Arhus:
Demonstrating ways of meeting urban ecological renewal needs
Arhus:
| |
| Country: | a) Northern Europe | ,b) Denmark |
| Language: | |
| Type: | Project, Policy, 1 |
| Area: | City/Town, District/Quarter, 100,000 - 1 mill. |
| Actors: | Local government, National government, Economic sector |
| Funding: | Local government, National government |
| Topics: | Energy |
| Housing (and new settlements) | |
| Information and public participation | |
| Urban renewal / Urban rehabilitation | |
| Water | |
| Objectives: | Improve access to information |
| Increase bio-diversity | |
| Increase green areas | |
| Increase public awareness | |
| Increase use of ecological building materials | |
| Reduce energy consumption | |
| Reduce water consumption | |
| Instruments: | Demonstration and pilot project |
| Integrated planning approach | |
| New environmental policies and regulations | |
| Public participation |
The Arhus Ecological Urban Renewal programme in the Ole Romersgade Area of Arhus started in 1992 aims to meet urban housing renewal and development needs in an ecologically sound and sustainable manner. One idea behind this is to minimize or avoid negative side effects building modernizations have on the level of resource use. Another is to improve the urban environment of the area by creating green spaces. While parts of the measures are supported by public funds, the majority of them have to be undertaken on private intiative. Therefore, to instill the necessary interest and commitment in the population, the Ecological Renewal Programme encourages intensive public participation as a main policy. Further features implemented so far are demonstration projects, information services, and a decree setting minimum requirements for renewal activities. First results of this ambitious programme have become visible. The project is an outstanding and examplary initiative for several reasons:
In Denmark, after a period of intensive construction of new housing lasting up until the late 1980s, in the 1990s the main construction task shifted onto the renewal of old residential buildings. By today's basic standards 250,000 of the dwellings contructed before 1950 need renewal: many of them are not only in a dire general state but have no baths, shared toilets, or inefficient heating systems such as kerosene heating. However, experience has proven that modernization and refurbishment of such dwellings will usually cause the use of energy and other resources, e.g. of hot water, to rise substantially. Since a large portion of urban energy and resource consumption can already be attributed to the residential and building sector, modernisation, in the sense of business as usual, might cause an even greater environmental strain. In Denmark, however, there is seen a way out of this dilemma: if this task was fulfilled according to ecologically sound principles, urban renewal could substantially contribute to the improvement of the urban environment as well as climate protection.
Urban renewal concepts discussed at national as well as local level in Denmark today include next to financial, regional-economic and other 'traditional' planning aspects the new goal of 'urban ecology'. A national forum on the issues, the Consultative Committee on Urban Ecology, described this concept in the following way:
"Urban ecology describes a particular environmental effort which takes its point of departure in the environmental state of a specific urban area and in citizen participation, while seeking to develop overall solutions to problems connected with the area's resource consumption, environmental impact, and nature. Thus urban ecology focuses on a given PLACE (a building, a settlement, a neighbourhood, an area, or in principle a whole town) and on a given group of citizens." (cf. Nina Munkstrup 1995, p. 2).
Thus, the reduction of resource use and of impacts on the environment and extended public participation are the principal goals of urban ecology put forward in this statement.
The municipality of Arhus as initiator of the urban renewal project in the Ole Romersgade Area in the city's district of Frederiksbjerg aims at proceeding according to these goals. The project encompasses the renewal and improvement of the buildings as well as of open spaces and streets in an ecologically sound manner. To put this into practice, the main task is to entice owners and residents of the buildings to get interested in the ideas of ecological renewal and to decide to follow ecological principles in their renewal efforts.
According to the basic concept pursued, individual steps and measures toward this aim are debated in a discursive process. It involves the municipality, scientific and technical advisors, planning experts, and last but not least the residents and citizens as a whole. As far as possible, this debate is embedded in the planning and implementation of demonstration projects which also offer the opportunity to test the technical and economic feasibility of different ecological improvement measures. One important idea behind this is to consider and integrate the wishes for improvement brought forward by the residents into the municipal planning process. Thus, the project also aims at further developing methods and processes for effective citizen participation.
In 1991, the municipality of Arhus first took the initiative to renew the Ole Romersgade Area in Arhus. The district consists of 17 blocks with 1,600 apartments of which 40% are in need of refurbishment and generally lacks public green space. It is characterized by 1-4 storey buildings around large courtyards utilized mainly for residential purposes and by 45 small businesses giving it a diverse structure which is to be maintained. As part of the municipal plan of the municipality of Arhus, this district was given highest priority as an urban renewal area because of its mixed use and high density.
