ROBERT SVAIA
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE / DIS ABROAD
Lessons from Copenhagen Urban Design
DESIGNED INFRASTRUCTURE / LESSONS FROM COPENHAGEN ROBERT SVAIA
May 2016 / Danish Institute for Study Abroad
TABLE OF CONTENTS EDITOR’S NOTE Critical Lessons from Copenhagen Robert Svaia
3
TIMELINE 6 3 Decades of Copenhagen Development CASE STUDIES
8
Islands Brygge Housing/City Interactions
Nørreport, Indre By Transport Hubs and the city
Ørestad Experimental City
Nordhavn Future of Copenhagen, Redeveloping the Harborfront
INTERVIEWS
18
Interviews with leading designers in Copenhagen BCVA / Bjelke Cermak Veile Rune Veile / Partner
Gehl Architects Ulrik Nelson / Associate
COBE David Engell Jessen / Architect
1:1 Landskab Jacob Kamp / Partner
Arki_Lab Rasmus Frisk + Jeanette Frisk / Partner
SLA / Stig L Andersson Kristoffer Holm Pedersen / Communication
DISCUSSIONS
32
Shared / Separated Spaces Car, Bike, Pedestrian, Transit interactions in the city Architecture with a capital A The Architect’s Response to the urban condition Future Urbanism Copenhagen looks ahead CONCLUSION
64
CITATIONS
66
EDITOR’S NOTE
Critical Lessons from Copenhagen Robert Svaia Recently, cities around the world have been focusing their attention to the idea of livability and the way that the city functions beyond a purely economic outlook. With such rapid urbanization, the world is facing extreme challenges including shortages in housing, economic struggles, post-industrial decay, and other problems. No longer can only construction and engineering solutions fix these city's growing problems. Design and the idea of Designed Infrastructure, popularized by the British architect, Norman Foster, r is the thought process of using design thinking to battle some of today's most complex urban issues by improving quality of life and environments in cities. Designed Infrastructure takes a more humanistic approach, looking at the aesthetics of environments, the efficiency and use in the city, the diversity of environments and activity in an urban region, and how cities can move forward to increase standards of living. It also suggests that the competition between cities around the world will become increasingly more important to attract new workers and citizens and design can be a facilitator of this competition. Copenhagen, Denmark has been on the forefront of dealing with these immense challenges. The city is consistently ranked one of the best places to live in the world citing the livability of the region, the density, transportation networks, high quality of housing, and access to green space. Copenhagen has been at the forefront of experimentation and urban design since the 1990s when the city decided to invest in the people and the urban environment. Architects and urban designers in Copenhagen use the city as a foundation for these experimentations. In Denmark, design is considered a value to be shared with everyone in society. This democratic approach to design is based around the concept of the welfare state. The idea has its origins in trying to create a balanced society for everyone and to create systems for the lowest common denominator of society. This idea translates to Design. Danes are educated very early on in their lives about design and have a respect and knowledge of the direction of their urban environments and communities. They are politically and socially involved in the way that their cities and communities are shaped which means there is a critical public which allows for experimentation and revaluation of these projects. Danish design, since the modern era, has been heralded around the world for its simplicity and functionality, but only recently has urban design taken the forefront with new developments in Copenhagen by urban designers and architects. In the 1960s, like many cities around the world, modernism took over the building projects of the city. Urban designers like Jan Gehl became aware of urban challenges during this era, and sought to bring awareness to new ideas about urban design. Gehl, through his research observed the movement of people and theorized that more focus on the people scale was need as well as more urban stimulation. He looked at cities in Italy, with their car-less populated squares and Amsterdam with its narrow canal houses which provided a sense of motion and vitality in the city. With new investment, in the 1990s, Copenhagen set off on a mission to implement better urban design and to create a more livable city. In less than three decades the city has grown to become one of the most influential world leaders in urban design and livability.
02
Editor’s Note →
Critical Lessons from Copenhagen
Editor’s Note →
Critical Lessons from Copenhagen
03
EDITOR’S NOTE
Designed Infrastructure, Lessons from Copenhagen
Originally, like many small European cities, Copenhagen consisted of a medieval fortification on the Island of Zealand. The 19th century saw the spread of the city across to the Island of Amager and the creation of the neighborhood of Christianhavn. Further Development spread to the West, with the establishment of the Copenhagen Lakes, artificial bodies of water to increase fortification of the city. The Five Finger Plan implemented in 1947, created a system of urban density focused around existing S-Tog train lines with green space in between the fingers. This allowed for an access to nature and flexibility to spread but provided enough regulation to keep these regions dense. Copenhagen has, in recent years, become interested in biking as an alternative to car transportation. The proliferation of car culture in Europe in the 1960s also had an effect on Copenhagen. Large highways were to be paved over existing leisure areas including the famous Lakes which are very important to the city's character. The proposal was never implemented. Copenhagen began to focus on a slower method of transportation that would be better related to the pedestrian. It would also help to reduce car traffic that clogged up other European capitals. By improving bike infrastructure and by increasing incentives for bikers, Copenhagen quickly saw an influx of interested citizens in this new method of transport. The bike has had a major impact on commuting around the city as well as on the culture of Copenhagen. The concept has been implemented in the city's public space and urban design strategy. Copenhagen also departed from the new wave of centralized cores spreading across Europe, based on the American idea of a 'downtown.' Cities like Paris and London, with their central new business districts were popular with other cities in Europe. Copenhagen, to reduce car congestion, decided to shift away from a dense core by creating density in different regions across the city. This contributes to the variety of urban environments in such a relatively small city. By spreading out housing and offices as well as other urban programming, there is a reduction in congestion in the inner city and more economic diversity spread out. From an urban design standpoint, this allows for a spread of commuting which keeps congestion down and makes biking a more viable option for citizens. Copenhagen is also looking to the future by creating masterplans for new regions of the city to tackle current housing shortages as well as to continue to increase urban livability and density. Nordhavn, Sydhavn, and Sluseholmen are neighborhoods being constructed from the top down, using the process of land reclamation from the harbor. The neighborhoods are testing new architecture and urban design strategies, and face challenges of connecting to the current city and attracting a high number of new residents, a factor that will make the developments viable in the future.
