Zagreb Masterplan — Research & Analysis 1/3

Z AG REB I R ESEAR CH & ANALYSIS

UNI VE R S I T Y OF B ATH S U S TA I N A B L E CI T I ES M.A R CH D ES I GN S TU DI O 6.1 20 1 9 / 2 0

Mark Kendernay Luca Pizzamiglio Andrea Popescu Sirage Saudi Ibreek María Villalobos Throughout the design process we have been encouraged to keep looking behind the surface and to develop a radical yet sensible vision for Zagreb. We would like to give thanks to the following people whose knowledge and insight has been instrumental to developing this report: BATH UNI VE R S I T Y OF B ATH

Jayne Barlow Anne Claxton Prof. Peter Clegg Rupert Grierson Jo Hibbert Andy Jarvis Prof. Alex Wright Z AG RE B UNI VE R S I T Y OF ZAG RE B, FAC U LTY OF ARC HI TE C TU RE

Mia Roth Cerina Luka Korlaet Maroje Mrduljas C R OAT I A N A S S OCI ATI ON OF LANDSC APE ARC HI TE C TS

Barbara Klemar C IT Y OF F I CE OF S TRATE GI C PLANNI NG AND DE VE LOPMENT

Ana Magdić Nikola Petković Tomislav Dumančić 3 LHD A R CHI T E CT S

Marko Dabrović Goran Mraović TO BE RE AD I N C ONJU NC TI ON WITH:

Volume II — Process Volume III — Proposal 4

Contents

1

I N T R OD UC T I ON

2

G R E E N & BL UE I N F R A S T R UC T UR E

3

PR OX I M I T I E S

4

R E S OUR C E S

6

B E(LO NGING) TO EUR O PE

16

A LIFELINE FO R ZAGR EB

34

PATCHWO R K CITY

MA NAGEMENT A ND R ES ILIENCE

56

1

Introduction

( BE ) L ON G I N G TO E UR OPE

Zagreb has been characterised by being historically on the periphery, nestled between political and cultural East and West of the continent.

Political, social and economic transitions — mostly in the shape of regime changes — have been the normal for the last century and a half.

Despite a new generation had grown up in time of peace and the country joined the European Union in 2013, the ideal of Europe cannot come soon enough.

On the Periphery

BE T W E E N E A S T A N D W E S T

I NT R OD U C T I ON

The Croatian capital has geographically and politically wavered between European East and West for the last century and a half; from its belonging to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, through to the communist regime of the former Yugoslavia, and finally its own independence in 1991. As much as other European cities, Zagreb has endured transitions in a spectrum of categories, each of which have left their mark on the cityscape of the capital. In many ways, the city is culturally, socially, and architecturally, a palimpsest.

8

ZAG REB

Western Empires

Eastern Empires

9

Catching up to the EU

45,000

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000 Croatia

Zagreb

EU

UK

G D P PE R C A PI TA ( US D )

I NT R OD U C T I ON

Croatia has had trouble catching up with the European Union since its membership as of 2013. The Croatian economic output measured in GDP per capita is significantly lower than the EU average compared to the rest of the 27 member states. Based on these figures, Croatia has the second smallest economy in the EU. The medium to long term goal of the country and its capital is to converge to the European average, and to improve its quality of life, public services, and economy, within the terms of sustainable growth.

10

12.5% 5.3% 37% SERVICES

1.2%

21.2%

18.8%

I N D US T RY

TOUR I S M

Zagreb

Croatia

E C ON OM I C S E C TOR S ( %)

The capital generates 31.4% of the country’s GDP, being a service-based economy: it is the home of many of Croatia’s service companies, as well as government and educational faculties. The activity in the city means that 40% of the Croatian workforce can be found in Zagreb alone.

11

0.06% 4%

AG R ICULTUR E

No. 1 GDP Generator

LOW

H IG H

C R OAT I A N I N T E R N A L M I G R AT I ON

I NT R OD U C T I ON

As the largest GDP generator in the country, Zagreb compares to the more popular tourist cities on the Croatian coast. However, while the coastal cities attract myriad of tourists, the capital attracts Croatians from elsewhere in the country who look for better education, work, and living opportunities.

