Reykjavík Grapevine - 05.08.2005, Blaðsíða 25

Reykjavík Grapevine - 05.08.2005, Blaðsíða 25
lengths of piping for water and heating than high-density multi- family areas. They are, in other words, less efficient and more costly to maintain. At the same time, the Planning Council doesn’t exactly warmly embrace the idea of developing the islands and having an inordinate proportion of single-family homes in Reykjavík. Bragadóttir cut to the heart of the argument, taking the pragmatic approach: “Before we build on land fillings and the islands,” she told the Grapevine, “we should first build on the land we already have on the peninsula. We should wait a while before using land fillings. It’s just common sense. It’s true that people did live on Víðey, but that changed, and we should now first consider where it’s already more practical to build, on the peninsula.” Others, such as Stefánsson, don’t even consider the plan realistic. As he told the Grapevine, “I find the idea of developing the islands around Reykjavík to be a kind of utopia that’s fun to think about, but I don’t think it would be a reality.” In order to maintain high density and a high quality of life, the Planning Council has proposed a development “mix” of apartments and single-family homes. That proposal, called the “Five Flowers,” focuses on five areas of the city: the Mýrargata-Slippasvæði of the west harbour area, the east harbour area, the neighbourhood around the bus terminal Hlemmur, the largely industrial area of Elliðaárvogur, and the crucial Vatnsmýri, where the city airport currently resides. All of these areas will be predominantly apartments, thereby keeping density high, but Bragadóttir doesn’t believe that necessarily means building upwards. “I don’t think building up is the only answer,” she told the Grapevine. “We can build denser by building lower, maybe five to seven stories high. An important thing to be aware of is urban spaces on a human scale and an easy access to daily needs and the nature around us. It’s a question of quality of life.” When asked how taller buildings would affect the quality of life of the city’s residents, Bragadóttir cited aesthetics, saying, “You get the view, but the building can be out of touch with the space. Regarding the importance of quality of the urban space, you have to have in mind, for example, at this altitude tall buildings cast very long shadows and can in fact generate a windy micro- climate.” Eggertsson is particularly passionate about what he’d like to see happen in the Five Flowers. In addition to building apartments in the west harbour area, he told the Grapevine that he’d also like to “build up the harbour atmosphere with fish markets, squares, and ports for small boats. The Maritime Museum just opened there, which is a good start, but we want to see more, with a link to the city centre.” In the east harbour, the Planning Council has designs on building a concert hall, hotels, retail outlets, restaurants and even a new headquarters for Landsbanki. Hlemmur seems to be what Eggertsson would like to be the new hub of Reykjavík youth culture. “We’d like to see at least a thousand new apartments in that area,” he told the Grapevine, “maybe with a focus on young people and students, who use the bus more than other demographics, and to build fewer car parks. Right now the area is too much like a slum. What we want is a dynamic mix of youth, culture and city functions.” The largely industrial area of Elliðaárvogur is trickier, as the question arises, how do you convince people to move into an industrial area? On this point, Eggertsson says, “[The area] could be one of the most beautiful places to live and work. We’ve proposed moving the heaviest industries to the outskirts of town or having them refreshed. Instead, we want to see a dense residential area by the sea.” But the real crown jewel of the bunch is Vatnsmýri. If the city airport is moved to Skerafjörður as many have proposed, this will free up an enormous swath of land within city limits. Bragadóttir herself sees the area as having the potential to contain “thousands of flats,” while Eggertsson adds that he’d like to see the area be the new science and technology district of Reykjavík. “The area could be home of the knowledge industry in its closeness to the University of Iceland, the hospital and the University of Reykjavík,” he told the Grapevine. “We want knowledge-based industries to find a home there.” When told of the Five Flowers proposal, Firchow was very positive. “That sounds like the right approach,” he told the Grapevine. “In the 