04
Editor’s Note →
Critical Lessons from Copenhagen
This review of Copenhagen's infrastructure strategies focuses on the way that Copenhagen creates environments that allow for shared spaces among users of the urban environment as well as how architecture, a quality of Copenhagen's urban environment, responds or reacts to these urban design challenges and strategies. It is intended to start a dialogue about the way that urban design can begin to bridge the gaps between architectural projects and how architects can better respond to their urban environments. The discussion taps into local talent of Copenhagen, with interviews and perspectives from 6 leading offices around the city that are focused on architecture, landscape architecture, and urban design. There are representatives from one leading office and one up and coming office in each of the categories of designers that operate in the urban environment. As part of my time at the Danish Institute for Study Abroad, I conducted this research project to focus my attention on urbanism in the city. As an architecture student interested in urban design, I have known about Copenhagen only in theory before coming here. I wanted to dig deeper than the iconic images and messages of livability to look at how Copenhagen is strategizing its urban future. The research looks further into the details of Copenhagen's urban tactics. It also provides a critical look at the city's iconic architecture. Throughout the research project, I focused on 4 case studies, looking at regions in different neighborhoods that represent 4 different types of developments of Copenhagen and different time periods in the city's contemporary development. The case studies: Islands Brygge, Nørreport, Ørestad, and Nordhavn represent key regions in Copenhagen's development. Islands Brygge is the first example of a radical reinvention of a neighborhood, Nørreport is a redesign of a historical neighborhood that is a major transportation hub. Ørestad represents a top-down urban creation, and Nordhavn is a new neighborhood currently being constructed in the city to house more people and expand the area of the region. It represents Copenhagen's new method of creating urban developments. I visited each site several times throughout the semester at different times of day, making sketches and diagrams of what I saw. I also took key photographs to tell stories about the issues. The process allowed me to gain a more detailed perspective about Copenhagen urbanism. I carried out a series of interviews with architects, urban designers, and landscape architects around Copenhagen to discuss varying perspectives on the current city's strengths as well as where the city is headed. It gave valuable insight to the project and also allowed me to hear the current discussions and debates surrounding Copenhagen urbanism and the future and how these architects are contributing to that. I chose offices that were both prominent in the field as well as new up and coming offices that are testing new ideas. Throughout the project I faced obstacles which included setting up the interviews, scaling down the project to focus on 4 strong sites and to find a standard process to work with each site. I worked with Rasmus Frisk who was an advisor. He is an architect at the local architecture firm Arki_Lab who provided me with invaluable assistance on the direction of the project. I also interned at the office of BCVA, which gave me valuable insight into how architecture firms in Denmark actually work. Beyond this, I participated in a design studio where I was able to take my design skills and apply them in a new context.
Editor’s Note →
Critical Lessons from Copenhagen
05
TIMELINE
1990s - Islands Brygge is redeveloped 2008 - 1:1 is established 1994 SLA is established
1960s - Modernism comes to Copenhagen
1947 - Five Finger Plan is Established
1965 - Jan Gehl observes cities in Italy
2000s - Ørestad is developed 2000 - Gehl Architects is established
06
Editor’s Note →
Critical Lessons from Copenhagen
2012 - Arki_Lab is established
2005 - COBE is established
2011 - Construction begins on Nordhavn
2015 - Nørreport station is completed
2013 - BCVA is founded
2005 - Bjarke Ingels Group is Established
Editor’s Note →
Critical Lessons from Copenhagen
07
Case Studies
A look at key neighborhoods in the Copenhagen development strategy
08
Discussions
→
Case Studies
Discussions
→
Case Studies
09
Islands Brygge is a neighborhood situated on Amager facing the harborfront of Copenhagen. The area was formally a industrial site and the location for a major soybean processing facility. Access to the harbor made this area a hotspot of trade and industry during its time in operation. Since industry left the city, the site stood derelict and remained unused. During the revitalization period of the Copenhagen waterfront in the 1990s, Islands Brygge was slated for redevelopment. After a redevelopment that looked at how to reuse existing materials to connect back to the site’s past, the area has become a fashionable neighborhood for housing as well as for urban activity along the harborfront.
ISLANDS BRYGGE
The neighborhood features some relics of the industrial past including boat anchors, remnants of factory buildings as well as original pavings and ornaments created from railroad ties. There are also existing railroad tracks as well as a freight wagon still on the site to evoke the area’s past. This keeps the identity of the neighborhood alive. Other harbor area developments have been criticized for becoming too generic, but Islands Brygge, one of the most popular new developments for living and for leisure, is an example of successful masterplanning with post-industrial and historical honesty. The neighborhood, in its new identity, has become a hotspot for housing projects and offices for the city. The Kulturhus (Culture house) and harbor bath allow for urban recreation and lounging. It has become a major social spot in the city. The neighborhood is still expanding southward, as new apartment buildings and other housing projects are realized.
