Aalten

Introduction

This is the report of the first round of discussions on the environmental vision in the 'Aalten residential areas' sub-area. A total of around 30 residents took part in the discussion. The discussion was facilitated by six employees of the municipality of Aalten.

If you have any comments or suggestions regarding this report, or if you would like to contribute to the new environmental vision of the municipality of Aalten, please send an email to omgevingsvisie@aalten.nl.

What was the purpose of this first conversation? 

On January 1, 2024, the Omgevingswet came Omgevingswet force nationwide. Municipalities must draw up a new environmental vision within three years of this date that meets the requirements set Omgevingswet the Omgevingswet .

One such requirement is that governments must work in a more area-oriented way. Another requirement is that the new environmental vision be drafted together with stakeholders (and thus residents). The municipal council has the final say.

From September until spring 2025, the municipality of Aalten will be holding area-specific discussions about the new environmental vision. A total of twelve sub-areas have been identified in Aalten for this purpose. Three discussions will be held for each sub-area.

What was the format and format of this first interview? 

This first interview consisted of three parts:

1. A brief discussion about what makes the sub-area (in this case: residential areas in the village of Aalten) unique, different from other areas, and what points require attention in the future. 
2. a brief discussion about topics (themes) in the living environment that the participants consider most important for the future of their own sub-area or for Aalten as a whole (top 3); 
3. a somewhat longer conversation about how participants envision the desired living environment in 2024, and what they think (along those lines) are and are not desirable developments toward the future. 

The conversation was conducted in three different subgroups, at three different tables, under the guidance of one employee of the municipality. 

What were the outcomes of this initial conversation?

Below by section one the results of this initial conversation.

Table 1

• Space, green
• Quiet, cozy
• Fine living environment
• Liveable for all
• Naoberschap
• Schools (mentioned twice)
• Sports facilities (4x mentioned)
• Lots of forest, greenery (but could be more)
• Accessibility (train)
• Fine neighborhood (Kobus, mentioned twice)
• Appearance and layout Admiraal de Ruyterstraat a great example!
• Plan Kobus idem

The following points have been identified as areas of focus for the core qualities of the residential areas of the village of Aalten in the future:

• Vacancy in general and downtown (mentioned twice)
• Building at sports park south
• Aging
• Youth and retention of youth
• Aalten must remain a rural village
• Observe good distribution of greenery and construction
• Green (mentioned twice), not enough forest
• Maintaining good schools (mentioned twice)
• Sufficient new construction, housing
• Energy supply
• Keeping everything affordable
• Health the elderly
• Easily install temporary home care homes
• No smoking ban for wood stoves
• Municipality must combat wood burning
• Infrastructure in general
• Busy roads in built-up areas
• Better access to industrial area; heavy traffic to bypass the center of Aalten
• Industry for job retention
• Health sufficient space for businesses
• Increase awareness of opportunities for businesses
• Nijverheidsweg busy, and this will only get worse due to the expansion of the industrial area (especially traffic heading towards Arnhem) (mentioned twice).
• Traffic on Bo Bocholtsestraatwegtsestraatweg

Table 2

• Cosy markt catering facilities
• Nice center
• Fine scale
• Still a wide range of stores
• Fine middle class and hospitality industry
• Fun hospitality
• Lively village with lots of activity
• Nice village in the green
• Green, fine rural community
• Public transportation, train station 
• Fine basic amenities
• Characteristic, old buildings (mentioned twice)
• Characteristically beautiful center
• Spatial, green
• Gangekes (mentioned twice)
• Nice maze of alleys and paths
• Biodiversity
• The old homes and buildings from before the 60s/70s are quite beautiful and varied
• Kobus beautiful neighborhood
• There is a lot of organization, events, something for everyone
• Activities, festivities
• That I can leave the back door open and not fear intruders
• Naoberschap and (social) safety
• Lots of greenery in built-up areas and thus birds and other small animals
• The new public gardens on Admiraal de Ruyterstraat very beautiful, with gorgeous flowers.
• The forests and hiking trails immediately surrounding the built-up area
• The beautifully landscaped hiking trails, making for fine walks everywhere (2x mentioned)
• The streets are clean and well maintained
• Multiple sports complexes where young and old can play sports (mentioned twice)
• Beautiful outdoor area (mentioned twice)
• Proud of high-tech manufacturing industry

The following points have been identified as areas of focus for the core qualities of the residential areas of the village of Aalten in the future:

• Center is emptying in terms of stores (3x mentioned)
• Center area not very pedestrian-friendly
• Maintaining pens
• Collapse and more variety
• Rearing the elderly and disabled
• Petrifying high-rise buildings
• Petrification in and around downtown
• Road safety in general
• Traffic circulation could/should be better
• Parking in and around downtown and also in residential areas
• Insufficiently attractive to pedestrians and cyclists
• Accessibility in general
• Preserving the greenery that is there
• Not enough greenery
• Biodiversity, e.g., 't Smees and 't Slaa
• Poor air quality (including from wood burning)

• Solve industrial site regionally, not locally

  Table 3

• Green environment (3x mentioned)
• Small scale
• Naoberschap
• Little noise
• Sufficient space around homes
• Beautiful church buildings (but too many)
• Beautiful markt
• Village with plenty of opportunities (train station, petting zoo, HEMA, museum etc.)
• Center and outlying area (mentioned twice)
• Vibrant center, many things organized
• Oerkroeg Schiller
• markt celebrations, such as the fair, wine festival, and bock beer day
• Offering events 
• Sports facilities
• Outdoor area everywhere nearby
• Distinctiveness of the outlying area
• Positive: 't Slaa (no through traffic; keep it that way)

The following points have been identified as areas of focus for the core qualities of the residential areas of the village of Aalten in the future:

• Improving the image of Aalten-South
• Preserving naobility
• Welcoming newcomers to the neighborhood
• Impoverished social housing districts (Aalten-zuid, Molenkamp .)
• Amend APV on nuisance caused by 'collectors' (people all throwing junk in front yard etc.)
• Playgrounds and play areas for children (if it's possible elsewhere, why not in Aalten-zuid?)
• A decent skate track
• Dilapidation
• There will be too many social housing units, particularly in the area surrounding the center (mentioned twice; all of them are undesirable individuals with no connection to Aalten).
• Maintenance of greenery
• rundown Loohuis forest
• Road safety in general (we would like the entire town of Aalten to have a speed limit of 30 km/h)
• Separation of traffic flows
• Many speed bumps and traffic circles
• Unsafe street due to speed of cars combined with missing sidewalks
• Little parking
• Parking in the bike lanes
• Spreading policy in winter
• Many billboards and Jesus signs along the roadsides
• No faith-based signs along roads etc. (because then why not other faiths, such as Islam etc.?).
• No stores in residential areas
• Maintenance of gardens (may people be held accountable)
• Dog outlets fine in terms of bags, but where are the trash cans?
• Off-leash areas for dogs
• Smoke pollution from wood stoves (3x mentioned).
• Municipality needs to listen to residents more! Responding to reports et cetera.

