The prioritisation of this dataset of 139 items was prepared based on TIMBRE WP3 methodology, presented to local stakeholders and discussed. 25 people involved or interested in brownfields regeneration in Ústí nad Labem (local city administration, regional administration, urban planners, local people, researchers from university of Ústí, university students) participated in the presentation on 26^th March 2013.

The whole event was divided into three parts. In the first part, Dr. Petr Klusáček of IOG shortly introduced the TIMBRE project with special attention to WP3 tasks (success factors and prioritisation tool development) who was followed by Dr. Václav Novák of the Jan Evangelista Purkyně University, who explained origins, pre-conditions and background for contemporary spatial distribution of brownfields in the area of Ústí nad Labem city (historical development of industry, decay of industry in last two decades etc.). Dr. Novák stressed that not only location of individual brownfields is important, but also other factors have to be taken into account (as specific types of contamination in sites after chemical industry in Ústí nad Labem). Also the proximity of the city to Germany was discussed as potential factor that could help to attract potential investors.

The second part of the event was devoted to the presentation of the results of the prioritisation exercise of a set of brownfields for the city of Ústí nad Labem. Individual steps and the methodology approach were described in detail by Dr. Josef Kunc (IOG). Dr. Kunc didn´t stressed week points of methodology to enable discussion that followed. Dr. Kunc also analysed ranking of brownfields and proposed prioritisation results to be discussed.

Next, a discussion was led by Mgr. Stanislav Martinát (IOG). The most interesting parts of the discussion were linked to: 1) weighting of individual factors used in methodology; 2) questioning the necessity to use the overall total for all dimensions results; individual results for each dimension seem to have information value; 3) how to manage up-dating of databases of brownfields and accommodate such prioritisation tool to work as a part of such database; is its realistic? 4) necessity to provide cartographic output as part of prioritisation for better orientation and spatial overview. It might be stressed that prioritisation results mostly suited to urgency of brownfields to be regenerated in Ústí nad Labem as perceived by the participants.

^ Example of prioritisation table.

The event was concluded by a round where participants were asked to shortly sum up benefits, advantages or disadvantages perceived with regard to the proposed prioritisation tool. The majority of stakeholders perceived the concept of the prioritisation tool for brownfields as a very useful idea that is difficult to develop in reality. Coherence between WP3 prioritisation results with opinions of local stakeholders on that issue were perceived as acceptance of the proposed tool to be useful and helpful for regeneration of brownfields in Ústí nad Labem.