Expansion of the neighborhood
Industrial Past
Connections in Islands Brygge
Urban Decay
Copenhagen’s new postindustrial hotspot How Copenhagen turned an industrial and underutilized part of the city into a trendy and diverse neighborhood, representing a new investment in urban livability
10
Discussions
→
Case Studies
Discussions
→
Case Studies
11
Ørestad has been developed completely from a green field site and has expanded the land area of Copenhagen. Started as a private-public partnership of developers to construct a new neighborhood. The concept was to create a new community, connected to the rest of the city by transport networks and a new metro, but also to create a more dense neighborhood. The location was set and the infrastructure constructed, and the plots were sold afterward.
ØRESTAD
The site was constructed from an existing parkland that was purchased. The development was essentially raised from out of an open field and creates the feeling of an urban island in the midst of vast expanses of greenfields and parklands. The neighborhood features a series of radical architectural projects that seem to have landed from space on the fields by architects like Bjarke Ingels and Julien De Smedt. Ørestad is a testing ground for the latest and greatest work of architects from Copenhagen and beyond. The flat land and limited landscape context allow for buildings that appear to have landed from space which allow for new radical architectural forms. The projects are conceptual dreams. Bjarke Ingels, the Copenhagen and New York based architect who launched into international stardom, created 3 crucial projects in the neighborhood, The Mountain, VM Houses, and the 8-House, all based on the idea of incorporating urban ideas into the buildings and using infrastructure as an architectural challenge. There has been criticism though that these buildings only superficially address urban issues. Ørestad’s disconnection with the rest of the city as well as its lack of connection to context contribute to an isolated location. There are wide boulevards in the area, not seen in other areas of Copenhagen, and there is limited public shopping space, or room for restaurants. Places such as Field’s mall which feature no exterior active facade also creates a feeling of disconnection akin to the American Shopping mall. Small business have been struggling to cope with this type of urban condition. The neighborhood has also been criticized for its lack of connection to the identity of Copenhagen and because of this the buildings seem disconnected, the area seems to be lacking the glue of normal urban neighborhoods especially in comparison to other Copenhagen regions. The region from above
Housing and Parking
View from 8-House
8-House
Copenhagen’s architecture playground Architects like BIG have taken to Ørestad to show off their most radical design concepts in the middle of a what is essentially an open field.
12
Discussions
→
Case Studies
Discussions
→
Case Studies
13
The redevelopment of Nørreport station drew upon the historical aspects of the original site. As a major transportation hub for the city as well as Denmark in general, the station has become a key historical landmark and the construction of housing and commercial spaces surrounding the station have continued for a few centuries. The original station prior to the COBE development was not meeting the need of the expansion of Copenhagen. The transport infrastructure was taking a toll on the surrounding area, with limited spaces for Copenhagen’s new biking interest as well as an inefficient connection to the station entrances, across two main roads. The solution was to keep the existing entrances to trains and plan existing circulation around those main points, so that the station would feel tied to its historical origins, despite its new futuristic aesthetic. Original signage and markers were kept as well to connect back to the site’s importance.
NØRREPORT
The architects have implemented several strategies on the site to mitigate traffic including the incorporation of shared spaces, allowing for cars and pedestrians as well as bikes to share the space. Taxi drivers, delivery trucks, and police cars often drive up on to the same surface as pedestrians and bikers and share the space. There are inflections in the pavement that allow for a sophisticated system of bike parking which separates the clutter of the bikes with the heavy traffic of the paths leading to the train entrances and across the site. The Nørreport area stretches beyond the confines of the train station to include several blocks of the area in the inner city of Copenhagen including Torvehallerne, the glass market, as well as Israel Plads, a large public recreational park in the city. These spaces work in conjunction to create a very busy area with a variety of Programming and have become lively hotspots for the city themselves.
The Station Israel Plads
Torvehallerne
COBE’s plan for the station
Historical photos
Bringing a historical transit hub into the 21st century How Copenhagen took an existing transit hub and gave it and the neighborhood new life.
14
Discussions
→
Case Studies
Creating opportunities for strategic bike parking.
Closing one street and opening up to pedestrian only zones of the inner city.
Discussions
→
Case Studies
15
Norhdavn is Copenhagen’s newest city district. Situated at the Northern most point of Copenhagen and jutting out into the Øresund Strait, the district is a masterplanned neighborhood, a strategic plan to create homes for 40,000 residents as well as public programming, public spaces, connections to the rest of the city, and recreational and green space for ecological and resource management. The neighborhood is a top down strategy and constitutes a public-private partnership between the Municipality of Copenhagen and private developers that are looking to invest in the site. The Copenhagen based architecture and urban design firm COBE, who has had great success around the city creating public spaces and buildings that have become staples of Copenhagen’s design scene, was commissioned to do the masterplan as well as to design several buildings on the site.