12

Shrinking and Stagnating Populations

5,000,000

4,076,000

-18% 4,000,000

3,400,000

3,000,000

2,000,000

?%

1,000,000

Croatian Population

Zagreb Population

BR A I N D R A I N

Despite an influx of people from outside the city’s boundaries, Zagreb’s population is stagnating as an equal amount of people leave the country for elsewhere in Europe, looking for better future prospects as recent members of the EU. More and more, the potential of working in other, more liveable European cities makes Zagreb less and less attractive to young professionals.

13

17 20

01 20

81 19

61 19

19

48

21 19

00 19

80 18

57

0

18

803,900

I NT R OD U C T I ON

2020-2050

14

Challenges on the Periphery

C ON VE R G E N C E , BR A I N D R A I N , S US TA I N A BI L ITY

The challenge of the masterplan, therefore, is to achieve the sustainable growth and resilience of a city which currently finds itself on the periphery of development, struggling with a low economic output and risking a declining population as young professionals leave for better prospects. The goal is to make Zagreb a resilient, green, liveable city as much as other primary European capitals, and to attract and retain both talent and investment at the same time.

15

2

Green & Blue Infrastructure

A L I F E L I N E F OR Z AG R E B

Zagreb is surrounded by Sava’s virgin river ecosystem, the latter which supports outstanding biodiversity unparalleled in Europe. Threatened by a colossal hydropower project involving 3,000 dams across European rivers, capitals previously separated by the Yugoslav wars are now united to protect their wild rivers. Zagreb lies at the pinch-point of the river Sava where a crucial decision is yet to be made: to add four hydropower plants or to redirect the water to a bypass channel. The latter option would redirect the floodwater to Europe’s largest natural floodplains, and emerges as the most natural and protective option of the two.

The precious resource of freshwater

O CEA NS

97.5%

Accessible freshwater constitutes less than 1% of the world’s total water supply, and needs protection to help sustain human life. Wild, freshwater rivers are the equivalent of an untouched wilderness area: they are rare, yet necessary for biodiversity and the ecosystems they live in. Rivers also help mitigate floods, droughts, and secure groundwater aquifers, while simultaneously acting as carbon sinks; they globally transport about 200 million tons of carbon to the ocean every year, effectively taking it out of the atmosphere. The forests supported by these rivers remove much more. Rivers provide us with invaluable ecosystem services, which, when quantified, equate to billions. In the case of Zagreb, their worth are estimated to be near €2 billion.

FR ES HWATER

2.5% GLACIER S

68.7% GR O UNDWATER

30.1% PER MA FR O S T

0.8%

Balkan rivers are the last wild rivers on the European continent, currently threatened by more than 3,000 proposed dam projects. The Sava, one of these wild rivers, crosses through Zagreb, and supports Europe’s largest natural floodplains. These ecosystems alone support endangered flora and fauna which cannot be found elsewhere in Europe. It is of global importance to protect the Sava river.

SUR FACE & ATMO S PHER E

0.4% FR ES H LA KES

67.5% SO IL MO ISTUR E

12% ATMO SPHER E

9.5% G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

W ETLAND S

8.5% R IVER S

1.5% VEGETATIO N

1.5% 18

Sava River Basin

A R I VE R S H A R E D BE T W E E N M A N Y

The Sava river flows through Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia — countries sharing an intertwined history of both kinship and war. In the twenty-first century, the river is offering an opportunity for a symbolic reconnection of the people, united to protect their shared blue lifeline.

