Since ever, in the city exists the interference of various interests, different residents, various opinions and functions. It is not our principle to separate individual interests and then to solve them ideally. So we do not design purpose-built car streets and as opposition to that pedestrian zones. Our goal is to find a compromise of all interests and actions, not their separation. In the area under revitalization we design traditional streets from which we do not exclude traffic, we only regulate it and thus offer the city for pedestrians. We follow a similar approach in the design of urban greenery. We offer familiar things that evoke familiar feelings. If simple "things" are sensitively designed into a coherent whole, it is sufficient. We discover the meaning of the terms "shadow under the tree", "bench on the corner".

Phasing:

We consider the ideal solution to divide the individual stages into even smaller units - for example the street size from one crossroads to another. Completely close the street for a predetermined time, reconstructing both the infrastructure and the parterre - both in all its consequences. The effect is clear. If a quality is created that no longer needs to be further intervened because it is comprehensively completed, it is not so difficult to follow up. As a contradiction, a more common practice can be found: pavement is repaired in the whole neighborhood. The effect is noticeable, but not complex. In next step there is public lighting replaced in the whole neighborhood. On that occasion, new pavement will be damaged. Furthermore, greenery is revitalized throughout the neighborhood and on that occasion… the direction of reflection is clear. Thus: step by step, part-by-part repair the city as in consecutive completely completed stages - ideally whole parterre and technical infrastructure.