NORDHAVN
The plan features a scheme that attempts to make the neighborhood a competitor with other neighborhoods in the region by incorporating transportation infrastructure, a similarly dense population as well as an activation of the harbor bath. The neighborhood is currently still a massive construction site. It was fabricated from an intensive land reclamation process which helped to connect existing harbor peninsulas that were originally used for industrial purposes. The area is one of the examples of Copenhagen’s interest in building into the harbor my reclaiming land and building on top of existing industrial zones. Other areas including Sluseholmen and Sydhavn, south of the inner city, have already been experimenting with how to build large scale developments on top of existing harbor. The idea is to create a larger and more extensive harbor front that is an active part of the urban fabric, but some critics believe that the harbor itself is diminishing in size, and areas that can be used are being reduced by this building strategy. The strategy however, represents the new frontier of Copenhagen expansion techniques. Nordhavn hopes to learn from the city’s top-down planning mistakes, most notably in Ørestad, by incorporating a more dense system of housing, commercial, and mixed-uses while also preserving the character of the harbor. Some critics are still worried that the neighborhood’s masterplanned top-down approach may create an area of the city that is generic and not related to Copenhagen’s urban design details seen across the city.
Nordhavn water Incorporation Nordhavn in relation to the current scale of Copenhagen
Nordhavn Adaptive Re-Use Projects
COBE model of Nordhavn Masterplan
Harbor
‘Copenhagen’s new city district - Nordhavn’ - COBE IndreBy
How Copenhagen is designing the neighorhood of the future, for 40,000 new residents in the middle of the sea. Amager
16
Discussions
→
Case Studies
Discussions
→
Case Studies
17
Perspectives
Interviews from the city’s leading and new, architects, landscape architects, and urban designers
18
Perspectives
→
Interviews
Perspectives
→
Interviews
19
Gehl Architects
Ulrik Nielson
Founded in 2000 by architect and urban researcher Jan Gehl, Gehl Architects based in Copenhagen, with offices in New York City and San Francisco, has been focusing on the people-scale in their designs and visions for cities around the world.
Architect, Gehl Architects
www.gehlarchitects.com Why has Copenhagen become a model city for urban design in the world? I think the city is really good about pushing the area’s idea about what a neighborhood should be like. I think that what's really good about Copenhagen, it’s that the city and the municipality is really strong and they know what they want to do and where they want to go. Developers are pushing the economics and the city has a strong vision about livability and being a nice city to live in. I think Ørestad has a lot of problems, in that it has a disconnection from the rest of the city. The buildings are totally out of scale and not proportional to the site.
What makes Copenhagen different? I think a lot of other cities in other countries don't have the capacity of talking about architecture like Copenhagen does. They have their small group of planners who are sitting in their offices with work piled up over their heads and seeing who can develop these ideas, but not thinking about the further implications of these decisions. They get a lot of star architecture. They are really happy when they get a star architect but sometimes the project does not necessarily lift the area. We bring a more holistic way of looking at the city.
What is the role of Infrastructure in the city? Infrastructure does a good job in being that framework for the city. While economics goes up and down, having good infrastructure with transportation and a street hierarchy is important. Copenhagen is really good at that.
Nordhavn becomes the opposite (of Ørestad), another reaction to development. It goes from super nice flats laying on a flat surface to a movement toward more density. The city is pushing agendas and then looking back at projects. The city is very good at facilitating the discussion about architecture and what city people want to live in and be a part of.
Infrastructure is the glue that holds buildings together. The city is really good at creating strong infrastructure and investing in that so that the city can provide a more equitable environment for its citizens.
When did urban design become a priority in Copenhagen planning? When was public space discussed? Public space used to be point 7 on a list of priorities for the city in the local planning guide. If you look at the local plans today, the size of point 7 is now half of the local plan. They've started to use it as a guide to show architects what they have to do to create good public spaces and relevant programs. I think Copenhagen is really good at seeing that vision.
“Ørestad has many problems”
20
Perspectives
→
Interviews
What is the role of the developer? Developers think that they are in control, they are defensive about when you talk about collaborative processes. It's changing though, developers are now seeing how their projects affect public spaces and the city. I think we are in a good spot. Developers are more willing now to open up the idea to other stakeholders. The city is not static, it is constantly changing.
Perspectives
→
Jan Gehl
Interviews
21
BCVA
Rune Veile
Established in 2013, BCVA is a new architecture and urban design office based in Copenhagen. Their office is focused on competitions for urban design plans. They focus are currently focused on improving conditions in small Danish cities but also work extensively on new concepts in Copenhagen
Architect, BCVA
www.bcva.dk
What is your role at BCVA? I am a partner and founder of the office along with Sara Bjelke and Arne Cermak. We work horizontally and we are all responsible for the outcome of the projects and concepts. What is a strong project in a city, that you feel connects architecture with the urban environment? The Royal Danish Playhouse is a good example of an architectural project that connects well to the urban context. The outside allows for people to have recreational activities along the harbor and this connects to an indoor cafe and seating area with an open glass wall looking out onto the docks and the harbor. It’s activating an urban space that would normally be underutilized after shows.
What does the term Designed Infrastructure mean to you? Designed Infrastructure is the idea that you can create opportunities out of seemingly normal urban solutions made purely for practical purposes. Designing cities is about making sure that there is a variety or diversity of programming in a given neighborhood.
“We need to re-use the existing urban fabric and get more people willing to live with less space”
What is the biggest issue facing Copenhagen and what is the direction you think the city is moving toward design-wise in the urban context ? The biggest issue facing Copenhagen is the need to densify the city. We think that Copenhagen has many areas within the city that can be transformed and densified, instead of just building new areas and neighborhoods. The biggest challenge, we think, is to re-use the existing urban fabric and to densify and optimize the city. We need to get more people willing to live in smaller spaces and with less.
