Reykjavík Grapevine - 05.08.2005, Page 24

Reykjavík is a car city, for
better or worse. According to
Statistics Iceland, as of 2003 there
are 69,727 private cars in the city
alone - one car for every 1.6 people.
As Dagur B. Eggertsson, chairman
of the Reykjavík Planning Council,
pointed out to the Grapevine,
“Homes with two or even three cars
are all the more common. There are
now actually more cars than there
are driver’s licences.” Former city
engineer of Copenhagen Dr. Jens
Roerbech addressed the problem
in the latest issue of aVs magazine,
where, in discussing Reykjavík he
said in part, “I cannot remember
having been in a city where 96% of
all trips take place by the private car.”
One of the big reasons why
Reykjavík is such a car city has
a lot to do with the building of
the Kringlan mall in 1987, when
Davíð Oddsson was mayor and
the conservatives controlled City
Council, which shifted the residents’
focus away from shops downtown
that they could walk to, to a mall
that they could drive to. As Chief
Planning Official of the Reykjavík
Planning Office Helga Bragadóttir
explained to the Grapevine, the city
had begun building multi-family
units in Skuggahverfi in 1985, with
the hope that one result would be
more people using mass transit
(which in Iceland’s case means the
bus) or travelling on foot, but then,
“Kringlan opened in August 1987,
which of course had an impact
on the city centre. Here you had
bigger shops contained indoors, free
parking, big lots - the concept was
that among other means, you come
by car. The private car has had a big
impact on the cityscape and how
people move to and from work.”
A car city has more to worry
about than just traffic jams: apart
from concerns regarding air pollution
and fuel consumption, there’s also
the problem of “traffic islands”
- neighbourhoods boxed in by
heavy car traffic - especially true
in Reykjavík, where nearly 50% of
the available land is used for roads,
parking spaces, and other traffic-
related structures.
“The city’s neighbourhoods have
been split up,” says Eggertsson, “into
neighbourhoods where parents are
afraid to let their children outside to
play. It’s a quality of life issue.”
To deal with this problem, Dr.
Roerbech proposed in the same
issue of aVs that Reykjavík increase
parking restrictions and provide
better facilities for bicycle traffic,
stating that the city, “should build
bicycle paths and special bicycle
roads.” While there are those who’ve
been reluctant to bicycle traffic
in Reykjavík for climate reasons,
Roerbech is on the same page as
the Planning Council in one regard:
emphasizing mass transit.
The Planning Council wants to
put greater emphasis on buses and
walking.
“The fact is,” said Bragadóttir,
“we have to better utilize land for
development and link homes to
work sensibly, where we can bring
transportation down to a human
scale, such as walking on foot.”
Eggertsson agrees, adding that
he would like to see the city adopt
a “think train and drive bus” policy,
wherein the city would be able to
“guarantee to city residents in high
population areas a constant stream
of transport with a train-like bus
system, that is, one with speed and
efficiency.”
Others, such as Einar Örn
Stefánsson, managing director of the
Downtown Development Society,
have proposed a new bus line for the
city centre.
In an article he wrote in the
July 2005 issue of the downtown
magazine Miðborgin, Stefánsson
put forward the idea of a bus route
downtown that would run on a
continuous loop, travelling down
Laugavegur from Hlemmur to
Lækjartorg, and then travelling back
up to Hlemmur on Hverfisgata
- an idea that he believes would
greatly reduce downtown traffic,
adding, “There is no walking street
in Reykjavík, which is strange, as I
think every major city in the world
has a walking street. I think the
best solutions to reducing traffic
downtown would be to encourage
further use of parking garages,
have a walking street, and to have
bus service form a loop” between
Hlemmur and Lækjartorg.
Already changes to the mass
transit system have begun, with 10%
of bus stops removed from some of
the city’s denser areas in the hopes
of increasing travel time in those
areas. Ilene Solomon, a designer for
the Institute Without Boundaries -
who recently returned from a trip to
Iceland - agreed with the changes to
the bus system, telling the Grapevine
that, “I understand the logic behind
it, in that it does increase efficiency.
Fewer stops also mean the buses use
less fuel, expending less exhaust.”
Not everyone is thrilled with
the idea of the changes to the bus
system - there have been some public
grumblings, including television
personality Gísli Marteinn criticizing
the changes on the news-discussion
television show Kastljósið on
the grounds that the new system
will “take a long time to learn.”
Vilhjálmur Þ. Vilhjálmsson, leader of
Independence Party representation
on City Council, takes that argument
further. He would in fact like
Reykjavík to be even more of a car
city than it already is.
“Icelanders have decided
themselves to use personal vehicles,”
he told the Grapevine, “and this is
something that we have to accept.