19

Sava River Basin

G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

ZAGR EB

River Sava

River Avon

National Parks

Ramsar Wetlands

LO NJ S KO PO LJ E

Nature Reserves

Natura 2000

20

EmeraldPLUS

Landscape Protection

Zagreb

Catchment Area

97,700 49

SQU A R E K M O F C ATC HM E N T A R E A SIT E S O F O U T STA N D IN G B IO LO G IC A L & LA N D SC A P E D IV E R SIT Y

A C ON T I N UOUS F L OOD PL A I N E C OS Y S T E M

Along its length of 990 km, the Sava Basin supports areas of outstanding and globally-recognised biodiversity protected by the Natura 2000 programme. Zagreb therefore plays a part in continuing this regional wildlife corridor in Europe. An essential part of this river corridor is Lonjsko Polje, a nature park — nominated for the UNESCO World Heritage list — making up Europe’s largest natural floodplains. It is the home of the largest alluvial hardwood forests in Europe, as well as a lifeline for a myriad of endangered bird and fish species.

21

The Blue Heart of Europe

G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

T H E DA M T R UT H

The Sava is currently caught in the middle of a continental hydropower project, proposing over 3,000 dams along Balkan rivers. 91% of these dams are small hydropower diversion dams which do not retain water and rely on water currents. Nevertheless, the collective effect of multiple diversions of water is predicted to drain stretches of rivers dry, affecting the biodiversity and ecosystems supported by the river, as well as less developed, rural villages. Studies have found that the cumulative impacts of multiple small diversions often outweigh those of a single large dam.

As such, the hydro-morphology of Europe’s last wild rivers will change from “near-natural” to “extremely modified” in a matter of years.

22

SLOVE NI A HUNGARY

S E R BIA

BO S NIA & H E R ZE G OV INA

ADRI ATI C SE A

Zagreb

Planned Dams

23

Hydromorphology

S E VERE LY M ODI FI E D

E X T E NSI VE LY M ODI FI E D

M ODE RATE LY M ODI FI E D

14%

6% 6%

26%

31%

39% S L I G HTLY M ODI FI E D

53% 21%

G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

N EAR- NATU RAL

44%

36%

13% 6%

4%

1

Sava

Danube

Sava

TO DAY

TO DAY

IF A LL DEV ELO PM ENT BUILT

24

Class 1

Class 2

Class 3

25

Class 4

Class 5

1869

N

G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

S AVA’ S H I S TORY

The stretch of the Sava crossing Zagreb has already been extremely modified since 1869. An intensive canalisation and engineering of the riverbed took place to make the water flow more efficient, diverting the Sava away from the city, and allowing the capital to expand further south without building on top of the Sava’s alluvial deposits. This engineering has already caused a cut-off of the regional river corridor of the Sava Basin, making Zagreb an area where restoration of the ecosystem is critically required.

26

1869

2019

27

Sava as the Zagreb Riviera

G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

Z AG R E B’ S S UN N Y D E S T I N AT I ON

Despite its canalisation, the Sava riverbanks were a notorious escape destination during warm weather up until the 1960’s. Today, unfortunately, locals prefer to drive 4h to the Croatian coast – a journey enabled by the extensive motorways built to connect Yugoslavian cities.

Culturally, locals no longer think of the Sava as an important part of their city, a thought which has exacerbated since the 1964 flood.

28

1964

A PH Y S I C A L , S OC I A L A N D PS YC H OL OG I C A L BA R R IER

A mix of excessive rainfall and inadequate flood dykes led to an unprecedented flood in Zagreb in 1964. 40,000 people were left homeless, while 9,000 had to be evacuated. Some locals today associate the Sava riverbanks with danger and encourage younger generations not to go. Buildings and infrastructure were inaccessible months after the flood, costing the government â‚Ź22 million in damages and repair.

In addition, this lead to the further engineering of the Sava riverbanks, mainly consisting of 5m tall levees as flood barriers for the city.

29

Engineering of the Sava

0 PR E VI OUS R I VE R BA N K C ON D I T I ON

1 D E VA S TAT I N G 19 6 0 S F L OOD

2 E N G I N E E R E D F L OOD M I T I G AT I ON

3

G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

PR OT E C T E D C I T Y I N E VE N T OF F L OOD

30

S AVA, ZAG R E B

Seen as a hazard, the river is constrained between levees and floodable grass banks. Even at low water levels, the public keeps a distance from the river which has turned into a green void as a result.

