Intra-metropolitan polycentricity. as a useful concept

Transcription

1 Intra-metropolitan polycentricity ( IMP) as a useful concept to respond to climate change, to combat urban sprawl and to promote quality of life? Dr. Peter Schmitt, Nordregio METREX Expert Group on Intra-Metropolitan Polycentricity 3rd Workshop Leipzig 30th-1st of Dec, 2009

2 Questionaires received from: (1) Metropolitan region Central Germany (2) City of Helsinki* (3) Region Frankfurt/Rhein-Main (4) Warsaw Metropolitan Area (5) Veneto region* (6) Emilia-Romagna region (7) Naples region* (8) Ile-de-France (Paris Region)* (9) Tri-City (Gdansk-Sopot-Gdynia) (10) City of Rotterdam (11) Stockholm region * no attendance at the Leipzig workshop

3 I To what extent is Intra-Metropolitan Polycentricity (IMP) a useful concept to respond to climate change? Three issues have been addressed: (1) expectations and rationales (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes (3) experiences, lessons learnt, recommendations to the group

4 (1) expectations and rationales - three basic statements - IMP can play an essential role in terms of aiming for a zero carbon society - ecological solutions through environmental determinism are insufficient IMP can help making cities more compact and dense, based around high quality public transport networks the regional scale is an appropriate one for adaptation/mitigation policies quite similar expectations and reationales within the Expert Group!

5 (1) expectations and rationales - MITIGATION - Compactness/Density and Public Transport Reducing energy consumption by IMP-strategies ( compact cities/cores are the key) IMP and a good Public Transport System (PTS) as a prerequisites for mitigation IMP enables more high-density clusters fed by Public Rail Transport (PRT) compactness reduces the length of commuter journeys a polycentric structure demands for more criss-cross/tangential PTS IMP can help to promote alternative transport modes (e.g. bycicles, electric cars) for small distances if a robust network of multifunctional centers is established

6 (1) expectations and rationales - MITIGATION - Densities and qualities high densities generate critical mass for PTS and urban amenities, which will in return attract other services and thus reduces the region s carbon footprint but: extending cities cost still less than densifying existing ones so only meaningful for those that can afford it? the more local layer of polycentricity is important too assumption: public services should be diffused in smaller centres to reduce the lengths of trips

7 (1) expectations and rationales -ADAPTATION - in case of emergency a polycentric structure of First Aid centres is more efficient

8 (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes - MITIGATION - Same rationales, different approaches urban development along modernised railway-lines better accessibility/quality/reliability by/of PT to reduce use of cars / upgrade of cycling network improvements in the regional logistics systems preserving high densities in the central core to minimise travelling densification and better PT in (some) core areas (coupled with better district heating/cooling systems) and: strenghtening local centres with new services to minimise travelling to larger cores

9 (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes - ADAPTATION - Same rationales, different approaches (?): green belts/green spaces as means to structure the polycentric landscape and to restrict detrimental activities on the climate + cooling effects Beyond IMP: re-naturalisation strategies of fallow land net of biologically active areas to protect sprawled areas from floods creating and preventing tree and bush belts along the waterways and reservoirs.

10 (3) experiences, lessons learnt, recommendations to the group??? none so far -??? PS2

11 Bild 10 PS2 Why no answers here? Is my assumption (further below) right? Peter Schmitt;

12 Further remarks recommendations partly implicitly included in the expectations and rationales ( what is good and what should be done) but not necessarily based on experiences/lessons learnt apparently the response to climate change and in particular linked with the concept of IMP is too new (?) much more about mitigation, than on adaptation strategies - lies this in the nature of the concept of polycentriciy? Other reasons? the thorny question is at what spatial level is a IMP-strategy meaningful here?