The weather here is always changing
from rain, to cold, to wind and snow,
all very quickly. People just don’t
want to walk 500 to 700 metres to a
bus stop and wait 10 or 15 minutes
in bad weather for a bus to come.
This is our Icelandic reality. We
don’t see people driving fewer cars.”
To further accommodate cars
in Reykjavík, Vilhjálmsson and the
Independence Party have proposed
removing a number of traffic lights
from the Miklabraut-Hringbraut
roads, which currently run down the
middle of the Reykjavík peninsula,
effectively creating an expressway
through the middle of the city. Such
an expressway would cut off the
Vatnsmýri area – which has been
slated by most involved for multi-
family units – from the downtown
area.
Looking for some perspective,
the Grapevine consulted Kevin
Firchow, of the urban planning
consulting firm Schreiber Anderson
Associates in Madison, Wisconsin.
Madison has repeatedly earned the
best small city in the US award, all
while coping with population booms
and geographic limitations - the
Northern city faces much harsher
weather overall, including much
colder winters, than Reykjavík,
and is located entirely on a narrow
isthmus. Firchow pointed out that
an expressway running through the
middle of a city like Reykjavík would
actually run counter to the goal of
reducing traffic.
“Anytime you run freeways
through the middle of a city,” he told
the Grapevine, “you’re effectively
forcing them to use car travel by
cutting them off from other parts
of the city. This increases car use,
which creates more congestion.
Eventually, you have to widen the
freeway further, and the land for
that expansion displaces buildings
and cuts people off further. A better
approach is to integrate uses and
provide more options for travel.”
In other words, splitting
Reykjavík in two with an expressway
could turn the Vatnsmýri area into
a slum – a dense residential area cut
off from basic goods and services.
Even if the people who would live
in Vatnsmýri bought cars to access
the expressway, this would only snarl
traffic more; the community would
remain shut off from downtown.
Solomon found the proposal
slightly difficult to believe, stating
that, “I think an expressway would
make the city more like the suburbs.
I wouldn’t push the city in that
direction, in terms of dealing with
traffic density.”
Yet making the city more
like the suburbs is precisely what
Vilhjálmsson and the Independence
Party have in mind for Reykjavík.
One of the more radical planning
ideas being suggested by
Vilhjálmsson and the Independence
Party concerns the islands
surrounding Reykjavík: Geldinganes,
Akurey, Engey, and to some extent
even Viðey have been slated as
possible sites for predominantly
single-family homes. This would
create the ultimate “gated
communities,” using water instead of
high walls, and would be accessible
only by a two-lane or four-lane road.
Bridges would connect Geldinganes,
Engey and Viðey to the mainland,
but the gap of water between
Öfirisey and Akurey would be filled
in with earth. While many have
expressed concerns about the idea of
landfilling as a means of expanding
the city geographically, it’s not
exactly a new technique to the city.
As Vilhjálmsson told the Grapevine,
“Landfilling has been ongoing in
Reykjavík for the past decades. In
the past 15 to 20 years, some 240
hectares have been added, 125 of
which are around Örfirisey.”
The idea of developing these
islands isn’t without controversy.
Viðey in particular has attracted
the affections of many people in
the city as a historical setting worth
preserving.
“I can certainly understand this
point of view,” said Vilhjálmsson,
when questioned about making
celebrated public land private. “But
visitors to Viðey have been on the
decline.”
The islands would be built
up with mostly single-family
homes. While this seems like a
straightforward, albeit temporary,
solution to the problem of
Reykjavík’s population boom, the
underlying reason for Vilhjálmsson’s
method of expanding Reykjavík
doesn’t seem to be to find room for
the city’s new residents, but rather,
to hang on to the better-off of the
current ones.
As Vilhjálmsson explained to
Grapevine, “In Reykjavík last year,
there were 343 new residents.
Compare that to 900 new residents
in Kópavogur and 1000 new
residents in Hafnarfjörður. In the
suburbs, you have more choice of
sites for families and mostly families
in single-family homes, while in
Reykjavík there are mostly multiple-
family homes. Most people want
to live in single-family homes,
and that’s why there’s been this
flight into the suburbs. There are
now people moving as far afield as
Hveragerði and Selfoss. We want to
keep families in Reykjavík.”
If the majority of the 39,000
possible new residents expected over
the next 30 years live in single-family
homes, this will mean thousands
of new cars in Reykjavík, a city
that by that time would only have
expanded geographically by a few
hundred hectares. The wear-and-
tear of roads, air pollution and traffic
injuries and fatalities associated
with private car usage in Reykjavík
would increase dramatically. Not to
mention the fact that low density
areas like single-family home
neighbourhoods require more sewer
lines, more power lines, and greater
Island communities:
better than building a moat.
Last chance to form a sovereign state in
the island of Viðey
24