10 square feet of outdoor space per förskoleplats is what the city of Stockholm offers the children in the current detaljplaneförslag at Bolidenplan within the project Årstastråket.
In the publication ”Vision for the future Bolidenplan” from 2016, developed jointly by the urban design and exploateringskontoren, states the following: ”the District follow the city's recommendations, which is 30 square feet of outdoor space per child for kindergartens. In addition, it is important to take into account the perspective /.../ to create educational and stimulating outdoor environments for the district's children. However, we know that it is difficult to compensate for the small farms through content and programming, because the child's development is actually affected by the size that they have to play on”.
thus passed from 30 square metres to 10 square metres per child!
Is this the plan proposal as an exception? No. Just as bad is it in all the four projects meatpacking district, Årstastråket, Årstafältet and Årstaberg. The total includes the approximately 14,000 homes and 40 nursery schools for 4,000 children!
10 square meters is what applies, sometimes less. A nursery school in the Årstaberg area get a farm of 6.1 square feet per child. The placed, as well as most of the kindergartens in these projects, in the ground floor of a house included in a high end neighborhood, with relatively dark and narrow courtyard.
observe how the förskolefrågan have been neglected at the förtätningen of sothern 1940s and 1950s, talsstadsdelar. How to now intentionally can also provide four brand new large projects with really substandard förskolegårdar is incomprehensible. The city has all requisite power to plan carefully for the children. It has a monopoly on the planning and it is strong as landowners in all of these examples.
we Have really no longer a place for children? Not advice?
the suburbs was in the 1940s and 1950s so much more attention and care. In the Stockholm master Plan of 1952 suggests that kindergartens and schools should be added first, preferably in their own buildings with large nice farms, with proximity to the park, green areas and transport links.
Why you do not think so today? Park in the district, at Årstafältet, can never – as suggested – offset too small förskolegårdar, just complement them. To market forces ignores the child perspective is no surprise. What upsets us is that also the city's planning body, is now so cynically and systematically do it.
the days in the district. They have today been relegated to what will be possible when other goals have been established, for example, plot ratio and ”urban qualities”.
General stressed the strong importance of the outdoors for health and as a counterbalance to sedentary. Also, the parents we meet tend to increasingly examine the outdoor environment in the face of their förskoleval. Therefore, there is likely to also market aspects to take into account in this förskolefrågan.
a stockholmsk abdication of the almost unbelievably kind? It has been quiet, have received surprising little attention and meager political debate. How was this so? What was the vision? Who bears the responsibility?