Words from Brussels
In the beginning of July I joined a summer school in Brussels organised by London Met University together with the Flemish Government (Vlaamse Overheid). The brief was intentionally concise, talking about the area in question and its future redevelopment – the North part of Brussels, locked between the airport, the canal and the city. Coming from a country where the planning process has a notoriously bad reputation the realities we faced in Brussels left me wondering whether this argument has any foundation at all.
Historically the Noordrand was open fields, which have later attracted sporadic developments catering for the newly industrialised city – the airport, heavy industries and transport links. Most recently in a post-industrial metropolis the predicted housing shortage and need for organisational seats such as NATO have all looked up North and marked the area as a candidate. However, its potential is in a deadlock between the political structures that have evolved in Brussels. This area of about 2,500 acres lies within the boundaries of the Brussels-Capital Region and Brussels municipalities (separate administrations), the Flemish Region and Flemish villages’ municipalities and the geographical metropolitan region. That separation leads to conundrums such as the tram route to the airport stopping short of airport because of the administrative boundary. The area of open spaces reminds very much of the North of England – brown field sites ripe for development but with further political complications.
The contrast between the historic core and the outskirts, the languages distribution, the European capital and the rural villages in immediate proximity is striking. It is a city in a heated debate about its future – an exciting position for young urbanists to get involved. In the meantime a publication will be soon coming out and hopefully a dialogue between all of the mentioned institutions in Brussels will be instigated.