While most of the renewal is to be carried out voluntarily by the private owners of the buildings over the following 10 years, the municipality of Arhus made a first start with two demonstration projects: the ecological renewal of the two houses in Ole Romersgade 38-42 including the rear courtyard and the courtyard renewal project of block 102. Furthermore, the municipality's policies emphasise the build-up of an effective information infrastructure, providing participation structures, and also rely on regulatory measures such as the urban renewal guidelines.
Demonstration Projects: According to Danish municipal planning and urban renewal law, the citizens have to be involved in urban renewal projects from an early planning stage. In public announcements and personal letters the tenants and owners of the buildings have to be informed of the planning document and the alternatives debated. They have the right to submit their objections and suggestions before the final plan is adopted. Furthermore, every tenant has the right to veto changes in his/her apartment (except for installing toilets and central heating). Collectively, they have the right to veto alterations to their building. Thus, there is a minimum procedural requirement securing the involvement of citizens in renewal planning processes in Denmark. In the case of the exemplary courtyard greening project of block 102 in Arhus, these minimum rights have been extended substantially.
b) Block 102. This block is composed of 19 buildings with 192 apartments and 4 businesses circling a courtyard of 3,250 m2. Within the courtyard were several dilapidated smaller buildings and shacks as well as some bushes and small trees of varying health, but large areas were sealed. Within the course of the remodelling, the shacks were removed; the surfaces reopended and planted with a variety of indigenous plants and trees; rainwater is now collected from the roofs and used for watering or is fed into ponds and streams for percolation into the ground; facilities for waste separation and composting were constructed and spaces for gardening and recreation designed; wooden structures treated with non-polluting natural substances such as lime, buttermilk, zinc sulfate and colour pigments instead of solvent-based substances.
First steps starting up the project were taken in early 1992; the final workphase ended in May 1996. Within this long process, the emphasis of time (and funds) was put on the planning and public participation process. Involved in this process were the Office of the City Architect as a coordinator, the landscaper, a number of residents living in the block, and an independent planning agency. (In many Danish municipalities these planning agencies were founded with the reforms in planning law, in order to relieve the municipalities of the resulting work load. Most of the agencies are organised on a non-profit basis.)
The decision to choose Block 102 among several other blocks suitable for a demonstration projects was arrived at by a petition (March 1992), which showed that interest among the residents of this block was strongest. The planning itself proceeded in roughly three phases, lasting from October till December 1993: the first was an interview phase, in which residents where informed about the principles of ecological renewal and asked about their individual wishes and suggestions. As a second step, five different elements for an ecological renewal of the courtyard were presented and discussed. Four of them were agreed to by the residents. (The suggestion to rebuild the old bakery into an ecological information centre was vetoed by the tenants.) In a third phase, two concrete designs were suggested and discussed. The work in each of these phases was accompanied by an 'editorial group', consisting of residents and a landscaping architect, which documented the process and results. The idea behind this is to give the different arguments and findings a binding quality and thus to guarantee them proper consideration in the following planning stage. (Derived from this is the method's name: 'arbejdsbogs-metoden' - 'working book-method'.)
Based on these results, the municipality's decision for the backyard greening project was taken in September 1994. This decision was followed by drawing up and agreeing on the details of the project. Also in this planning stage, the tenants were actively involved. For two months 'Saturday meetings' were held to discuss the plan and to allow their ideas and criticism to be taken into account. After publication and agreement on the final plan, execution of the project started in July 1995 and was completed in May 1996.
Providing Information. To inspire owners and tenants in the district to follow the city's positive example, the municipality has put the main emphasis on informing the owners and tenants about the ecological urban renewal concept and their possibilities to act. In one of the remodelled buildings, Ole Romersgade 42, the Municipality founded an urban ecology information centre. Here, the energy and resource-saving features of the two ecologically refurbished houses and its courtyard are presented and explained to the visitors from a practical perspective. To impart ecological renewal experiences and establish a dialogue, the centre offers specific technical and other practical advice to planners, architects, businesses, house owners, teachers, and the general public. There are lectures and seminars held and free personal advice is offered to building owners and residents of the district. A further emphasis of the centre's efforts is cooperation with schools, churches and other associations of the district.
Participation Structures. As evident from the implementation of the Block 102 courtyard greening, public participation is further encouraged by structuring the planning process to include the residents' concerns at an early stage. Similar methods are applied for the planning and design of other measures in support of the ecological urban renewal of the area. Strategic mainstay are the permanently installed working groups which are intended to keep up communication between the municipalities departments, planners, and residents/owners.