Component 2: On the main topics toward the future 

In section 2, participants were asked to identify the topics (themes) in the living environment that they consider most important for the future of their own sub-region or for Aalten as a whole. They were asked to indicate their top three from a list of 24 topics in the living environment (ranging from noise, water, etc. to construction, infrastructure, agriculture, and nature). The results were as follows: 

Table 1 (most often were mentioned, in order)

1. Residential construction and building (4x mentioned).
2. Livability and quality of life (3x mentioned)
3. Economy and employment (3x mentioned)
4. Nature and biodiversity (3x mentioned)
5. Landscape quality and values (3x mentioned).

Table 2 (most often were mentioned, in order)

1. Spatial planning (3x mentioned)
2. Economy and employment (3x mentioned)
3. Public space and green spaces (mentioned twice)
4. Social cohesion and participation (mentioned twice)
5. Nature and biodiversity (mentioned twice)
6. Environment, noise, odor, air quality (mentioned 2x)  

Table 3 (most often were mentioned, in order)

1. Livability and quality of life (4x mentioned) (also in relation to environment, noise, etc.)
2. Public space and green spaces (3x mentioned) 
3. Environment, noise, odor, air quality (3x mentioned)
4. Residential construction and building (3x mentioned).
5. Economy and employment (3x mentioned)

Component 3: What is and is not desirable toward the future 

Component 3, then, focused on how participants envision the desired living environment in 2024, and what they consider (along those lines) desirable and undesirable developments toward the future. The results were as follows:

Table 1

For Aalten as a whole, desired:

• Force freight traffic to bypass Aalten (mentioned 3 times)
• 30 km/hour in downtown (mentioned twice)
• 50 km/h where it can go 50 km/h (mentioned twice)
• 30 km/h where it can only go 30 km/h (mentioned twice)
• Attention to mobility and safety in general (mentioned twice)
• Fewer trucks in built-up areas
• More homes
• More residential streets
• St. Joseph School good spot for high-rise building
• First and foremost, transform buildings to housing, not sacrifice green space immediately
• Transforming The Pol site to residential/living area
• When expanding neighborhoods and industry, also ensure good accessibility (mentioned 2x)
• Opening up industry to lead the core of Aalten
• Aalten Goor beautiful, preserved
• Retain Laborijn (important role in various areas, employment/width)
• Retaining businesses in Aalten, also for the benefit of young people and quality of life (mentioned twice)
• Sustainability and circularity must be affordable

For Aalten as a whole, undesirable: 

• Much hassle and insecurity around the station, would like more visible control
• Increase in drug trafficking and use worrisome
• The wolf

Specifically for the residential areas in the village of Aalten, desired:

• 30 km/h throughout Aalten (mentioned twice) 
• District of Kobus with wadis as an example
• Parking on Hogestraat Ringweg
• Intersection of Beeklaan Hogestraat

Specifically for residential areas in the village of Aalten, undesirable:

• See Aalten general 

Table 2

For Aalten as a whole, desired:

• Retain: old, characteristic buildings
• Retain: sports facilities and the beautiful countryside
• Greenery, planting
• Center: More combos by transforming old-fashioned large(er) stores into more hybrid forms, with smaller activities/workshops, plus living at the back; this keeps the center livable
• More activity in downtown, small craft
• Making Ring better for cars
• Clearer sidewalks in downtown
• Better handling of old buildings/monuments (mentioned twice)
• Parking per property, including downtown
• Parking in front of stores is very welcome for the elderly (also in connection with self-reliance)
• Attention to tourism (opportunity)
• The village is traffic safe, especially around schools (30 km and one-way traffic is often quite irritating, but has good sides)
• Unique companies have an interest in technical development and innovation
• Compliment on all social services provided by the municipality so that everyone has the opportunity to participate
• Consider other forms of communication to reach and engage citizens; rethink, communicate creatively, use catchy slogans/phrases, playful videos
  
  Undesirable for Aalten as a whole:
   
• No expanding low-value industry at the expense of our high-value outdoor area
• Inaccessibility of downtown for pedestrians, cyclists and walkers
• Jesus signs along the access roads to Aalten; not inviting to visit Aalten
• Little focus on air quality and health (including wood burning)
• Parking policy as more and more parking spots are snatched away and more and more downtown properties are occupied
• Aging population (mentioned twice)
• City dwellers who want to spend their retirement in Aalten and then significantly overbid on house prices
• The ease with which people from the Randstad can come to Aalten and live there
• That the group of non-working/needy people becomes too large compared to people who generate income and bear burdens.
• Drawing attention to the justification for accepting more asylum seekers/Ukrainians rather than providing housing for our own youth. Making room for our own youth who still live at home seems to be a secondary concern. Health an unhealthy ratio.
• That the youth move away to villages/cities where they do get housing.
• That because of the zero alcohol policy until 18, youth are indulging in drugs.
• Sacrifice a beautiful green landscape for new business parks for "box-shufflers," instead of innovative high-value companies.
• That the municipality is unable to effectively reach citizens, thereby hindering participation.
  
  Specifically for the residential areas of the village of Aalten, the following is desired:
   
• Equal treatment of Aalten-zuid in relation to other residential areas; Aalten-zuid feels neglected.
• Play areas and playground equipment for the kids.

Specifically for the residential areas of the village of Aalten, undesirable:

• Remove greenery and replace with grass.
• Play equipment removal.
• Parking on the sidewalk prevents pedestrians from using the sidewalk; must swerve to the street.

Table 3

For Aalten as a whole, desired: 