S AVA, LO NJ S KO PO LJ E

Seen as an opportunity, each year the Sava expands into the floodplains and alluvial forests of the Lonjsko Polje Nature Park, turning it into one of the most important bird nesting and fish spawning habitats of the Danube river basin.

A S US TA I N A BL E M OD E L ?

While the engineering of the Sava riverbanks protects the city in the event of future floods, its long-term consequence is the excavation of the riverbed, which has receded 6 metres since the event. As a result, the groundwater aquifers – once fed by the riverbed – are now at risk of drying out. The Sava in its natural floodplains poses a much more natural and sustainable example of a flood re-mediation strategy, whose principles could be considered for the masterplan’s regeneration of the river Sava.

31

Natural flood retention

SL OVE NI AN M OU NTAI NS

LO NJ S KO PO LJ E F LO O D PLAINS

G RE E N & BLU E I NF R AS T R U C T U R E

T H E S AVA - OD R A C A N A L

There exists an alternative to the hydropower project in Zagreb. The Sava-Odra flood-relief canal was excavated as a response to the 1964 flood, and is meant to redirect high water levels to Odransko Polje and subsequently to Lonjsko Polje. Its storage capacity is capable of reducing incoming discharges by over 30%. However, the channel was never fully excavated and still remains an unfinished project. The optimisation of this bypass channel could reveal a solution for reducing the flood risk of the Sava without compromising its ecosystems. At the same time this would allow the riverbanks to become a recreational destination.

32

Natural flood retention

ZAGREB S AVA Q 3,600 m3/s

S E S VE T E

SAMOBOR

Q 1,900 m3/s

Lonjsko Polje 634 km2

S AVA- O D R A C AN AL Q 1,000 m3/s

1 billion m3

STO R AG E CA PACITY

€1.5 billion

ECO SYSTEM SER V ICE *

*

SISAK

Odransko Polje 137 km2

216 million m3 €324 million *

Cost of a reservoir of the same capacity

S TO R AG E C APAC IT Y

E C O S YS T E M SERVICE*

Cost of a reservoir of the same capacity

G R A DIŠKA

Spillway

Canal

Flood storages

Floodplains

33

Urban area

Towns

Lowland area

3

Proximities

PATC H WOR K C I T Y

The paradox of Zagreb is that despite its compact size and relative density, moving between the various parts of the city feels slow, inefficient and often unwelcoming. The existing road and railway infrastructure act as barriers within the city by separating neighbourhoods from one another. Although distances are short in comparison to other European capitals, walking and cycling do not seem to enjoy priority over car traffic.

PR O X IM IT I ES

18 5 0 PO PULATIO N 1 5 000

36

Origin

ST MA R K CHUR CH, GR A D EC

M E D I E VA L C OR E

Unlike other riverine cities, Zagreb originated beneath the freshwater creeks of the Medvednica mountains. Gradec and Kaptol are the two original medieval cores which, with their union, established the city today. Historians suggest that their geographical position away from the River Sava can be explained because of the Sava’s extensive alluvial deposits and fast current, preventing a secure settlement. Today, the medieval town is the key brand of Zagreb –– the main cultural and tourist destination of the capital, hosting the commerce and business that come with these titles.

37

BUDA PEST

VI E NNA

R I JE K A

SISAK

PR O X IM IT I ES

18 9 0 PO PULATIO N 1 8 6 70

38

Industrial Growth

GLAVNI KO LO DVO R TR AIN S TATIO N

L I N K I N G VI E N N A , BUDA PE S T A N D Z AG R E B

The rail was introduced in 1892 under the Austro-Hungarian empire to connect its main capitals, Vienna and Budapest, and subsequently connect the two to their respective ports on the Adriatic coast. The rails for the trains were built on a 5m mound in the face of flood risks from the Sava, which had not yet been canalised. Today, the rail infrastructure presents both a vertical and horizontal barrier in the city and constitutes Zagreb’s largest collection of brownfield sites.