13 II To what extent is Intra-Metropolitan Polycentricity (IMP) a useful concept to combat urban sprawl? Three issues have been addressed: (1) expectations and rationales (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes (3) experiences, lessons learnt, recommendations to the group

14 (1) expectations and rationales Again: Compactness/density supported by PT, but with different focal points a polycentric strategy as a driver to encourage higher densities how many poles/cores shall be developed? A few big ones or rather a micro-polycentric structure? - the latter is more expensive and difficult to organise IMP is a useful concept since it supports a joint regional strategy for inner city densification a focus on some (8) multi-functional growth cores outside the central core will help to combat urban sprawl (will lead as well to a slight reduced domination of the central core)

15 (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes densification approach ongoing even though it is against the logic of market actors capitalism (so far) has just worked by spatial expansion of the city Again a question of scale: regional fast train system shall help to maintain a polycentric structure at a larger geographic scale new core development centres to be built over the next 30 years to create a better land-use balance within the cityregion intensification of land-use within existing urban areas reinforce IMP around small centres by new settlements along railway axes

16 (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes Again: densification, but also urban regeneration zoning the most valuable and thus natural areas in spatial development plans concentration of industrial development in a few specific and well accessible areas reuse of brownfields, regeneration of urban, post-industrial and post military areas protection of forest/green belts, setting some urban and rural areas under preservation urban sprawl generated by summer cottages shall be combated by gradually converting them into permanent houses (?)

17 (3) experiences, lessons learnt, recommendations to the group thematic reflections: higher densities must be linked to increase higher centralities/better urban amenities, i.e. an urban offer with density goals but this demands powerful planning instruments regional parks and green corridors/belts are successful instruments to preserve open space

18 (3) experiences, lessons learnt, recommendations to the group governance/organisational issues: Cooperation with many stakeholders/institutions needed (e.g. transport companies/providers, landowners of brownfields) etc. a polycentric settlement structure requires to strengthen the regional self-government intra-regional dialogue needed learning, awareness and understanding required consistency of planning activities at all levels using informal instruments for regional land-use strategies to compensate for the weaknesses of the central place concept

19 Further remarks thematic overlaps with chapter I strong expectations, many approaches, rich array of recommendations common ground: densification/green belts to structure a polycentric urban landscape in line with transport axes/nodes different focus due to different polycentric structures and growth dynamics formal versus informal instruments scale sensitivity polycentricity - a powerful planning and political concept to combat urban sprawl (?)

20 III To what extent is Intra-Metropolitan Polycentricity (IMP) a useful concept to improve quality of life? Three issues have been addressed: (1) expectations and rationales (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes (3) experiences, lessons learnt, recommendations to the group

21 (1) expectations and rationales very different approaches: Quality of life is a multifaceted concept - it can be assessed differently urban qualities/housing conditions, better services and accessibility IMP as a tool/process to develop a regional mindset' if we use IMP as a tool for reducing energy and land consumption, it must include an improvement in quality of life win-win strategy IMP is a programme of social regional justice

22 (1) expectations and rationales very different approaches: IMP as a tool to prioritise certain areas for public investments to improve q.o.l. IMP can help to spread people s consumption patterns high competition among the main centres in a polycentric setting is positive for q.o.l. densification and upgrading in the main centre pre-condition for a resilient and robust urban economy will be of benefit for the entire metropolitan region

23 (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes densification areas are planned to become multifunctional centres preservation of urban and rural heritages improve urban qualities (including buildings)

24 (2) examples of current strategies, projects, programmes numerous transport planning initiatives planned creating zones of knowledge/culture/recreation along main transportation corridors improving accessibility to services and to local labour markets in the sub-regional centres

25 (3) experiences, lessons learnt, recommendations to the group IMP can help to minimise agglomeration disadvantages (congestion, pressure on land-use, high land prices etc.) by spreading urban amenities/services to distinct centres and by preserving the open space in-between long-lasting urban regeneration policies are needed consistent policies at different levels needed (such as accessibility, availability of services, urban renewal) cooperation among municipalities/with other stakeholder profiling/branding of distinct growth areas that are to be developed

26 Further remarks quality of life has been tackled from (very) different points of view values of people, different lifestyles/lifephases etc. have been hardly mentioned maybe focus influenced by the other two questions (some) issues raised might be deepened on the next workshop ( labour divisions between centres, a better organisation of transportation and sustainable growth)