Any projects by BCVA that you feel consider the urban environment in a strong way ? Our Ørestad 2.0 project attempts to suggest a new way to take existing issues with the neighborhood and improve them by increasing density. Currently, projects like the 8-House by BIG do not give anything back to the city and do not relate to the urban context around. The area lacks a hierarchy, so this concept provides a hierarchy of programming. It’s a rethinking of the current site.
Are there any projects in other locations that you feel provide an interesting urban space or environment that can be explored in Copenhagen. In Chicago, Lurie Gardens situated in Millennium Park is a great example of how urban space can be designed. The urban park is constructed above existing and unused train lines in the city. Copenhagen could benefit from a more monumental park or greenspace that would gather people together in the urban environment.
What are some projects that the office is participating in that fit in the outlook of the office. We participated in the Paper Island competition with MVRDV which looked at how we could preserve the existing buildings in the project and build above. We looked at how these new buildings would interact with the existing ones and how we could use the spaces between buildings to create new programming.
Paper Island Exhibition Model
22
Perspectives
→
Interviews
Perspectives
→
Interviews
23
Kristoff Holm Pedersen Communications, SLA
SLA Founded in 1994 by Stig L. Andersson, SLA is a landscape architecture office in Copenhagen with offices around Scandinavia. It is focused on designing spaces in the city that have a close connection with nature. www.sla.dk
What is your role at SLA? I am a communications director at SLA and I make sure that the work of the office is in line with the core values. I work together with the designers to produce concepts of the designs. What is the biggest issue facing Copenhagen urban design in the next 10 years? The biggest challenge is finding a whole new way of thinking about our cities, about thinking about Copenhagen. The city is a front-runner in the world for looking at itself and evaluating its successes. In Copenhagen and in cities around the world it is important to create a balance between the grown environment and the built environment. There tends to be a lot of rational thinking, the thought that we can solve all of the problems through logic. But we think that we need a balance, to introduce a more humanistic approach to the city. We think that by introducing the grown environment as an equal part of the urban space as the built environment we can create a whole new type of city and a way of living in the city. It’s a challenge because we don’t know what that city nature will look like. It’s impossible right now to draw an image of that city, it would radically change our notions of what a city is.
“We are starting with nature instead of starting with roads”
24
Perspectives
→
Interviews
Looking at the case studies, which area stands out as a strong urban development? It’s difficult to say really. I think that Nordhavn has definately learned a lot from the development of Ørestad which in many ways was failed. We are involved in correcting many of the wrongs in that area. Islands Brygge is very good because there has been a greater effort in thinking about how to create urban spaces and more involvement from people in how to create the urban space. It is an exceptional example in the city of a successful development. It’s the opposite of what happened on the other side of the harbor with a wall of large corporate buildings, which is an example of what not to do in an urban space, to close off the water front. Nordhavn is suffering from the problem that it may be too generic despite the fact that the architects have thought about the details intensively.
Perspectives
What is a project that SLA is working on that connects with the idea of Designed Infrastructure? We work in many different scales with different projects. We design whole new cities as well as small renovations for exisiting spaces. We are working on a new project for a climate quarter in Copenhagen where the area needs to be adapted to control and manage rain water as well as cloudbursts. The streets need to be able to transport water as well as cars, and parks and greenspaces need to be designed to retain rain water but also provide a nice place for people to use as a recreational environment. What are some new strategies developed by your office for tackling the construction of new urban space? In Ørestad, they made roads and access as well as plots for corporations to move to the area. We said that method is a proven way to fail because there is no incentive for families, people, and businesses to move to the area. This means that the land had to be sold at reduced prices. We instead are looking at starting with nature. We said that we should create the location and create the destination by planting forests and modulating landscape by creating these natural amenities. We started with small pathways. So that by starting with nature, we create exciting spaces for people to explore. Then we can bring the roads and new infrastructure. It’s a new way of thinking that changes how we are currently designing cities.
SEB Bank Landscape by SLA
→
Interviews
25
Jeanette Frisk + Rasmus Frisk Architects + Urban Designers, Arki_Lab
Arki_Lab Arki_Lab is an urban design office in Copenhagen which is focused on how to design better cities with people. Its strategy is to work with users to produce better schemes for urban life. www.arkilab.dk Are there examples in Copenhagen of a project that responds to the urban environment? RF Norhdavn is a very innovative project, the silos stick out to me as an interesting environment. You have areas underneath that have zones that are completely underutilized. It is a pity that we have a gap between the wealthy inhabitants and the culture that could provide some connection to the urban environment. When we privatize the city and the commons, what do we have left? There isn't a lot of privatized space in Copenhagen. The courtyards are an important parts because they are semi-private in that you can come inside but there is also a separate community there as well.
What is the mission of Arki_Lab? JF We are very curious as to what extent can you involve people in design. That is our focus but an extra layer is: how can we raise future generations to be more aware of our surroundings. Right now the conversation about architects and architecture is: who builds the highest and most spectacular buildings. It's a lot of Star Architecture. It becomes a very flat conversation. People don't think architecture is relevant for them. We started out doing more education projects to create a common language. Architects can talk to each other but we don't challenge the way we talk about our projects to non-architects. Then, there's a gap from people who live in an area or use a building. We are curious about young people and what they want to see in the city, a group that we are involving, increasingly, in our projects,
The Tietgen Kollegium is an amazing building, everything public is at the ground floor. Bike parking is at ground floor. They have activities in the courtyard and their own community. How should we approach building our cities? RF We should think more about flexibility in the way that we build, the use of the building can change over time depending on economic or change of programming factors. Sometimes architects just design for one function. The city has a strategy about how to activate private cafes for public seating. The hardest part of urban developments is developing from scratch.
