03717nam 2200373z- 450 991049373370332120231214141133.0(CKB)5590000000537485(oapen)https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/71531(EXLCZ)99559000000053748520202108d2021 |y 0gerurmn|---annantxtrdacontentcrdamediacrrdacarrierKonzeptverfahren als Instrument einer gemeinwohlorientierten StadtentwicklungBerlinUniversitätsverlag der Technischen Universität Berlin20211 electronic resource (144 p.)ISR Impulse Online (bis Bd. 50: ISR Graue Reihe)3-7983-3174-X Who should profit from urban planning? An increasing number of stakeholders currently demand that planning policy leads to added value for the entire urban society and not just for individual groups: Designing for the common good! One instrument of public real estate policy that negotiates the common good could be a conceptual allocation of public property (Konzeptverfahren). This instrument allows cities to allocate their land based on the quality of the idea for development and use instead of price-based bidding. In public invitations to tender, municipalities define a set of criteria that applicants can or must meet. The aim of this publication is to evaluate the orientation of such tenders towards the common good using a list of criteria compiled from the following existing assessments: The Federal Building Code (Baugesetzbuch); the city yield (Stadtrendite); a proposed federal policy to support not-for-profit housing companies (Wohngemeinnützigkeit); the Common Good Balance Sheet (Gemeinwohlökonomie); the Better-Life-Index (Wohlstandsforschung) and the common good criteria as defined in the federal tax code (Gemeinnützigkeit nach Abgabenordnung). Although there may be some variations in definitions of common good, at the core of these assessments are social criteria, ecological sustainability, and opportunities for participation. Beside these dominant categories, each assessment is supplemented by less common criteria which are grouped into six additional categories, giving an overview of how the common good is currently defined. This paper examines 28 invitations to tender based on the conceptual allocation of public property (Konzeptausschreibungen). Of these 28 invitations, each from a different German city, it was found that all contained, to some extent, the criteria for forming common good. As such, these tenders can be considered as supporting the common good. This script finds, however, that the categories participation, education and health should resonate more strongly in future tenders. The instrument (Konzeptverfahren) offers municipalities the opportunity to set development goals that are based on local needs and public interest criteria. But, as the comparison shows, there are significant differences between tendering procedures. Therefore, it should not be concluded that tendering based on the conceptual allocation of public property guarantees public interest-oriented urban development.Urban & municipal planningbicssccommon good real estate conceptional allocation public property public interestUrban & municipal planningGennies Monaauth1322409BOOK9910493733703321Konzeptverfahren als Instrument einer gemeinwohlorientierten Stadtentwicklung3034968UNINA02818nam 22004693 450 991014975980332120250109080609.097816823000221682300021(CKB)3710000000935018(BIP)053454999(MiAaPQ)EBC31872455(Au-PeEL)EBL31872455(Exl-AI)31872455(EXLCZ)99371000000093501820250109d2015 uy 0engurcnu||||||||txtrdacontentcrdamediacrrdacarrierThe 2016 Contenders1st ed.New York :Diversion Publishing Corp.,2015.©2015.1 online resource (40 pages)The 2016 Contenders: Jeb Bush -- Copyright -- Introduction -- A Clan of Ferocious Competitors Returns to the Fray -- Inside Jeb Bush’s long game: A bet on peaking late -- Jeb Bush dogged by decades of questions about business deals -- How Jeb Bush’s firm made him rich — and created a nest egg for his family -- More on Jeb Bush -- More from The Washington Post… -- Connect with Diversion BooksGenerated by AI.Presidential candidates are a breed apart, often propelled by traits that have shaped their careers and have deep roots in personal histories.Often their greatest strength can turn at supernova speed into their greatest weakness. The exact qualities that set them apart from the field trip them up eventually over the long haul of a presidential campaign.Jeb Bush's DNA string might as well be tied around his neck. It's a twisting, double-edged lariat, this family inheritance, at once his greatest advantage and disadvantage. On the one hand, it makes him an immediate force in the crowded GOP presidential field. On the other hand, it saddles him with a problem of self-definition; people think they already know him, which means they see him as more of the same of something they already got. Twice.In this series of eBooks, The Washington Post is exploring in-depth all these key characteristics of the leading presidential contenders, the very characteristics that could help make one of them the country's next commander in chief--or forever sink their presidential ambitions.2016 ContendersPresidential candidatesUnited StatesGenerated by AIPolitical campaignsUnited StatesGenerated by AIPresidential candidatesPolitical campaignsJenkins Sally1781384The Washington Post The Washington1780223MiAaPQMiAaPQMiAaPQBOOK9910149759803321The 2016 Contenders4306116UNINA