• Center car-free (mentioned twice), rest 30 km/hour.
• Revitalizing the mall.
• More boutiques, specialty stores, etc. downtown.
• Conservation of retail offerings.
• Greening of the city center and the markt mentioned twice).
• Preserving monuments.
• Makingmarkt Aalten (goods)markt .
• Only rent properties to people with a social/economic connection to Aalten.
• Less social renting.
• For housing development, primarily infill (mentioned twice).
• Make residential subdivision easier, get rid of red-for-red.
• Mandatory participation program (integration of new residents).
• Better screening of newcomers to Aalten; they must be willing to participate; this is of great importance for cohesion and therefore the future of Aalten.
• Put unemployed people in social housing to work: maintaining front gardens, decorating window coverings, picking up trash, straightening tiles et cetera.
• More activities for youth.
• Do more to keep young people in Aalten (entertainment venues, suitable and affordable housing, employment) (mentioned twice).
• Skating rink for youth.
• Invest in and retain several elementary schools.
• Invest in Schaersvoorde, preserving all levels.
• Attractive outdoor and indoor pool (but not compete with Slinge Lake).
• More facilities for the elderly.
• Amenities nearby.
• Good schools (mentioned twice).
• Versatile sports offerings for all (retention and preferably more).
• More residential care complexes for the elderly (mentioned twice).
• Allow splitting of homes and stores.
• Retain the regional hospital.
• Whatever is green, keep it green, including in the center.
•  When you drive into Aalten from 't Slaa (really beautiful, keep it that way!): Artwork has been maintained again, no large signs with political parties, etc.
• More focus on road safety in general.
• More focus on accessibility for people in wheelchairs, with asthma, blind and others.
• Music pavilion on the markt square.
• Community center in Aalten must remain.
• More greenery and nature in general.
• Planting more trees and replacing felled trees.
• More greenery, trees, plants, etc., and a fairer distribution throughout Aalten.
• More green parks, also as meeting places.
• Forest with lots of biodiversity.
• Attention to culture.
• More opportunities in terms of business halls etc. for zzp'ers, instead of everything going to big companies and developers.
• Maintain and improve tourism.
• Distinguishing Aalten through events (museum, hospitality, heritage).
• Ban on wood burning.
• Ban loud music outside after 10 p.m.
• Solar panels as much as possible on rooftops.
• Increase number of free trash drop-offs (because now dumped in nature etc.).
• More/better ways of disposing of waste; consider a bulky waste pass with X number of kilograms/year.
• Healthier eating in Aalten; now only pizza and fries (and no fewer than seven fry shops) (mentioned twice).
• More multi-culti dining (hospitality industry).
• Chinese takeout at the Kota Raja.
• More manufacturing, less warehousing.
• Industry not in the center of Aalten.
• Increase sustainability (solar panels, etc.).
• Better listening to people, responding to notifications etc.

For Aalten as a whole, undesirable: 

- Aging population.
- Decay.
- Vacant stores (mentioned twice).
- No compulsory removal of gas.
- Agricultural poisons.
- Wood burning.
- No wood burning stoves in the new Landal cottages.
- Cutting down trees etc.
- Less parking in and on the street.
- Jesus promotion along the road.

Specifically for the residential areas of the village of Aalten, desired:

• Play areas for 10+ children (skate park, soccer cage, etc.).
• More facilities for children in Aalten-zuid.
• More attention to public green spaces.
• Better maintenance of infrastructure and green spaces, also in relation to traffic safety.
•    Better sidewalks, so that they are accessible to walk on and you don't have to walk on the street.
• Renovate sidewalks and roads in Aalten-zuid.
• More streets that look well-maintained, with greenery, etc.
• Freight traffic via Dinxperlosestraatweg use other 'ring roads'.
•    More/more frequent maintenance of the verges/edges of the Keizersbeek.
• Better facilities in Aalten-zuid: doctor, dentist, supermarket, etc.
 
Specifically for the residential areas of the village of Aalten, undesirable:

• Houses on Dijkstraat messy.
• No attractive entrance from Bocholt.

Date of second interview

The discussions in Aalten have been postponed until early next year. The discussions about the residential areas and the center of Aalten will be combined. The date is not yet known. Further information will follow later.

Introduction

This is the report of the first round of discussions on the environmental vision for the center of Aalten. A total of around 16 residents took part in the discussion. The discussion was facilitated by four employees of the municipality of Aalten.

If you have any comments or suggestions regarding this report, or if you would like to contribute to the new environmental vision of the municipality of Aalten, please send an email toomgevingsvisie@aalten.nl.

What was the purpose of this first conversation? 

On January 1, 2024, the Omgevingswet came Omgevingswet force nationwide. Municipalities must draw up a new environmental vision within three years of this date that meets the requirements set Omgevingswet the Omgevingswet . 

One of those requirements is that governments must work in a more area-oriented way. Another requirement is that the new environmental vision be drafted together with stakeholders (and thus residents). The municipal council has the final say. 

From September until spring 2025, the municipality of Aalten will be holding area-specific discussions about the new environmental vision. A total of twelve sub-areas have been identified in Aalten for this purpose. Three discussions will be held for each sub-area. 

For more information, seewww.aalten.nl/omgevingsvisie. All documents (report, explanatory presentation) can be found here, organized by subject area. 

What was the format and format of this first interview? 

This first interview consisted of three parts:

1. A brief discussion about what makes the sub-area (in this case, the center of Aalten) unique, different from other areas, and what points of attention there are for the future. 
2. a brief discussion about topics (themes) in the living environment that the participants consider most important for the future of their own sub-area or for Aalten as a whole (top 3); 
3. a somewhat longer conversation about how participants envision the desired living environment in 2024, and what they think (along those lines) are and are not desirable developments toward the future. 

The conversation was conducted in two different subgroups, at two different tables, accompanied by two staff members (per table) from the municipality. 

What were the outcomes of this initial conversation? 

Below, item by item, are the outcomes of this initial conversation. 

 Component 1: About the subarea itself 

Part 1 therefore focused on the question of what makes the center of Aalten unique, different from other areas, and what the points of attention are in this regard. The following was said about this: 

 Table 1 (Annette)

• Elevation
• Characteristic/monumental buildings (3x mentioned)
• The markt an event venue
• Beautiful unified layout (pavement) of the shopping center
• Sufficient retail supply 
• Decorating the center (flags, Christmas lights, etc.)
• Small scale
• Lots of space between buildings
• Gangeskes
• Reasonably green environment (mentioned twice)
• Reasonably good parking
• Good bikeable
• Liveliness (3x mentioned)
• Activities in the center (3x mentioned)
• For the elderly, the downtown area is close
• Orange School
• Senior citizens overlooking 't Smees

 The following points have been identified as areas of focus for the core qualities of the center of Aalten going forward:

• Vacant property (mentioned 3x; if not full, then make housing from it)
• Landstraat : property has been unrentable for 3 years (too large, no interest)
• In center need not only stores, but also other business and activities in shopping streets
• Number of properties in arrears of maintenance
• Perhaps engage the stores that are "out of the loop" a bit more/better
• More housing development; perhaps build houses behind stores?
• Wider quotas for housing development
• Making housing construction easier
• Hogestraat : converting café area into apartments
• Divide properties more into (small) homes
• Insufficient separation between pedestrians and cyclists
• A lot of car traffic in the center (especially in the weekends, please make the center more car-free so that shoppers have more space).
• Often excessive speed of car traffic
• Parking spaces for cars
• Charging poles
• Municipality needs to work better with business owners (not wave rules)
• Municipality should act more personally, not via email

 Table 2 (André)

• Height differences (gives charm; 3x mentioned)
• Old buildings (5x mentioned)
• Cozy look of downtown
• Nice mix of living, shopping and recreation
• Hospitality industry (mentioned twice)
• Nice retail offerings, fairly diverse (mentioned 2x)
• Beautiful church (5x mentioned)
• Decorating the streets (flowers, paving, etc.; mentioned 2x)
• Flower boxes
• Flower beds and borders
• Narrow small streets
• Cozy market square, with nice terraces (4x mentioned)
• Beautiful town hall
• Center area yet spacious
• The stores out there almost all exude quality and expertise
• Most homes well maintained 
• Gangeskes (4x mentioned)
• Museum (with good image and national reputation; 5x mentioned)
• Good accessibility

 The following points have been identified as areas of focus for the core qualities of the center of Aalten going forward:

• Vacancy (although there is a difference of opinion on this ...)
• Admiral de Ruiterstraat, borders and street
• Unclear traffic plan
• No beautiful north entrance
• Accessibility by car

Component 2: On the main topics toward the future 

In section 2, participants were asked to identify the topics (themes) in the living environment that they consider most important for the future of their own sub-region or for Aalten as a whole. They were asked to indicate their top three from a list of 24 topics in the living environment (ranging from noise, water, etc. to construction, infrastructure, agriculture, and nature). The results were as follows: 

Table 1 (most often were mentioned, in order)

Not discussed/taken up.