RF If we are able to open up their eyes, it’ll be a much more interesting future. They will become more critical about our own environment.
“We don’t just want to design cities for people, we want to design cities with people” - RF 26
Perspectives
→
Interviews
What are the challenges of Copenhagen? JF ...looking at the development of an area as more of a process than a final product, and I dont think anyone knows how to do that yet? We keep falling back on the idea of the masterplan. We need to look at a master process rather than a master plan. How can we leave some areas untouched but still do some type of design process. We need more stakeholders in the process, so that more people have a voice and there's more of a debate.
Ørestad is a mushroom field of crazy architecture, the glue is missing. Hopefully Nordhavn will improve further and learn. In Refshaleoen, a new area in Copenhagen, they are learning from Nordhavn by taking more time, because they know that this takes time. They are not selling off land immediately. JF In the future we need to be aware of how we can make our cities and buildings more adaptable because we have limited resources, we cannot continue building the way we have been building.
RF We dont just want design cities for people, but also design cities with people. Do you feel that Copenhagen has a starchitecture issue? JF There’s a lot of innovation in Copenhagen at the moment. It is a great situation, at some point. We can be too cocky, and everything we do is right. We need to stay on our toes and explore more. Are we over-programming and/or over-designing? Perspectives
→
Arki_Lab user involvement
Interviews
27
1:1 Landskab
Jacob Kamp
1:1 Landskab is a medium sized landscape architecture office based in Copenhagen. It’s focuses are producing lively urban spaces for reasonable budgets and to create places in the city for varied and interesting programming.
Partner, 1:1 Landskab
www.1til1landskab.dk
What are your main goals in every public project? It's to give people what they didn’t know they needed. We usually say that a project stands on four legs, We have a functionality problem that we need to fix. There’s the practical and then there is a context which is very important. We don't have one approach. Some companies do a bit of the same. We are really context based. Some abandoned areas need a lot to draw attention to them and in some places the context is really strong, so you need to do less in those areas in order to keep the character of the existing place. We are really focused on the budget and we like the restraint of low budgets. It's important to have this knowledge throughout the process. We go back and forth between scales, it's a question from going from functionality to economy, then becomes a question of materials and ambiance. How do you respond to the city? We are both pragmatic and poetic, it needs to provide a functionality but also the added value of a character and an experience. In Copenhagen, the architect and landscape architect is the lead of the project and the engineer or contractor is below them working with them on the project.
“Copenhagen needs to stop trying to design everything”
28
Perspectives
→
Interviews
Any projects that you have done that you feel connect to the city in an innovative way? We did a plaza at Flintholm station that tries to connect this busy train station with the rest of the neighborhood. We used interesting pavers and materials to better detail the site. We are doing Carlsberg plaza at the moment and the station design. Creating a sense of identity and the sense of a feel is the most important thing about our work and its crucial to this specific project.
What is the biggest issue facing Copenhagen in the next decade? The biggest issue facing Copenhagen in the future is the problem of over-design. Copenhagen sometimes becomes a little full-of-itself due to all of the attention on its urbanism tactics. I think the city needs to leave some spaces untouched to grow on their own. If we design everything we will not be able to retain character or strong context. We risk that Copenhagen can become too generic if over-designed.
How do you believe that projects in these case studies respond to the urban environment? All of the case studies are architects doing urban space. I think that it tends to be that they want to create everything from scratch. In Nordhavn, there is new paving on the street, why do we need to do that when we use the traditional Copenhagen sidewalk. 1:1 Landscape Design
There’s a problem when architects design outdoor urban space because the detailing of projects are different. you can tell as a landscape architect that these details were designed by an architect.
Perspectives
→
Interviews
29
COBE Architects
David Engell Jessen
Established in 2005, COBE is one of the leading offices in Copenhagen for the design of architecture around Denmark and internationally. The practice is focused on how buildings can provide interesting and more improved urban spaces. The team is focused both on large scale urban issues as well as detailed solutions. The office has worked on several notable projects in Copenhagen including the redesign of the city’s Nørreport Station.
Architect, COBE
www.cobe.dk
What is your role at COBE? I am a project architect, working with cityplanning as well as building projects. Besides that, I am a DGNB consultant in City development for Copenhagen.
Any projects by COBE that you feel consider the urban environment in a strong way ? I think the library in Nordvest is a successful project in concerns of changing and strengthening the urban environment. It has made a gathering point for a part of the city that was/is very scattered and diverse, and put the area on the map in the city, making a place for them to feel proud of. At the same time it is a interesting project combining urban design and buildings with the inner street.
How would you describe COBE's outlook on the urban environment? One of our key points when working with architecture is to deliver more back to the city then what we take. Both when working with urban developments, city spaces and buildings. We see our projects as social engines, places where people meet and interact and where change is made in the urban context.
What does the term Designed Infrastructure mean to you? (I tried to google it.. hadn’t heard of it before) But I guess I understand it as design meaning something that solves more than just infrastructure. Intelligent spaces that serve to solve climatic issues and social issues by providing places to sit and stay. We work with infrastructure as a part of the urban space and not as two separate entities.
