IPErasmus Report Template

7/27/2019 IPErasmus Report Template

1/9

1

Evaluation of Selected Indicators of LocalityZlat Potok

Care Green, SlovakiaReport

Group: B

Elaborated by: Abraham Gebreselassie Gebreyes

Anda Claudia Stefura

Anett Klaudia KovcsDorin Clipa

Kim Thuy Nguyen

Jana Oplkov

Nina Kvasovsk

Zuzana Kucbelov

June 2013

Zvolen, Slovakia


2/9


3/9

2

Methodology

Our main task was given on Friday 21st. Field surveys were on following days: Friday 21st,

Sunday 23rd and Wednesday 26th. Results were done by the whole group. For the final results

analysis was made descriptively in the form of graphs, averages and tables.

Results

Task No. 1

ANaturalness Index, A = 0,36

In this area were found 93 woody species. Out of the total number 39 (36%) are autochthonous.

EEvergreen Index, E = 0,24

From 93 species 26 are evergreen woody species which is 24% of a total number.

FGreenery Facilities, F = 0,83

In the whole area is missing only one of solved items and it is playground for 14-18 years old

children. So the final average 0,83 is enough as people have an opportunity to spend their time in

greenery.

Public Space Yes/No

Playground for small children 1

Playground for 10-13 years old children 1

Playground for 14-18 years old children 0

Sport facilities 1

Parks 1

Recreation public spaces (amenity open space) 1

F (average) 0,83

Source: Field Survey (2013)


4/9

3

G

Greenery Balances, G = 0,43

In accordance with our field surveys the rate of greenery areas to overall area was found as 43%.

Private areas for example schools we were not able to enter so that the data are missing.

For each zone the data are following:

Zone Value

Zone of low - floor buildings 0,35

Zone of high - floor buildings 0,4

Zone of education(private) -

Zone of trade and service 0,1

Zone of rest with public greenery 0,8

Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor buildings 0,5

Average 0,43


HParameter of the Greenery Perspective, H = 0,55

Zone Value



Zone of education (private) -



Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor buildings 0,6

Average 0,55


The zones around both low-floor and high-floor buildings are evaluated as medium perspective.

Prevailing part of these zones has good long-time perspective with more or less requirement

management. That is why the parameter is 0,5. Some of trees need an arboristic care. Similar

situation is also in Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor buildings. Zone of trade and service

is in a good condition. It is the best valuated zone. It is required only basic management. The worst

zone is Zone of rest with public greenery, where we found many sick trees. This requires

professional care. The average parameter of the greenery perspective is 0,55.


5/9

4

PParameter of Permeability, P = 0,20

Zone Value



Zone of education(private) -



Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor buildings 0,18Average 0,2


The P parameter is quite small. It has been done mainly because of missing items such as green

roofs, open water areas and green walls. In our opinion there are just a few benches, trash bins and

water elements so we made a 12 th parameter for those items.

VVerticality Index, V = 0,64

64% of the total amount of buildings is up to 5 levels. In whole area there are 39 buildings, out of

which 14 of them have more than 5 levels while 25 are up to 5 level.

XAesthetical Index, X = 0,5

As our own selected parameter we decided to evaluate aesthetical point of view. How can people

feel here, how greenery does look like in general, if people can feel comfortable, etc. were

considered in this evaluation.

The most problematic zone was Zone of rest with public greenery, especially park. Dry trees,

many weedy perennials and shrubs were seen. Another big issue is that these trees and shrubs are

used as a shelter for homeless people. There are also many excrements and it does not smell good

there. In the whole area are many litters, especially close to children playgrounds. On the other

hand there are many tree species which make this area more attractive, nice and people can feel

comfortable and good weather. The place is quiet, good for resting and walking through the place.


6/9

5

Task No. 1.1.

Final values which were found during field surveys are in some points similar to optimal values.

Some of them are more or less different, for example H parameter is higher. It is done because of

bad quality of trees in the area.

Task No. 2

Zone Value

Zone of low - floor buildings 4

Zone of high - floor buildings 3

Zone of education (private) 5

Zone of trade and service 4

Zone of rest with public greenery 3

Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor buildings 3


Zone of low - floor buildings is not dangerous at all. The unpleasant about this area are leaves

shedding and small dry branches.