Table 2 (most often were mentioned, in order)

1. Image quality and urban design (also in connection with cultural heritage) (4x)
2. Leisure economy and tourism (4x)
3. Cultural heritage (4x)
4. Infrastructure (also in relation to mobility and traffic safety; Oosterkerkstraat , among others, Oosterkerkstraat a race track) (3x)  

Component 3: What is and is not desirable toward the future 

Component 3, then, focused on how participants envision the desired living environment in 2024, and what they consider (along those lines) desirable and undesirable developments toward the future. The results were as follows: 

Table 1 (Annette)

For Aalten as a whole, desired

• Preserving village character
• Looking out for each other
• Ensuring public order and safety
• Youth retention (housing, employment, accessibility)
• More/better facilities for youth (e.g., practice rooms for music/bands)
• Preserving monumental properties
• Affordable housing construction
• More small homes (1 to 2 persons)
• More informal care homes
• Affordable housing for young people (mentioned twice)
• Split large vacant properties for residential development
• Sufficient employment opportunities
• Schools (mentioned twice)
• Culture (for livability)
• Bicycle Friendly
• Health the agricultural sector can meet all soil and climate requirements, but also continue to earn a living
• Healthy food for the less fortunate (food bank) (impact on health and Health)
• More contact with foreigners
• Lofts/chains essential (that's where friendships are formed, naoberschap; do keep a close eye on alcohol consumption) (mentioned twice)
• Keeping a mix of young and old

 Undesirable for Aalten as a whole

• Aging population (mentioned twice, including once in relation to Health)
• Insufficient Health the elderly
• Dilapidation of properties (Ter Stal, Kota Radja, Blokker, etc.)
• Undermining

 Specifically for the center area of Aalten, desired

• Accessibility
• Markt
• Markt(stalls) more towards Saturday / another day?
• Keeping the core shopping area compact (mentioned twice)
• More Germans in the center
• Maintain wide range of stores, with a good mix of basic necessities and specialty stores
• Smaller and cheaper stores
• Fewer stores, more apartments
• In addition to excessive retail floor space when converting to residential, the requirement for parking spaces cannot be realized
• Do not build for vacancy; also look at vacant properties on which retail is now licensed
• Insulate properties properly
• Carefully preserving monuments

Specifically for the center area of Aalten, undesirable

• Fewer stores, vacancy (4x mentioned)  

 Table 2 (André)

For Aalten as a whole, desired

• Nothing appointed.

Undesirable for Aalten as a whole

• Nothing appointed. 

Specifically for the center area of Aalten, desired

• Rejuvenation
• Supply of stores, including for young people
• More entrepreneurs (mentioned twice)
• More stores (mentioned twice)
• More restaurants
• Attention to appearance
• More greenery in the village (mentioned twice)
• Planting larger trees, such as (slate) sycamores
• Planting a large linden tree in the markt
• Preserving the church
• Housing opportunities, including for young people
• Preservation of ATMs
• Completion of the Green Slinge plan up to the Ringweg
• Core shopping area may make more compact
• How do we ensure that there are and continue to be entrepreneurs who can and want to work in the downtown area? 
• A good cultural center (The Pol) that meets today's standards 
• Continue to attract from outside
• More housing(s) for the elderly
• 30 km/hour throughout the area (mentioned twice)
• Discourage car traffic in downtown area
• Ban truck traffic from downtown (small vans at most)
• Accessibility (mentioned twice)
• Fewer traffic signs
• Redesigning the area around De Ahof petting zoo. 
• Collecting water in containers
• Leaf baskets for leaf litter

Specifically for the center area of Aalten, undesirable

• Vacancy (mentioned 5x)
• Speeding on Oosterkerkstraat 

  Date of second interview

The discussions in Aalten have been postponed until early next year. The discussions about the residential areas and the center of Aalten will be combined. The date is not yet known. Further information will follow later.

Feb. 12, 2025

The municipality of Aalten is tasked with working with its residents to develop a new environmental vision for the entire municipality. We are doing this by, among other things, engaging in area-specific discussions with our residents and other stakeholders about what they consider important for the future of their own living environment.

This is the report of the second discussion in and with the center area and residential areas of the core of Aalten. In the first round of discussions, separate discussions were held with both of the aforementioned sub-areas, but in this second round of discussions, both sub-areas were combined. A total of around 50 residents took part in the discussion. The discussion was supervised by six employees of the municipality of Aalten.

Do you have any comments or suggestions regarding this report? Please send them toomgevingsvisie@aalten.nl.
If you would like to contribute to the new environmental vision of the municipality of Aalten, please use this email address as well.

For more information: see environmental vision. You can find all reports of all conversations held (also in other subareas) there.

What was the purpose of this second conversation?

In the first round of interviews, we retrieved (1) what residents find typical about the subarea in question, (2) we retrieved what living environment topics are seen as important(st) toward 2040, and (3) we asked about desirable and undesirable developments toward 2040.

In this second round of discussions, we mainly presented statements and collected opinions on three themes:

• Living
• Green
• Social cohesion

How was the format and format of this second interview?

This second round of interviews consisted of the following components:

• Opening, introductions and agenda. 
• Welcome to 2040: What might the world look like in 2040? So what should we consider or anticipate in the environmental vision?
• The how and why of the environmental vision, an explanation by the municipality.
• Component 1: What do you think is important towards 2040? What should be preserved, improved, addressed, etc.? Via Mentimeter the participants could indicate what they would like to bring along for the environmental vision
• Part 2: Round of choices and statements. Through Mentimeter, participants were able to express their preferences on choices and statements.
• Part 3: Talking in groups about the 3 themes (housing, green and social cohesion). What do residents think is important to bring to these themes towards 2040?
• Continuation and conclusion.

Outcomes parts 1 and 2 (Mentimeter).