Urban Renewal Guidelines. As another element of the Ecological Urban Renewal Programme of Arhus, the municipality drew up ecological renewal guidelines for the refurbishment of housing in Arhus (Retningslinier for miljomaessige minimumskrav og anbefalinger ved boligforbedringer under den stottede byfornyelse, June 1996). They cover the areas electricity, heat, water, waste, courtyard greening, and building materials. Their minimum requirements have to be adhered to if an investor in the urban renewal area wants to be eligible for public support (from municipal as well as national funds). Some of these rules fix common best-practice technical standards, for example the use of standard low-energy electrical or water-saving appliances. Exceptional from a comparative perspective is the emphasis on measures saving resources such as building materials. For instance, before one pane windows are replaced by new ones, adding a second glass layer is to be considered. Old building material has to be reused as long as it is economically and technically feasible. Another exceptional example are the special requirements drawn up for the insulation of outfacing walls which must not impair a healthy building and room climate. Therefore, the use of air-tight outside sealing materials such as plastic paint is forbidden.
Together with the obligatory guidelines other voluntary, and generally more expensive, measures are listed as suggestions for more far-reaching activities. Thus, the Urban Renewal Guidelines simultaneously serve as a tool to raise the people's awareness and spread information about the wealth of ecological renewal measures. By offering further advice from the city architect, it points out first steps to their integration in renewal projects.
Visible results so far are restricted to the two demonstration projects, which, however, give a good impression of the improvements that can be achieved in the quality of living as well as environmental quality. More specifically, in Ole Romersgade 38-42, installation of bathrooms in the appartments without any additional measures would have caused the use of water and energy to increase. However, due to the water and energy-saving activities and the solar thermal system, the consumption of district heat was reduced by one third compared to pre-renovation levels and the level of water use increased only slightly.
Both demonstration projects provided the opportunity to gather experiences with ecological urban renewal, from a technical, economic, as well as planning and procedural perspective. Moreover, the underlying concept was in practical terms spelled out and promoted among the owners and residents of the area and the citizens of Arhus on the whole.
With respect to public participation in the project, experiences have shown that interest by the residents was strongest when planning of the yards and green spaces was concerned, which would visibly improve the quality of living for everyone at comparatively little cost to them. It has proved to be more difficult to raise this kind of interest for ecological improvements of the houses, mostly because of the higher financial costs to owners and tenants.
Up until the end of 1996, there had been relatively little private initiative for further ecological renewal projects. However, in view of the short time which has passed since the start-up of the Arhus Ecological Urban Renewal Project and the ongoing activities of the municipality, it is far too early for final statements.
The Arhus and other urban ecology renewal projects have shown that the quality of technical and attitudinal changes are not a question of either or, but that both aspects are important.
Both demonstration projects and the informational programme are mainly financed by the Municipality of Arhus. However, support for the projects has been provided by the Danish Ministry of Housing in the frame of its ecological urban renewal programme. For the Block 102 demonstration project, which cost DKr 5.76 million (3.33 for the planning process, 2.43 for the execution), national subsidies amounted to DKr 800,000.
Renewal projects in privately owned houses for a large part have to be financed on the private market. In addition, provided minimum requirements of the Urban Renewal Guideline are adhered to, they are eligible for public funding.
Arhus kommune 1996: Retningslinier for miljomaessige minimumskrav og anbefalinger ved boligforbedringer under den stottede byfornyelse, Byfornyelsesadelingen Stadsarkitektens kontor, June
Munkstrup, Nina 1995: Examples of Urban Ecology in Denmark, Interplan, No. 13, published by the Danish Association for International Urban and Regional Planning, December 1995
Stadsarkitektens Kontor 1991: Arhus - The Green City. The Urban Ecology Project at Ole Romers Gade 38-42; Municipality of Arhus, June 1991
Stadsarkitektens Kontor - Byfornyelsesafdelingen 1996: Gaardforbedring - Karre 102, April (Municipality of Arhus)
| Name | : | Hinrup |
| Firstname | : | Birgit |
| Telefon | : | +45 / 89 40 27 32 |
| Telefax | : | +45 / 89 40 27 42 |
| Address | : | Arhus Kommune |
| Stadsarkitektens Kontor | ||
| Raadhuset | ||
| DK-8100 Arhus C |
Arhus is the largest city on the Danish isle of Jylland, the second largest in all of Denmark. Already since the Middle Ages its development has been shaped by the ever expanding port which designated Arhus as an important commercial centre. This development has been supported by flourishing industry, especially of vegetable oil processing and breweries, textile and machinery industries, coke works as well as shipyards. Today, the city is Denmark's second most important production centre.
Furthermore, Arhus is a reknowned cultural and educational centre with one of the biggest Danish universities. Arhus is also famous for its recent development policies which have proceeded adhering to strict plans such as the Gellerupplan. This plan has resulted in the creation of an entirely new district with one of Europe's biggest shopping centres.
Project was added at 08.04.1997
Project was changed at 13.09.2001