39

PR O X IM IT I ES

19 5 0 PO PULATIO N 334 000

40

Unfinished Project

HI GH- RI SE TYPOLOGY

MID-R IS E TYPO LO GY

I N T E R - WA R & POS T- WA R

With the rail came imperial and industrial expansion, drawing lowermiddle class workers to the city. They established informal, unplanned housing settlements scattered below the railway and often arranging around impromptu agricultural plots. Subsequently, the 1930s saw the city transformed by idealistic modernist planning of grandeur and scale. Modernist blocks with high and mid rise typologies intended to rationalise a grid from the illegally developed plots, but was cut short of funds with the arrival of WWII. Today, the central part of the city is a collection of unfinished projects from different time periods, drastically conflicting in scale and character. There yet remains a solution to mediate the public realm between the two conditions.

41

LOW -R IS E T Y PO LO G Y

PR O X IM IT I ES

19 8 0 PO PULATIO N 7 70 000

42

Re-Imagined City

Proposed Industry

Z AGRE B FAI R / I TALI AN PAVI LI ON

Proposed Self-sufficient Cooperatives

Proposed Centres

MUS EUM O F CO NTEMPO R ARY A R T

M OD E R N I S T N OVI Z AG R E B

During the post-WWII period, the city expanded south of the Sava, and planning took a tabula rasa approach to the undeveloped land.

Developers imposed the 1961 General Regulation Plan, the latter which re-imagined the city working on the model of self-managing cooperatives. The model was only partially completed due to lack of funds, meaning today, Novi or New Zagreb remains functionally disconnected from Zagreb north of the Sava. Interestingly, it is yet a popular area for young professionals and families to live in. Residents therefore often commute across the river for work, creating a traffic issue on the central axis of the city.

43

H O U S ING T Y PO LO G Y O F NOV I ZAG R E B

Conflict of Scales and Typologies

UR BA N PATC H WOR K

PR O X IM IT I ES

Every political, social and economic transition which Zagreb has endured have each left their scar on the city’s urban hardscape. It is characterised by horizontal layers and patchworks of conflicting typologies, as each initiative to extend the city south had different political and economic motivations behind it. Today, each typology has made way for a particular programme, meaning the city is as zoned programmatically as it is architecturally.

44

45

PR O X IM IT I ES

46

M E D I E VA L C OR E / C O MME R C IAL & C U LTU R AL H E AR T E D U C ATIO N & C IV IC BU IL D IN G S

T R A I N S TAT I ON / L AR G E S T P O S T- IN D U S TR IAL BR OWN FIE L D AR E A

I N T E R - WA R & POS T- WA R / R E MN AN TS O F MO D E R N IS T P L AN N ING

I N T E R - WA R & POS T- WA R / IN FO R MAL S E TTL E ME N TS V S .

MO D E R N IS T S L ABS

N OVI Z AG R E B / S O C IAL IS T H O U S IN G E S TATE S

47

Urban Barriers

PR O X IM IT I ES

MO B ILITY INFR A S TR UCTUR E O F THE CITY INTENSIFIES THE CITY’S F R AG M E NTAT IO N

48

Noise Pollution

ROAD NO ISE DAY

R OAD NO IS E NIG H T

VE H I C UL A R T R A F F I C

The road noise maps of Zagreb clearly identify the arteries of car infrastructure cutting across the city. Since vehicular traffic is concentrated on the major roads — often in the form of urban highways, spaghetti junctions and dual carriageways — the existing road infrastructure acts as a set of hardly penetrable barriers for pedestrians and cyclists.

49

Comparing soft to vehicular traffic

C YCLING

R U NNING

PE D E S T R I A N S A N D C YC L I S T S

As the Strava heatmap of Zagreb shows (accumulated data of all running and cycling activities logged on the sport tracking application Strava), cyclists and runners tend to use a wider variety of routes to move around the city. Their pattern of use appears more decentralised in contrast to vehicular traffic sticking to the wide and fast roads.