This report on the results of parts 1 and 2 (using Mentimeter) can be requested via omgevingsvisie@aalten.nl. In addition to this, the following comments were provided on sticky notes:

• In Hogestraat, where Terstal used to be located, is it not possible to build affordable apartments for young people?
• The old building opposite, next to the fountain, pizzeria/shoarma store, has been empty for decades. Terrible! And Kota Radja has also been dilapidated for years. Terrible! Those locations could be (re)used so well.
• Fortunately, further down Hogestraat , a lot Hogestraat beautifully renovated, and construction is underway. Great!
• Careful with: historic buildings, green spaces, the hilly landscape, and Health remains very active.
• More parking downtown.
• Resurfacing sidewalks.
• Enforce, because is parking allowed in or in front of driveways? If not, where are the police?
• Car-free center.
• Prevent/address vacant stores.
• Road Safety.
• Share cars.
• Health affordable homes and apartments, including in the rental sector.
• Safety in the Servatiusstraat neighborhood; it is not safe to walk or cycle there, as cars drive on the sidewalk.
• Improve zebras on several downtown roads, been bad for years (but complaining doesn't help).
• Servatiusstraat maintained.
• More green.
• More neighborhood parties.
• More housing (or housing division) for many residents, especially to keep young people in Aalten.
• Maintain events in the center, a vibrant downtown with adequate retail and hospitality (at least in the core shopping area).

Outcomes part 3

Note: Residents have indicated (upon request) with a number (i.e., anonymously) on a Map in which district/neighborhood they live. This is provided as additional background information for the environmental vision.

Table 1, living theme

• District 3: demolish De Pol and build 100 apartments there for starters and the elderly (could bring the municipality €3.4 million)
• District 3: Dorcas tear down, idem
• District 3: Buy up Kota Radja and Voskuil and build housing there (and there are other places)
• Neighborhood 3: Make other arrangements with De Woonplaats so that people from other places with a certain "social background" can hardly or not at all register until the housing shortage is solved (now 600 registrations on 1 house!). Do we know how many Aalten citizens are looking for housing and how many fortune seekers there are from outside (with benefits and many social problems)?
• District 3: Build higher, more layers (then we could have built more housing on the former technical school site)
• District 3: Construct a new ring road and complete the Nijverheidsweg Kobus to Bocholtsestraat, so that Kobus is incorporated into the village.
• District 6: More housing for small households.
• District 6: Demolish dilapidated buildings, new construction there, possibly high-rise buildings
• District 6: Move tennis court, AZSV, et cetera.
• District 6: Move Schaersvoorde, housing development there.
• District 6: Turn dilapidated buildings into apartments (e.g. old Chinese).
• District 6: Turn vacant properties into houses and apartments (including stores).
• District 6: Build houses/apartments at old skating rink.
• District 6: Refurbish building behind fountain.
• District 6: Driessenshof Plan as Driessenshof .
• District 6: Facilitate fractional housing over stores.
• District 6: Encourage the demolition of poor-quality buildings and Health rental housing Health young people and the elderly.
• District 6: Move tennis court to Sports Park-South, and create housing there.
• District 6: Expropriate Kota Radja and make housing there.
• District 6: Keep the Pol, perhaps in slimmed-down form, with rental housing added.
• District 6: Build more for small households.
• District 6: Energy-efficient and climate-proof construction.
• District 6: Dilapidated properties, do something with them!
• District 6: Make old Welkoop building housing.
• District 6: Noise pollution is apparently not experienced in center area despite all events.
• Neighborhood 2/7: Aalten has many dilapidated buildings. Can't something be done about that? The old Welkoop, for example, would be a great place for new construction.
• Neighborhood 2/7: Homes have been "renovated"/"preserved," but there has been absolutely no look at the homes themselves: old cold house, old wood floors, basements flooded with groundwater, et cetera.
• District 2/7: Difference between buying and renting is large.
• Neighborhood 2/7: Mantel care homes placed in gardens.
• District 2/7: In homes with lots of land, offer more opportunity to build on.
• District 2/7: Allowing elderly and young people to live together in flats etc.
• District 2/7: Convert storefronts into housing in core shopping area; expropriate long-empty storefronts and turn them into housing.
• District 2/7: Make it easier for multiple people/families to live in farms, for example.
• District 8: Lichtenvoordsestraatweg the area around the Chinese restaurant on Lichtenvoordsestraatweg ; Voskuil; not in favor of high-rise buildings.
• District 10: Think that green spaces will give way to buildings in 2040.
• District 10: Also prefer greenery, preferably a garden(s) in front of the house.
• District 10: Tiles out, greenery in bins.

Table 2, living theme

• Neighborhood 3: Creating neighborhoods for seniors and preserving them. Example: Koeweide Manschot now also has many young people. As a result, social cohesion has declined in both neighborhoods.
• Neighborhood 6: The Residence should quickly rebuild housing instead of refurbishing bathrooms, installing kitchens, etc. when this is not/less needed.
• District 7: More small homes, tiny houses, for the elderly and young people and singles.
• Neighborhood 7: More knarren courtyards / living together / all age groups, also promotes naoberschap.
• District 7: High-rise buildings in more places.
• District 7: Split more homes (is more relevant to the outlying area), red for red, more homes in one yard
• District 7: Procedures need to be faster.
• District 8: High-rise more downtown.
• District 8: More and faster flow of vacant housing.
• District 8: Make it easier to live together under one roof.
• District 8: Voskuil building, Kota Radja replaced with high-rise building.
• District 8: No high-rise buildings.
• District 8: More small rather than large homes, and more rentals.
• District 8: Center stores in the core.
• District 8: Replace vacant storefronts with housing.
• District 8: More senior housing, possibly high-rise (max. 3 stories).
• Implement growth to 30,000 population.
• Building for people from outside Aalten.
• More split housing.
• Tiny houses for starters, or apartments.
• There is also a supermarket in Aalten-zuid.
• Flats instead of low-rise buildings.
• Allow homes for parents/elderly people to be annexed in backyards.
• More knotty courtyards, also with multiple floors. There are quite a few people who want to live up high.
• Center stores in the core.
• Smaller homes.
• More social renting.
• Another plan like Kobus.
• More housing for first-time buyers.
• Kota Radja repurposed for housing.
• Three high max.
• Address unnecessary vacancy.
• Center housing for the elderly.