“We work with infrastructure as part of the urban space, not as two separate entities”
Are there any projects in one of the neighborhoods studied, that you think exemplifies strong connections of architecture with the urban environment ? Nordhavn is creating a strong frame for the architecture to expand in. We thought of the cityspaces (streets and plazas) first and made the building mass fill out the rest. This hierarchy and internal dependency is very important in our work. The city space doesn’t exist without buildings and vice versa.
What is COBE's mission in the future of working locally in Copenhagen, what lessons are you taking from Copenhagen and applying to other regions? Our work with architecture as a social engine is in our DNA, so you could call that our mission. We bring an idea of very democratic urban spaces, where no one is excluded and the city spaces are for everyone.
What is the biggest issue facing Copenhagen and what is the direction you think the city is moving toward design-wise in the urban context ? Mass vs. the character of the different Copenhagen areas. Last year the city allowed more highrise (high density) buildings, which is quite new to Copenhagen. We need more building mass, but the issue is where to place densification. And then a lot of issues follow that problem. Making it a diverse and lively city is also important. It’s important to not just focus on building high-end but building affordable housing due to rising housing prices in the city.
COBE’s office at Paper Island, Copenhagen
30
Perspectives
→
Interviews
Perspectives
→
Interviews
31
Discussions
32
Discussions
Discussions
33
Shared / Separated Spaces
Copenhagen’s multi-modal traffic strategy
34
Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
35
SHARED SPACES / NORDHAVN LANGELINIEBRO BRIDGE
NEW NORDHAVN NEIGHBORHOOD
Stroller
Family Walking/Biking
Biker Resting
Multi-modal neighborhood
Shared Condition
Biking / Pedestrian Markings
Separation Line Range of user conditions
Creating gradients of transit movements The Langeliniebro Bridge across the S-Tog and Regional Train tracks connects Kastellet with the Østerport/ Østerbro region of Copenhagen and offers connections to the new area of Copenhagen, Nordhavnen. Observing the bridge, there is an informal division between the bike path and the walking path in contrast to the Bryggebroen in Islands Brygge. The division is created by a painted line with the same material constituting the walking and biking portions. Allows a greater range of uses from the traditional path. Walkers can move across the bike path to view the neighborhood and the train tracks, Bikers, traveling at a low speed move around the walkers. Mothers with strollers stop on the sides for a rest. Young children on bikes accompanied by their parents maintain a position in the center. There is a variance in speeds and this acknowledgment that a person can walk on the bike path allows for safer situations. Bikers are noticeably more cautious. This is a new position Copenhagen is taking after Islands Brygge and Ørestad: Creating shared spaces and zones for basic nodes of transport to allow a better cohabitation of these different systems. The bridge also then connects the main transportation centers of the neighborhood. Like many waterfronts in the world that are post industrial, the train tracks are blocking the neighborhood from some of the harbor front zones. The bridge mediates the traffic and only allows bikes and pedestrians to move across to populate the harbor area, there is an intention of channeling only certain connections. Kastellet is thus primarily pedestrian with limited car traffic. This also results in the new Nordhavn neighborhood having low in traffic movements, only residents, workers, and guests are moving through the area.
36
Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
Shared space as new urban glue In the new Nordhavn, attention has been placed in making the main routes through the housing accessible mainly by bike and pedestrian traffic and the occasional car moving through and making deliveries as well as fire emergency lanes. These reduces the through traffic through the area. The area benefits from its isolation on peninsulas that jut out into the harbor, land reclaimed from the sea, it separates out programs and the massing of the urban space. The new paving system allows for maximum flexibility in pedestrian, bike, and car traffic. The shared space allows users of the road to be more aware of each other to reduce collisions and increase safety. It also suggests that the area has a slowed-down pace as compared to the major street parallel to the neighborhood on Zealand which is a major thoroughfare for both bikes and cars. The Nordhavn neighborhood is meant to be separated a bit from this busy zone, for the benefit of its inhabitants. The idea of shared spaces is a central part of Copenhagen’s urban design strategy. They provide more flexible environments to allow for any necessary car traffic, but during normal use also provide a open space for walking and biking. Instead of compartmentalizing different traffic modes, they are placed together in order to maximize the flexibility of urban space at all times.
Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
37
SEPARATED SPACES / ISLANDS BRYGGE BRYGGEBROEN BRIDGE
THE BIKE SNAKE
Bike snake from above bypasses the pedestrian plaza
Bryggebroen lining Amager and Zealand
walking
Separation Zone from Shared Space
median
biking
Bike snake from above bypasses the pedestrian plaza Limited range of uses
A new bike and pedestrian highway Bryggebroen is a car-free bridge constructed to link the Fisketorvet Area with the Islands Brygge neighborhood during the area’s redevelopment in the early 2000s. The bridge is one of only a handful that cross over the harbor in Copenhagen and the first to focus on just biking and pedestrian traffic. The design features a path for walking and a biking path in both directions, with a 1 meter tall median in the middle that separated the two modes of transportation. Unlike the Langeliniebro bridge, this design does not allow for a casual pass between different levels of transportation speed. What results is somewhat of a pedestrian and cycling super highway, which does the opposite of its intensions, in that it makes the trip across hostile to pedestrians at the two entrances. The median also does not allow for correcting mistakes if going down the wrong path which results in collisions between bikers who are traveling at too great of a speed and pedestrians that are confused. The paths also result in a confusion at both ends of the bridge where there are very large shared spaces for pedestrians, bikes, and occasionally slow moving cars that are parking at the offices. Bikers that are traveling to fast often have near collisions with pedestrians who are confused of which way to walk. This phenomena does not happen at the Langeliniebro bridge due to the use of shared space and implied divisions, which are essential to creating an urban strategy that provides flexibility and heightened awareness for users.