PR O X IM IT I ES

The overlaying of the soft — pedestrian and cyclist — and the vehicular traffic shows a few areas of clear separation where the two types do not meet. The river realm of the Sava and the hilly, leafy area to the north of the city centre both offer a retreat from the noise and pollution of the city.

50

A NETWO R K O F B A R R IER S FR O M THE CITY’S TR A NSPO R T INFR AS T R U C T U R E

51

The Railway as a Barrier

RA I LWAY, Z AGR EB

PR O X IM IT I ES

Historically, the railway had been built at the southern end of the pre-1918 city, partly serving as flood protection with its tracks raised on five metre tall mounds. With the city’s expansion southwards, this railway zone became a major barrier with less than a handful of tight underpasses.

52

Zagreb divided by the railway

53

Bridges, crossings, underpasses

C R OS S I N G T H E UR BA N BA R R I E R S

PR O X IM IT I ES

Even though the main roads are designed to allow more tourists to travel fast and uninterrupted within the city, the road network is severely limited by the capacity of bridges and underpasses which cross the infrastructure barriers, such as the railway. More specifically, the underpasses going into the centre of the city saturate during peak hours, paralysing the city.

54

21 min P UB L I C T R A N SP O RT WO RK

12 min

52 min

C YC L I N G

WA L K I N G

10 min CAR HOME

AVER AGE CO MMUTING TIMES B Y TR A NSPO R T TYPE

55

4

Resources

M A N AG E M E N T A N D R E S I L I E N C E

Croatia has some of the largest deposits of untouched natural assets in the world, particularly freshwater. While many of these can be used as renewable energies, Zagreb nevertheless sources more than 70% of its energy from oil derivatives; not to mention most of it is imported from neighbouring countries. In an effort to meet the EU’s 2020 targets of renewable energy, the country has marketed a myriad of hydropower projects across the Sava Basin, enormous in both scale and budget. While hydropower is, in principle, a renewable energy source, it threatens the globally-recognised, pristine yet functional landscapes and ecosystems on the Sava Basin. For Zagreb, the consequences are clear: risk of losing its most valuable natural assets, while locking in an infrastructure that prohibits the capital from meeting climate targets over the following decades.

R ES O U R C ES

58

Waste

416 kg PE R P E R S O N P E R YE AR

30% 70%

+ 1200

R E C YC L E D

I L L E G A L DUM P SITES LANDFILLED

A DIRTY CITY

Zagreb has a substantial waste issue, rooting from a deficiency of frequent rubbish collection, recycling facilities, and general education towards waste. Of all the municipal waste produced, most of it is sent to landfill, even though a large part of this waste could be recycled instead.

59

European Garbage Capital ‘15

Municipal waste by treatment K G PE R C A PI TA

600

500

400

379

384

2012

2013

391

40 4

387

3 93

2016

2017

40 3

416

300

200

100

0

LANDFI L L / DI SPOSAL

2014

CO MPO ST

2015

MATER IA L R ECYCLING

DIFFER E NT T R E AT M E NT

M I S L E A D I N G F I G UR E S

R ES O U R C ES

Croatia produces less waste per capita than the EU average: 416 kg/ capita against 487 kg/capita elsewhere in Europe, an initially impressive figure. Nevertheless, the figures are misleading. 72% of municipal waste is sent to landfills, a rate significantly higher than the EU average of 24%. The data therefore reveals a deficiency of recycling facilities, collection, and education.

60

2018

2019

E U 28 AV E R AG E

Recycling rate of municipal waste PE R C E N T

60

EU 20 20 R ECYCLING TA R G ET

50

40

30

24 21 20

17 15

18

15

?