7/9

6

There were found some trees which had a branching in a latter V shape in Zone of high - floor

buildings. This can be dangerous during strong wind or storms. These few trees were found also

close to public ways. On the other hand just a few of them are enough old to be so dangerous.

There are many cherry and wild-cherry trees, chestnut trees in this zone which fruits and seeds fall

down and it can be uncomfortable.

Private zone is supposed to be safe and optimal as children are there very often. But we were not

able to evaluate this part properly because of privacy.

Zone of trade and service was evaluated as not dangerous but unpleasant because there is not

enough greenery.

Park, which is included in Zone of rest with public greenery, would be evaluated as potentially

dangerous but in general with the rest of areas the situation is not so bad. It is similar as a Zone of

high - floor buildings and as a Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor buildings.

Task No. 3

Zones Value

Zone of low - floor buildings 1

Zone of high - floor buildings 2

Zone of education(private) 1

Zone of trade and service 2

Zone of rest with public greenery 3

Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor buildings 2


Zone of low - floor buildings and Zone of education (private zone) are optimal. Zone of

high - floor buildings, Zone of trade and service and Zone of mixed low - floor and high - floor

buildings are suitable. These areas are larger but destructions are not so obvious.

Zone of rest with public greenery where is also park is little disturbed. Quality of this part is not

optimal at all. People do not visit this part because management and maintenance is not done here.

It does not look like a park. Another reason is homeless people. The area can be found out as

uncomfortable then. There are also many invasive plants and the value of the park has been lost.


8/9

7

Task No. 4

Problematic Area of the Whole Estimate

Zone of Rest in Public Greenery (The Park Place)

The park is found near to the main road way. It is a green place combined with large trees and

invasive species of plants. It has a beautiful weather and is suitable for walking and sitting in a free

time for people in different ages. In our field work, we have seen some people crossing through the

park to enter into the main residential place. The park place is also used for shelter for homeless

people. Few people inside the park place were sleeping in the grass. There is no building inside the

park, but there is a pub, which provides services near to the park. Few benches were found in the

park, but they are old and need to be repair.

Recommendations of the Group about the Problematic Area (The Park)

Some remedial measures are forwarded by the members of the group to improve the problematic

area (the park place).

1. Treatment should be given for those trees which are affected by diseases. In some of the talltrees the dry branches should be cut on time, otherwise they may create some potential

problems/accidents on the people and the tree itself.

2. The old benches should be repaired and new ones also should be put in some places toreduce the shortage of sitting benches.

3. The park place is not clean as it is full of shrubs and rubbish because of shortage ofgarbage/waste bins. So the municipality should give much more emphasis in providing

trash bins around the park place.4. The park is vulnerable for homeless people who are living around the trees by constructing

their own shelters, which makes the place more uncomfortable for the people who walk and

sit in the park. So the park place should be protected and cleaned by the government

through some intervention mechanisms such as giving shelter place or houses to the

homeless people.


9/9

8

5. In order to attract more people to the park place, the concerned body should build smallshop which is providing some services for the people. For example, the shop which is

selling ice creams for children and young people. It is also possible to construct

playgrounds for children to increase the attractiveness of the park place.

6. There are some introduced species in the park. These plants are not good and have a veryinvasive feature. So that these plants should be removed.

7. It is better to plant beautiful flowers around and inside the park to attract people and toincrease the greenery and sightseeing of the park place. It is also good to install some taps

for drinking water supply for the people. There is no electric light poles and public toilet

around the park place which should be solved by the concerned body.

8. The grasses inside the park should be protected and cut on time. Because in some parts ofthe park place the grasses are very tall and found in a disorder way. The walking way

which crosses the park should also be rebuilt.

Conclusions

The main aim of the project which is evaluating the house estate of Zlat Potok is done. Area

was divided into 6 zones which were then evaluated one by one according to the tasks. From that

information we got many results. In the task 1 we worked with some coefficients and parameters

which held us for making final results. From these results was made a graphic which shows us that

the situation in this locality is not optimal. It was also compared with optimal values. In task 2 was

found out that the area is not dangerous in general. Only one zone of total number was found as

little disturbed, most of zones are suitable and optimal in task 3. From the field survey result

related to task 4 is obvious that some parts (mainly park area) need better management,

maintenance and for many trees is needed arboristic care, some of them could be also cut down.

IPErasmus Report Template

Documents

Transcript of IPErasmus Report Template