Table 3, living theme

• District 2: More affordable housing for ages 20-40 so they stay here.
• District 2: Don't just build senior housing. What are we supposed to do with that in 2050? Young people will have to live in too big expensive houses? Doesn't solve anything.
• District 2: Allow fewer newcomers into social housing. Creates insecurity and nuisance. Results in impoverishment of previously neat residential neighborhoods.
• District 2: I am in favor of expanding, for example, pasture 't Smees. Full is full in the core. It must remain livable in terms of numbers of people per square meter.
• District 4: Turn vacant properties into apartments.
• District 4: Let young and old live together in tiny houses.
• District 4: Prefer infill, and pay attention to sufficient green space (trees, facade gardens, etc.)
• District 4: Split farms, turn barns into homes.
• District 4: Be creative, a storefront can also become a residence (if not in core shopping area)
• District 4: Slingelaan Schaersvoorde Slingelaan into an apartment complex.
• District 4: Smaller homes should become more normal, less square footage per resident.
• District 4: Move-in should be possible without very strict (tax) rules.
• District 4: Making transit easier (skewed housing).
• District 4: Few building lots.
• District 4: Space for tiny houses.
• District 4: Return to its own municipal housing corporation.
• District 4: Introduce vacancy penalty.
• District 4: Reduce living spaces.
• District 4: No expansion.
• District 4: New district around Schaersvoorde Slingelaan sports field. Convert Schaersvoorde into residential apartments.
• District 4: Residential projects with community gardens. See Silvolde example.
• District 5: Limit housing development and reserve as much as possible for local (younger) people
• District 5: Do not build up green areas/pieces in the core
• District 5: In outlying area, center housing in cores
• District 5: Planning new residential areas north of the ringweg.
• District 7: Not enough building for 70+, single-story. Many people with large detached houses want to live smaller, with a little garden.
• District 7: Establish another local housing corporation.
• District 7: Build, add a street if you can.
• District 7: Make residential splitting easier.
• District 7: For example, build 3 houses on the site of 1 farm.
• District 7: Convert storefronts to housing. Ditto regarding vacant commercial properties.
• District 7: Perhaps introduce a vacancy penalty for properties that have been vacant for more than 2 years.
• District 7: Build much more for the elderly, who may leave their single-family homes as a result.
• District 7: Returning to nursing homes.
• District 7: Do not create disadvantaged neighborhoods.
• District 8: Kobus. Building houses or apartments for first-time buyers, so that young people continue to live in Aalten.
• District 8: Turn De Pol including the parking lot into an apartment complex, go up in height.

Table 4, living theme

• District 5: More affordable housing, more social housing, fewer regulations.
• Neighborhood 5: More housing for the elderly to increase circulation.
• District 5: More social housing, may include high-rise buildings.
• District 5: Back to nursing homes or something similar, where the elderly can live independently as much as possible.
• District 6: Encourage home exchanges for the elderly and young people, voluntarily of course.
• District 6: Restore retirement centers.
• District 6: More apartments in the center. Also consider senior citizens' courtyards.
• District 6: More housing for the elderly, knarrenhofjes.
• District 6: More housing and housing options for young people, so they don't have to leave Aalten. Consider tiny houses and similar options.
• District 6: Brake on Westerners coming this way.
• District 6: Prefer not to build higher than 3 stories max.
• District 6: Make it easier to build by faster and simpler permit procedures. And take specific ideas seriously, if necessary arrange separate consultation hours etc. for them.
• District 6: Back to retirement homes, care centers, etc. Don't wait until people can do almost nothing.
• District 10: More apartments, preferably small, with 2 or 3 floors, with 1 or 2 bedrooms.
• District 10: No more gyms downtown, but apartments.
• District 10: Address and fill vacant buildings.
• District 10: As in Lichtenvoorde, rent vacant storefronts to entrepreneurs for 1 euro per year, to combat vacancy.
• District 10: More cheaper starter homes.
• District 10: Relax rules for assisted living facilities.
• Neighborhood 10: Creating a neighborhood with tiny houses, apartments, starter homes ( De Hare ice skating club, Oranjelaan).
• District 10: Nursing/elderly homes in meeting with youth?
• Neighborhood 10: Additional groene kamer, opposite Karwei, roundabout, knibbelweide .
• District 10: More need for own people rather than Westerners or foreigners.
• District 10: Shortage of housing for 2-person families, preferably in the neighborhood itself, low-rise.
• District 10: Replace industrial buildings where there are (almost) no employees (such as Beele, across from the station).

Table 5, living theme

• District 1: Convert existing buildings that are vacant. And if the municipality has plans, notify the people whose land is in time.
• District 5: Max. 3 to 4 building layers, no higher.
• District 5: Aalten ash? 't Smees?
• District 5: Limited infill development, attention to green space.
• District 6: Create more parking garages in the ground.
• District 6: Old buildings refurbished, municipal monument law no longer works.
• District 6: Use storefronts more generously, if a house can be put in at the back: allow!
• District 6: Construction sites: 't Smees, build outside the ring, near residential tower, De Pol road (new construction), convert stores.
• District 6: Locations: reduce core shopping area and transform; no high-rise buildings.
• District 6: Convert storefronts to housing, preferably social rent.
• District 7: The Residence has oversold, the offer is too expensive for the youth.
• District 9: Address vacant stores first, convert to housing.
• District 9: Build back De Pol smaller with housing for young and old.
• Neighborhood 9: Lichtenvoordsestraatweg: Chinese, Voskuil.
• Demolish existing 1960s storefronts and put up nice new construction (tall).
• Procedures much more expedited and not 7-10 years in duration so that there is also a dot on the horizon for youth.

Table 1, green theme

• Neighborhood 3: My neighborhood is green now, but a building plan has been submitted that will cause many green spaces and trees to die or disappear. The municipality thinks this has a serious chance of success. This surprises me because this is going to bring a lot of problems for human and animal habitat. So what is green should stay green!
• District 3: Trees are cut down but not put back, and where trees are put back, they are poorly maintained.
• Neighborhood 3: What should remain, or even be expanded, are the beautiful parks and roundabouts. These create a pleasant image. The area around the library is very attractive. However, there should be a plan for the whole of Aalten that ties everything together.
• District 3: More trees along or on sidewalks means sidewalks are less easy to walk on, but more greenery, which has benefits (climate, water, heat etc.).
• District 4+6: Right in the middle of downtown too little green space; more green space would really be much better.
• District 4+6: Driveways are beautifully landscaped with flower beds etc.
• District 4+6: More perks in the village itself.
• District 6: In core shopping area trees removed, and lots of stone, little shade (also for walking to downtown).
• District 6: Make parking areas more green.
• District 6: In areas of vacant/decaying properties, possibly create parks; low-maintenance trees, façade gardens, etc.
• District 6: Maintain trees/greenery better.
• Neighborhood 6: From the village it is easy to get to the countryside, but in the village itself too little greenery and therefore too little shade.
• Neighborhood 6: Health good drainage, more trees for more shade and a pleasant living environment, more green areas, and subsidies for sedum roofs, for example.
• Neighborhood 6: More trees. Hogestraat the Hogestraat parking lot. Turn Beeklaan into Beeklaan real avenue.
• District 6: Establish a ban on tree cutting.
• District 6: 3-30-300 is not met in several places.
• District 2/7: Better maintenance of trees. Roots push up paving stones. Other than that, I think the greenery is adequate.
• Neighborhood 8: More plants in flower beds. For example, Admiraal de Ruyterstraat. But they need to be better/well maintained.
• District 8: 3-30-300 is not met in many places.
• District 8: With taller trees, consider solar panels.
• District 8: Pavement should be out of the streetscape as much as possible.