8

10

4

0 2012

2013

2014

2015

2016

2017

CR OATIAN MUNICIPA L WASTE R ECYCLING

2018

EU 28 AV E R AG E

L OW R AT E OF R E C YC L I N G

Only 24% of municipal waste is recycled in Croatia, a rate significantly lower than the EU average of 46%. For this reason, the EU Commission issued an Early Warning Report, alerting the country that it would not meet the 2020 target of recyclin. Indeed, it has not met the target now, and therefore needs to implement recycling initiatives if it is to reach the targets of 2050 and beyond.

61

2019

2020

Waste management centres

WASTE M ANAGEMENT CENTR ES

JAKUÅ EVEC LAND FILL

R ES O U R C ES

I L LE GAL DUMP S ITES

62

GR EE N LAND S C APE S

FORESTS

Illegal dumping

+1200

D UM P S I T E S I N Z AG R EB

As a consequence of poor recycling initiatives and management, too many illegal dump sites have been reported in Zagreb. The main concern is that they often appear next to the city’s blue and green infrastructure, exacerbating water contamination runoff into the river Sava. At the same time, pollutants leach into the groundwater below the city, which is Zagreb’s primary source of drinking water. The gravity of the problem led the EU Commission to bring Croatian representatives to the EU Court of Justice for its delay in finding a solution regarding illegal waste in 2018.

63

JakuĹĄevec landfill

R ES O U R C ES

E PI TOM E OF WA S T E

The epitome of the waste issue is the Jakuťevec landfill, just 8 km from the city centre and 2 km from the closest residential area. It has been collecting an uncontrolled disposal of waste since the 1960’s, and only became a regulated, sanitary landfill in 2003. Since 2000, it has accumulated 8 million cubic metres of solid waste, and has been confirmed to contaminate at least 1 million cubic metres of soil, posing serious health risks to surrounding residences and the aquifers underneath from where the capital sources its drinking water.

64

The JakuĹĄevec landfill (left) and the periodically flooded banks of the Sava, separated by a two-metre tall levee running parallel to the river.

50 M

1. 5 K M

ZAG R E BAČ KA KAT E D R ALA

Cathedral of Zagreb

8 OUT OF 10

Out of the 10 compartments designed for the landfill, 8 have been filled and covered. As the only landfill serving the city of Zagreb, it is anticipated that the capital will face severe waste management issues as the remaining 2 compartments are being completed in the coming years.

Since the life of the landfill will not come to an end with its completion, its proximity to the Sava and aquifers lying underneath will demand a careful regeneration strategy.

65

Zagreb built on water

LAND F ILL

GROU NDWATER S UPPLY

S UR FACE WATER SUPPLY

ALLUV IAL D E PO S IT S F R O M T H E S AVA

R ES O U R C ES

F R E S H WAT E R C ON TA M I N AT I ON

Zagreb is built on the alluvial deposits from the Sava river, meaning most of the groundwater is drinkable. However, due to illegal dump sites, landfill leaching, among others, the city’s drinking water runs at risk of extreme pollution. Most critically, the Romani population without access to water services sources its drinking water from contaminated water bodies (yellow). These conditions demand a strategy to protect groundwater from the proposed masterplan.

66

Sewage pollution

CO MB INED SEWAGE NETWO R K

UNTR EATED O UTLETS

T R E AT E D O U T LE T S

L E A K I N G PI PE WOR K A N D C OM BI N E D S E WAGE

The groundwater is also contaminated from the poor construction of sewage pipework. The system is over 140 years old and has rarely been maintained. The leaking pipe release sewage into the groundwater, at the same time untreated outlets pour blackwater to the Sava when treated outlets are saturated. Simultaneously, 50% of Zagreb’s drinking water collection is lost to leaky pipeworks, costing the city £30.2 million per year in water losses.

67

Solar energy potential

GER MANY

CR OATIA

1164

1275

kW h /m 2

kW h /m 2

R ES O U R C ES

A S WA R M A S T H E M E D I T E R R A N E A N

Despite its continental climate, Croatia has the same solar irradiation as nearby Mediterranean countries like Italy, meaning it has great potential for solar power as a renewable energy source. Regardless, it significantly under-performs in solar power infrastructure. It consistently ranks in the bottom 5 for PV in Watts per capita in the EU, at 14.9. Meanwhile, Germany (having less solar irradiation that Croatia), boasts 550 W/ capita.

