Etienne Menguy – 7th semester – 16 March 2018
11. Conclusion Urban megaprojects are no longer novelties and exceptions. Many projects already carried out, or in progress, serve as examples, advice and preventive tools. Europe is a land of opportunity and especially fierce economic and visual competition, so the creation of these projects is only exponentially given the direction of economic policy turned towards the international. Every city wishing to increase its attraction must improve its connection to Europe. It is with this in mind that these two projects have been established. Create urban spaces of quality, innovative, modern, ecological and especially turned towards Europe and the world trade. There is therefore a need for the existence of these projects, they are mandatory to stay in the European and world economy. But as we have seen, initiating such projects is not easy and takes time. Even planning several years in advance with the meticulousness of a watchmaker, they are not a guarantee of success and can become in the rush of economic and urban disasters. As Ørestad, which in contrast to its original purpose which was to create a new breath to the Danish capital by becoming the Scandinavian economic centre plunge it the financial economy of Copenhagen to the lowest. The history of these two projects teaches us first of all the importance of a political and social context favourable to the initiation of these. Ørestad failed on this point by becoming a district boycotted by several associations and citizens. Ignoring these inhabitants and the unfavourable opinions, building on a protected area the project took a departure on the bad rails and continued there for a long time. In addition, the project was facing something important, he had to create his story unlike Nantes, which already had his own. Urbanistic visions tended to create territories hyper connected to the world. Transport facilities being one of Ørestad's main arguments, in order to attract investors. But this vision cantered on hyper connectivity makes this project forget the importance of urban wellbeing. The project quickly turned into a huge untapped piece of life, entertainment and recreation focusing on its profitability. The economic pressure was only stronger, strategic choices that had to be made in a rush and it is the landscape and urban environment that suffered the consequences. The failed attempt to create the Field's shopping centre is the best example. Nantes is to be taken as an example of its urban planning in terms of infrastructure. Its landscape environment was able to blend in with its history and gave the impression of having always existed. Its European dimension was less consistent and decided to concentrate its efforts on the quality of urban life. In addition, unlike Ørestad the project was done in collaboration with these citizens and allowed them to have a better involvement and therefore better understanding of it. It 33