1950s in America, you had these ‘bubbles,’ where there were single-family homes in one bubble, apartments in another, and services in yet another. This segregation of services puts a lot of pressure on a city’s infrastructure. Integration of use [like the Five Flowers plan] is a much more appropriate use of space.” These housing ideas and others are still up for debate, and will undoubtedly be debated fiercely in the planning meetings to come. More often than not, these discussions become politicized. One undercurrent as to why city planning in Reykjavík is often very politicized is illustrated in University of Iceland Professor of Urban Planning Trausti Valsson’s book Planning in Iceland from the Settlement to Present Times. Valsson contends that politics often get in the way of effective development. Created in 1972, the Development Office has seen different ruling parties come and go - the Leftists who came to power in the late 70s rejected many of the conservatives’ earlier planning proposals, and when the conservatives regained power in 1982, they, in turn, rejected many of the development proposals the Leftists had begun, such as further development of Reykjavík’s far eastern, mainland section. Politicizing development naturally slows down the process. Knowing that any plan set forth during your watch will immediately be cancelled if another political party is elected makes for rash decisions. Many cite as an example the current Miklabraut-Hringbraut construction project that connects these two four-lane roads with a six-lane road that bows over 50 metres away from the hospital. Apart from the fact that placing a six-lane road as a connection between two four-lane roads is an invitation to severe bottlenecking of traffic in either direction, there were also complaints that the plan was pushed through and approved quickly, with little chance for discussion among planners or the public. The plan’s lack of popularity - yet its ultimate passage - can be taken as a warning of things to come: Vilhjálmsson’s expressway and island communities might not be very popular ideas, but that doesn’t necessarily mean they won’t be approved. On the other hand, as of now, the Independence Party does not control City Council. They hold six of the council’s fifteen seats, with opposition alliance R-list controlling eight seats (the fifteenth seat is held by the sole Liberal Party member on the council, Ólafur Friðrík Magnússon). In addition, Mayor Steinunn Valdís Óskarsdóttir hails from the Alliance Party. R-list holds the majority - albeit a slim one - so the planning ideas put forth by the Independence Party could be defeated by the opposition. Or, if the next elections go the other way, Independence Party proposals could roll through with relative ease – latest Gallup Poll results indicate that 47% would vote R-list and 48% would vote Independence Party if City Council elections were held today. Whether it goes one way or another has a lot to do with public involvement from the very start – planning meetings are regularly advertised and are open to the public. With City Council elections coming up next spring, Reykjavík’s residents can also choose through their votes what they want their city to be: an unsustainable suburb that ultimately serves no one, or a thriving city that maintains a high quality of life for all and could even set an example for capital cities the world over. Plans for high rises on Reykjavík’s Skuggahverfi by the City Planning Council 25
Blaðsíða 1
Blaðsíða 2
Blaðsíða 3
Blaðsíða 4
Blaðsíða 5
Blaðsíða 6
Blaðsíða 7
Blaðsíða 8
Blaðsíða 9
Blaðsíða 10
Blaðsíða 11
Blaðsíða 12
Blaðsíða 13
Blaðsíða 14
Blaðsíða 15
Blaðsíða 16
Blaðsíða 17
Blaðsíða 18
Blaðsíða 19
Blaðsíða 20
Blaðsíða 21
Blaðsíða 22
Blaðsíða 23
Blaðsíða 24
Blaðsíða 25
Blaðsíða 26
Blaðsíða 27
Blaðsíða 28
Blaðsíða 29
Blaðsíða 30
Blaðsíða 31
Blaðsíða 32
Blaðsíða 33
Blaðsíða 34
Blaðsíða 35
Blaðsíða 36
Blaðsíða 37
Blaðsíða 38
Blaðsíða 39
Blaðsíða 40
Blaðsíða 41
Blaðsíða 42
Blaðsíða 43
Blaðsíða 44
Blaðsíða 45
Blaðsíða 46
Blaðsíða 47
Blaðsíða 48
Blaðsíða 49
Blaðsíða 50
Blaðsíða 51
Blaðsíða 52
Blaðsíða 53
Blaðsíða 54
Blaðsíða 55
Blaðsíða 56

x

Reykjavík Grapevine

Beinir tenglar

Ef þú vilt tengja á þennan titil, vinsamlegast notaðu þessa tengla:

Tengja á þennan titil: Reykjavík Grapevine
https://timarit.is/publication/943

Tengja á þetta tölublað:

Tengja á þessa síðu:

Tengja á þessa grein:

Vinsamlegast ekki tengja beint á myndir eða PDF skjöl á Tímarit.is þar sem slíkar slóðir geta breyst án fyrirvara. Notið slóðirnar hér fyrir ofan til að tengja á vefinn.