68

Total energy consumption in Zagreb by form T E R A J OUL E ( 2 0 18 )

1.2%

60

15.9%

50

31.5%

40

30

47.3% 20

10

0

NATU RAL GAS

O IL DER IVATIVES

ELECTR ICA L ENER GY

F IR E WO O D

F OS S I L - F UE L BA S E D E N E R G Y

Despite its natural resources, more than 70% of Zagreb’s energy comes from oil derivatives. In addition to this, only 1.2% of the city’s energy is generated within the county. Almost all the energy of the city is imported from elsewhere in Europe. As with waste initiatives, Croatia needs to begin implementing renewable energy sources to diversify its energy supply and meet sustainability targets for 2050 onwards.

69

R E NE WABLE S

Future Energy Investments

€130 million TO MODE RNI ZE ZAGR E B ’ S ENE RG Y SUPPLY* X2 G AS TURBI N E S X2 G E NE RATORS X1 STE AM TURBIN E

*EBRD, EIB, European Commission for Greener Energy in Zagreb

R ES O U R C ES

E X I S T I N G POW E R A N D H E AT PL A N T S

Zagreb is investing in its energy infrastructure, but it yet prioritises nonrenewable energy sources. The city wants to modernize their thermal plants to make them more energy efficient, marketing the initiative as “reducing pollution levels in the city.” However, the size of this investment means that the city will prioritise fossil-fuel energy for at least the next 50 years to pay back the loan received. For this reason, it is important to show the city an alternative with renewable energy.

70

Hydro-power?

One of four proposed diversion hydropower dams along Zagreb’s riverbanks.

x4 hydropower dams in Zagreb alone O N E E V E RY 2 .5 K M 1 0 – 1 5 MW E L E C T R I C I T Y E AC H 2 5% O F C AP I TAL’ S AN N U AL C ON S UM PT I ON 1 .5 B I L L I O N E U R O S D O N OT R E QU I R E E N V I R O N M E N TA L I M PAC T A S S E S S M E N T

T H E E L E PH A N T I N T H E R OOM

Zagreb is also marketing an expensive hydropower project along the Sava riverbanks as an initiative to show the city’s dedication to renewables. The problem with the diversion dams proposed is that their electricity output is subject to seasonal river flows, and has no capacity for energy storage. As such, the project can become inefficient with increased droughts and poorly managed energy outputs. At the same time, the scale of the construction would damage the riverbed of the Sava, drying out the groundwater supply of the city. Equally

important, it will threaten the virgin landscapes of the Sava Basin further downstream. Unfortunately, while these consequences are known, dams of this installed capacity do not require any form of environmental impact assessment. The masterplan therefore takes the opportunity of this ongoing hydropower debate to propose the city with an alternative renewable strategy; one that retains the city’s unique virgin landscapes while permitting a resilient city to climate change.

71

L I VE W I T H A W I L D R I VE R

S T I TC H T H E C I T Y

R ES O U R C ES

R E S OUR C E & R E S I L I E N C E

72

Zagreb 2050 To radically re-imagine the city of Zagreb, the premise of the masterplan is to propose an alternative vision to hydropower and its wide-ranging impact on the surrounding ecosystems. Instead, it aims to investigate how a European capital could live together with a rewildened river.

This move could serve as an example for other cities threatened by hydropower projects in the region, and show stakeholders the importance and value ­— environmental, financial and cultural — of a river system such as the Sava. At the same time, the masterplan aims to make a liveable city of Zagreb — one with an efficient and green public infrastructure that integrates the disconnected parts of the city, powered by a robust renewable energy strategy.

73

UN I VE R S I T Y OF BAT H S US TA I N A BL E C I T I E S

M.A R CH DESIGN S TUD IO 6 .1 201 9/20