Table 2, green theme

• AVA '70 trees not returned to same spot; shame; more trees, and back!
• District 2: Replace tall plantings possibly with grass due to poor maintenance
• District 2: Collect water in wadis and not directly into the sewer system.
• District 3: Preserve and expand existing green space.
• District 3: Remove dead trees, and always place new ones, in the same spot.
• District 3: Disconnect stormwater runoff.
• District 6: More trees in the streets.
• District 6: Better maintenance of green space.
• District 7: More trees/shade due to heat stress.
• District 7: Water spots, can be vertical. Wadis.
• District 7: Not enough trash cans for dog waste.
• District 7: Don't remove more trees, just add more.
• District 7: Garden in front of houses, instead of stone.
• District 8: Less rigorous pruning, more natural plantings, fewer poop bags in green spaces.
• District 8: More field flower strips/corners, more greenery, more biodiversity, construct wadis, capture rainwater.

Table 3, green theme

• Neighborhood 2: More biodiversity in the planting. For example, social housing on Ludgerstraat, where honeysuckle was promised. I haven't seen any honeysuckle yet.
• District 2: Doing more to combat high water levels. My basement floods regularly.
• District 2: More trees!
• Neighborhood 2: Nijverheidsweg busy. For greenery and tranquility, take a cue from Admiraal De Ruyterstraat.
• District 2: Rather one-way traffic WITH greenery than two-way traffic without it.
• Neighborhood 2: There is increasing construction and urban expansion, but this is at the expense of parks and similar amenities (see, for example, social housing on Ludgerstraat), which is unfortunate.
• District 4: More large (slate) trees, flower beds, etc.
• District 4: Allow large freestanding trees to grow freely (without taking off even one branch, both in outlying areas and in the core(s)).
• District 4: Squares as little stone as possible and more trees around and in parking lots.
• District 4: More natural playgrounds.
• District 4: Green the playgrounds in the neighborhoods. Now they are boring places with no "discovery opportunities. So lots of trees, shrubs, etc. (win-win). Attractive to people and climate.
• Neighborhood 4: More trees along the street, even if the street has to become narrower as a result. That immediately slows down nicely too.
• District 4: If there is no room for trees along the street, move out to front yards.
• Neighborhood 4: Rainwater should not enter sewer system
  Neighborhood 4: Subsidies on tile rocking and seeding (make neighborhood project out of it).
• District 4: More trees, 3-30-300.
• District 4: Action tile-swiping. All gardens in the Netherlands combined are the largest natural area.
• District 4: Promote green roofs.
• District 4: Shrubberies.
• District 4: Parking on grass pavers.
• District 5: (Much) more greenery and trees in the streets.
• Neighborhood 5: With lack of space for greenery, many streets can be designed as one-way streets, which creates space for greenery.
• District 5: Encourage people to remove concrete, gravel, etc. from gardens and replace them with greenery.
• District 7: The mix between greenery and paving is good now. Also adequate drainage. Can stay that way. 
• District 7: Encourage residents to keep their own yards green, but not impose obligations.
• Neighborhood 7: Housing associations must also maintain gardens (see Driessenshof), especially those belonging to new residents.
• Neighborhood 8: Collaborating with green companies from Aalten to offer packages to residents to make their gardens greener.
• District 8: Mix between green space and street is good as it is now.

Table 4, green theme

• District 5: AH, more trees, more flower boxes.
• District 5: More (playing) fields, more cladding.
• District 5: More trees where there are no or few front yards.
• District 6: How important is The Pol to the population and what can the municipality do in this regard?
• District 6: Field edges in Tree Ridge Trail.
• District 6: Preventing heat stress with green facades.
• Neighborhood 6: Retain grove behind municipal office please!
• Neighborhood 6: Greenery in Kerkstraat, replacing the large trees that have been felled. And use more green facade cladding.
• District 6: Rainwater runoff. In times of heat/drought, adjust downspouts so that rainwater can go directly into the garden.
• District 6: Limit/prohibit cutting of private green (healthy) trees.
• District 6: Plant trees along streets and roads where possible.
• District 6: Encourage green gardens. Bonus giving. 
• District 6: Nice the way flowers are in the large planters in front of the municipal office. May also be in other places.
• District 10: Green gives way to development.
• District 10: Encourage green gardens.
• District 10: More (small) trees in the streets.
• District 10: No more field edges, no more luring insects, butterflies, etc. to the poison, but sown-in grassy fields in the village.
• District 10: Improve water quality in ditches and ponds in residential neighborhoods.
• Neighborhood 10: Greenery in "useless" places instead of sacrificing parking spaces (Dijkstraat).
• District 10: Creating green verges.
• District 10: Less corten steel bins, pollute the view of the area and make it look less green.
• District 10: Better maintain and make playgrounds more attractive.

Table 5, green theme

• District 1: Green is plan Kobus, water can drain well, but whether there is 30% shade?
• District 1: Kobus is perfectly green, but sidewalk is not walkable due to open stones, so not doable for the elderly and children.
• District 1: 3-30-300 satisfies in my opinion.
• District 5: Enough view of trees/greenery; oaks are a nuisance now (but don't want to miss them).
• District 5: Not enough green space; too much is sacrificed to parking spaces for cars.
• District 5: pull 't Smees into the village. Turn it into a park.
• Neighborhood 5: No 3 trees visible, not 30% green, though a small green park.
• Neighborhood 5: Bredevoortsestraatweg renovated, so everything will be better.
• District 5: No unnecessary paving. Hessenweg be paved up to the riding school, with cobblestones instead of dust and/or mud.
• District 6: Very little green space in the district; recently cut down large trees.
• District 6: No birds due to unsuitable roofs and environment.
• District 6: Tile wheeling action for gardens.
• District 6: Asphalt road.
• District 6: Gravel on flower beds? Not pretty and bird unfriendly!
• Neighborhood 6: Lots of boring grass beds.
• District 6: Turn Buesink and Voskuil properties into park?
• District 6: More containers of greenery, including on facades.
• District 7: Planting tall trees Driessenshof .
• District 7: No parking in front yards.
• District 9: 30% yes is present, park not present.
• District 9: Pavement: 1 side bike lane, other side more greenery (as in village/center).
• District 9: 30% green space is present, there is not too much paving, and we have enough space to get into the green space.
• 't Smees, opportunity for park development, now just grass.
• Green manageable in time and growth.

