Abstract Policy changes have resulted in a shift of focus from greenfield to brownfield development, leading to densification and transformation of the urban fabric. Planning decisions are necessary steps towards implementation. However, such decisions do not necessarily mean that development projects materialise. From there, public authorities can choose an active role, as in greenfield urban expansion, or a passive role leaving the implementation of the plan to private developers. Despite obvious shortcomings, zoning is still the common statutory instrument of land-use planning. Traditional flat, exclusionary zoning has been under attack and is claimed to be inflexible and narrowly focused. However, adaptability has been a principal feature of zoning, evolving as a system from rigid zoning to case-by-case approvals. Consequently, modern zoning decisions are often made in direct negotiations with developers. Still, it is claimed that the statutory planning system leaves too little room for negotiations. Hence, informal strategic land-use planning has been adapted as an additional framework for negotiations. Norwegian planning has followed this international trend, introducing flexible zoning instruments and negotiations between planning authorities and developers and local public authorities rely on private property development as a means of urban development. The purpose of this article is to examine how municipal authorities and developers conduct negotiations on detailed zoning plans for the implementation of brownfield transformation projects in the existing urban fabric. The study is based on four cases in Oslo, where municipal authorities and developers have negotiated the content of the zoning plans for the implementation of primarily residential development. The findings indicate that statutory and legally binding planning could work just as well as informal planning as the basis for integrative negotiations if statutory master plans are made more generic and allow for a necessary degree of flexibility. However, it seems that the parties’ ability to trust each other is even more fundamental for both the opportunity to establish integrative negotiations and for the outcome of the negotiations.

中文翻译：

---

城市发展项目中开发商与规划部门的谈判

摘要 政策变化导致重点从绿地开发转向棕地开发，导致城市结构的致密化和转型。规划决策是实施的必要步骤。然而，这样的决定并不一定意味着开发项目会实现。从那里，公共当局可以选择积极的角色，如绿地城市扩张，或被动的角色，将计划的实施留给私人开发商。尽管存在明显的缺陷，分区仍然是土地利用规划的常见法定工具。传统的扁平化、排他性分区受到了攻击，据称其缺乏灵活性和狭隘性。然而，适应性一直是分区的一个主要特征，从严格的分区到逐案批准的系统发展。最后，现代分区决策通常是在与开发商直接谈判中做出的。尽管如此，据称法定规划制度留给谈判的空间太小。因此，非正式的战略性土地使用规划已被改编为额外的谈判框架。挪威的规划顺应了这一国际趋势，引入了灵活的分区工具，规划当局与开发商和地方公共当局之间的谈判依靠私有财产开发作为城市发展的手段。本文的目的是研究市政当局和开发商如何就在现有城市结构中实施棕地改造项目的详细分区计划进行谈判。该研究基于奥斯陆的四个案例，市政当局和开发商就主要实施住宅开发的分区计划的内容进行了谈判。调查结果表明，如果法定总体规划更加通用并允许必要程度的灵活性，那么法定和具有法律约束力的规划可以像非正式规划一样作为综合谈判的基础。然而，似乎双方相互信任的能力对于建立一体化谈判的机会和谈判结果来说更为重要。调查结果表明，如果法定总体规划更加通用并允许必要程度的灵活性，那么法定和具有法律约束力的规划可以像非正式规划一样作为综合谈判的基础。然而，似乎双方相互信任的能力对于建立一体化谈判的机会和谈判结果来说更为重要。调查结果表明，如果法定总体规划更加通用并允许必要程度的灵活性，那么法定和具有法律约束力的规划可以像非正式规划一样作为综合谈判的基础。然而，似乎双方相互信任的能力对于建立一体化谈判的机会和谈判结果来说更为重要。