture and the country in the Czech Republic 2000-2006, made in 1999 under participation of Terplan, a.s., is a necessary precondition of Czechia’s joining the SAPARD programme (Special Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural Development). This programme is an EU document, defining the measures to be taken within the sector of agriculture and rural development of CEEC (Central and Eastern European Countries - Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Rumania, Slovakia, and Slovenia) as membership applicants. The contribution deals in detail with the current situation in Czechia.

  • “REGULAČNÍ PLÁNY” VÝROČNÍ SHROMÁŽDĚNÍ ČLENŮ ASOCIACE PRO URBANISMUS A ÚZEMNÍ PLÁNOVÁNÍ ČR, PLZEŇ, 22.−23. ŘÍJNA 1999

    Regulation Plans − The Annual Meeting of the Czech Urban and Spatial Planning Association, Plzeň, 22−23 October 1999

    Except for the largest cities, there is generally a lack of experience in elaborating regulation plans. Rich evidence shows that Municipality and District Office clerks look for answers to questions of an elementary kind. Therefore the Czech Urban and Spatial Planning Association decided to organize a seminar on the topic, in October 1999. After many discussions it had been decided to focus especially on the contents of regulation plans and the manners of expressing regulation elements, as the Building Act No 131/1998 Coll. concentrates more on a step-by-step description of the process than the regulation itself.
    Regulation plan samples and the experience and opinions contained therein show typically both good ideas and errors (including neglection of legal rules). So, the editors were at a loss: Are the samples to be published despite some mistakes, or not? In the end, the former was decided, as people seem to be waiting for every inspiration in grasping the regulation plans. The published samples cannot, though, be treated as methodology nor as advice. It is always necessary to combine the inspiration with careful consultation of legal regulations and adapt the procedure and contents to their wording.
    In spite of some mistakes the authors of the samples deserve our thanks for their pioneer work, without which we would be unable to gradually unify the approach to regulation plans. Master plans of municipalities had also been showing many irregularities, but after publishing some samples their quality improved and various views got closer to each other. The necessity to discuss things is another good reason for publishing the samples. In this issue the following contributions are presented:
    • Plzeň-Slovany-Barracks, Plzeň-Vinice North / Irena Králová
    • Pardubice - CMZ Master Plan / Milan Košař & Petra Hauptová
    • Building up Písek’s Čechova Street / Luboš Průša
    • Links Between Regulation and Master Plans / Vojtěch Matějka
    • Reasons for Regulation Plans of Town Preservation Areas and Zones / Kamila Matoušková
    • Foreign Regulation Planning Experience; the Example of Germany and Switzerland / Vít Řezáč

  • NĚKTERÉ ZÁSADY PRO NOVOU PRÁVNÍ ÚPRAVU ÚZEMNÍHO PLÁNOVÁNÍ − PŘÍSPĚVEK DO DISKUSE
    Martin Říha

    Some Essentials of the New Legal Regulation of Physical Planning; A Discussion Contribution, by Martin Říha

    The writer deals with some ideas to speed up the new legal regulation of physical planning and decision-making, saying the law should be preceeded by an open and lively debate of specialists. As points to be discussed, and based on his own professional experience in public administration and physical planning, he is mentioning some points of the oncoming legal regulation that should differ from today’s practice.

Aktuality a informace

Přílohy pravidelné