Table 1, social cohesion theme

• Neighborhood 2: I/we moved into a neighborhood with a lot of elderly people. We have had a hassle with this from day 1 because they feel we don't belong among them.
• Neighborhood 2: The youth walking the streets with us, learning manners. It's constant collision after collision. School says it is doing its best, but this does not foster the bond between young and old.
• District 3: There is no social cohesion between municipality and citizens
• District 3: Reforming the organization of the municipality of Aalten: less policy-making, more listening to citizens, working more efficiently, being fair and transparent, showing decisiveness and courage by solving problems.
• Neighborhood 3: I really enjoy living in Aalten, but I am concerned about the future with the arrival of many migrants, Ukrainians, and Westerners.
• District 3: I like social cohesion because I participate by shopping locally, attending events, organizing neighborhood festivals, helping neighbors/acquaintances, volunteering (if you don't move yourself, you can't expect a social safety net).
• Neighborhood 4: Actually in our neighborhood there is nothing to complain about, but right now we are not looking for housing ourselves. However, willing to assist more often in the future with a helping hand.
• Neighborhood 6: Good, nice neighborhood, with an annual neighborhood festival. Mix young and old. Volunteering is fun when young, so trigger to help.
• District 6: There is already quite a lot in Aalten, the municipality must continue to encourage this.
• District 6: Continue to celebrate and facilitate festivals, etc. (Almond Day, King's Day, etc.).
• District 6: Encourage meetings (community center).
• District 6: Municipality may contribute more in certain activities.
• District 6: The Pol / cultural place very important, also for associations.
• District 6: Make church multipurpose.
• District 6: Community center in downtown, not on the outskirts or near a sports park.
• District 6: Support Figulus in its activities.
• District 6: Coherence in downtown/core shopping area is very low. Lots of entertaining events though.
• Neighborhood 8: Social cohesion is diminished by too many migrants in one residential neighborhood (many still remain in their own culture).
• District 8: Mixing young and old.

Table 2, social cohesion theme

• District 2: Odor nuisance (sewer) (Lage Veld)
• District 2: More neighborhood associations.
• District 3: No mix of young and old in living. Only if young people are willing to participate in the neighborhood.
• District 3: Everyone should look out for each other. Do not live in isolation.
• District 3: Facilities should be easily accessible to everyone (supermarket, doctor, etc.).
• District 3: Everyone MUST (be able to) participate.
• Neighborhood 6: Many odor nuisances up to the home. There is an urgent need for a hotline and enforcement.
• District 6: Beverage chains strengthen social cohesion (youth).
• Neighborhood 7: Wood-burning stoves out. The whole of Aalten is covered in smoke (more so than other villages). You can no longer walk properly without breathing in pollution, both during the day and in the evening. That's not taking care of people!
• District 7: Basically the basis is good. If you manage to keep the young people here, e.g., clubs, etc., will remain.
• Neighborhood 7: Sewage smell does often occur. Also nuisance from neighbors burning wood. See Amersfoort: stoke-alert.
• District 8: Trailer rental to be arranged by municipality, possibly for a fee, for large household goods
• District 8: More neighborhood coffees, social walk-in mornings and evenings, etc.
• Loan-hanger, Active Foundation, grants back for this.
• Keet: group confidence, positive.

Table 3, social cohesion theme

• District 2: Deliberately mix young and old in affordable housing!
• Neighborhood 2: I envision in 2040 that there are beautiful green streets with a green park with biodiversity and benches in each neighborhood where people meet.
• Neighborhood 2: I bought a new house on Kemenaweg the neighborhood got together to buy a picnic table. It's super cozy. Sponsor picnic benches!
• District 4: Contact with the neighborhood is good, but not intensive. I see little involvement and do not see that increasing. This I find worrisome and would like to convert, but how? Inventory in the neighborhood what everyone finds desirable? Get to know each other, because unknown makes unloved. Arranging supply and demand in an easy way, via a special app?
• District 4: Mentality change.
• District 4: Establish more community centers.
• District 4: Activities such as carnival, Aalten days, Sjoks festival, beer and wine festivals, etc., in addition to causing a nuisance, generate a lot of social contacts.
• District 4: District Nursing.
• District 7 (owner-occupied housing): Social cohesion in my neighborhood is good now. In neighboring neighborhoods it is sometimes a lot less, because the housing corporation there has used the wrong allocation policy. A good mix between young and old is important.
• District 8: Social rent full of newcomers on top of social rent that was already there has created zero social cohesion. Rather insecurity.
• District 8: More picnic benches.
• I still foresee for the future that you will be on your own when you are in need of help. You can't expect this from your neighbors either.

Table 4, social cohesion theme

• District 5: Specific residential facilities aimed at a good mix of young and old.
• District 5: preserving cultural and social centers.
• District 5: Volunteer pools targeting specific (age) groups.
• District 6: Apply the Doetinchem city room concept in Aalten as well. Drop-in centers, etc.
• District 6: See the City Room in Doetinchem, looking out for each other together, meeting rooms, open daily. See article in De Gelderlander of 12-02-2025.
• District 6: Help reduce screen time, tackle broadly with whole community.
• District 10: Making Neighborhood Day interesting.
• District 10: Promote/encourage organization of activities (parents' box, children's afternoons, etc.).
• Neighborhood 10: Initiating enjoyable celebrations, traditions, etc. Consider carnival. De Pol plays a significant role in this.
• District 10: Maintain associational life, promote volunteerism.
• District 10: Dart competitions, pub quizzes, etc.
• District 10: Referendum for residents on difficult decisions by council with many differences.
• Neighborhood 10: Naoberschap is declining rapidly, younger and younger residents are coming and they have their own friends, so it stays at most a "hello." Hope it will improve with a neighborhood app!
• Society is becoming more hardened. It's all about me, me, me, and the rest can go hang. I don't think the municipality can do much to change this. It has to come from society itself.

Table 5, social cohesion theme

• District 1: Health work at all levels.
• District 1: Fine neighborhood, neighborhood party, helping each other, neighborhood app.
• Neighborhood 1: Traffic safety, Kobus development; resonates with everyone.
• District 1: Employment and training.
• District 1: Preserve good stores.
• District 1: Safety, drugs, enforcement.
• Neighborhood 5: We know each other well, a few excepted. We have a neighborhood association and neighborhood app.
• District 5: I volunteer and have friends who look out for each other.
• District 6: Normal people are social, but there are also special neighbors living in residential warehouses.
• District 6: Helping each other happens (I am a family caregiver).
• Neighborhood 7: We take care of each other in the neighborhood (grocery shopping, Informal care).
• District 9: Neighborhood still takes care of each other now, but don't know if that will continue.
• District 9: Neighborhood house in downtown.
• District 9: The municipality could provide better information about what has already been arranged in Aalten. Things are currently being done twice.
• As a neighborhood, we take care of each other, but more broadly drawn, I do see problems with that due to more selfish behavior by people. And to turn that around?
• Ensuring that young people can continue to live in Aalten, as they can strengthen social life.

How to move forward?

After the second round of meetings we will describe all input (including policies of other governments, etc.) into one integral, coherent and as concrete as possible concept/proposal for an environmental vision, in which for Aalten as a whole but also for the individual subareas is indicated what the desired and undesired developments are towards 2040 and (in outline) how we want to realize the desired living environment in 2040. With this concept/proposal we will first return to the subareas in a third and final round, asking: What do you think? Only then will we take the draft environmental vision to the city council.

Please note that this third and final round of discussions on the environmental vision will not be March 2025, but a bit later in the spring! You will be notified of this at a later date.