38
Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
Separating bikes from the street Situated across the harbor from the Islands Brygge neighborhood on the Zealand side of the harbor is the Bike Snake which is an extension of the Bryggebroen bike bridge that crosses the harbor. The bridge is limited only to bike traffic. The idea is to connect the site below to the street which is one story above that features further connections to train station at Fisketorvet. The building bypasses the Copenhagen mall and provides a quick and efficient connection in the city. Despite the efficient connection for bikers, the Bike Snake provides some issues for the urban space. Because these spaces are separated, bikers and pedestrians do not interact. This creates a highway-like situation on the Bike Snake which gives riders freedom to how fast they are traveling because they do not need to be as alert as in a shared space environment. At the base, which is a zone that collects pedestrians and cars as well as the bikes, there is a confusion for pedestrians. Lightly painted markings on the ground and non-uniform signs provide confusion at this zone. Some pedestrians, intuitively, think that they are allowed to use the path. The Bike Snake also furthers the disconnect between the bike and the pedestrian. One of the reasons Copenhagen is focused on the bike is that it provides an efficient way to move about the city and it provides an opportunity for people to stop and purchase something or take a break in the middle of the city. This super high-way for bikes of sorts, does not create the human interaction needed in a city. Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
39
Shared spaces and separated spaces provide the glue that creates the urban fabric between buildings. Copenhagen has a very strategic and complex view of how shared spaces and separation zones work in conjunction in the urban context and how architecture responds. The Copenhagen courtyard for example, challenges the traditional notion of a private space, by acting as a semi-private zone between buildings. Most courtyards can be entered by the public and are meant for sharing a piece of the building activity with the outside urban environment. This consideration fills the gap that often exists between a property and the city around itself and is a more democratic and inclusive approach to being a part of the urban community.
40
Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
Discussions
→
Shared / Separated Spaces
41
Architecture with a capital A
How the city’s most extensive architectural experimentations, and the Star-architects who create them, respond to the urban context.
42
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
43
Copenhagen is known around the world for its experimental architecture and innovations in urban design. Showcased are examples of strong projects that are city-minded and consider the complexity of their urban environments.
Islands Brygge Harbor Bath / Islands Brygge
Tietgenkollegiet / Ørestad
PLOT: Bjarke Ingels + Julien De Smedt / 2003
Lundgaard & Tranberg / 2006
Urban Activity
Open Ground Floor
VIEWS INTO COURTYARD
SMALL VIEWS TOWARDS SURROUNDING AREA
COURTYARD
Inner Courtyard Bath from Above
44
BRINGING THE STREET IN AND CREATING COMMUNITY
STREET
Section
Providing infrastructure for recreation in Islands Brygge
Creating a series of semi-public zones for a student community in Ørestad
The Islands Brygge Harbor bath represents one of the key new projects in the newly redeveloped Islands Brygge neighborhood. The project not only activates the urban area in the vicinity, providing a new opportunity to use the harbor as a recreational outlet, but also set a precedent in urban design across the city. Other harbor baths have sprung up around the city and have transformed the harbor front into an active environment, a favorite in the city. The design of the project, created by Bjarke Ingels and Julien De Smedt of PLOT in 2003, focuses on bringing the population of the harbor to the water front. It creates a deck that floats over the harbor which is not invasive to the harbor but provides natural pools and a variety of swimming options. The large decking as well as the jumping tower provide areas of activity and social gathering. Other harbor baths have aslo provided an outlet for urbanites and the project represents a physical way that the city is trying to reincorporate nature into the urban conscience.
Tietgenkollegiet is a new student housing complex situated in the North end of the newly developed neighborhood of Ørestad. The project is an example of how housing can connect to the urban environment. By creating a series of multi-story housing units centered around a central courtyard, there is an introverted and extroverted side. A first floor is completely free of opaque walls allowing for openness to the street. Openings between the massing also allows for people to enter the central courtyard space. The center introverted space is populated by a series of extruded apartments that overlook the center which houses events. The space is a model in how to create semi-public space in a city and how to create a flexible community. There are an array of possibilities of how the space can be activated.
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
Site Plan
45
UN CITY Y / Nordhavn
Nørreport Station / Nørreport - Indre By
3XN Architects / 2013
COBE / 2015
Building on Separated Island
Station
Connections to City Infrastructure
46
Presence of a Water Separation
Connections Drawn to station entrances, voids are spaces for buildings and bike parking - COBE
Bike Parking Strategy
Creating a seamless integration of biking in an office building
Creating a series of new urban hub b for f different diff t transit t it types t
The headquarters for the United Nations in Copenhagen is representative of how architecture responds to the city and how a building project can foster the use of certain modes of transportation. Despite the serious nature of its programming, the project has presented an outward relationship to the city. Situated in the Nordhavn neighborhood, the project sits at the end of a pier that is currently still being constructed to feature housing. The project takes the shared space of the sidewalk leading to the building and integrates it in the building with the addition of a bridge that leads to an open plan ground floor and plaza that is equipped with bike parking. The ground floor provides a social area for people arriving to work that is separated from the urban space physically with a mote for security, but is not separated visually allowing for a feeling of being part of the newly forming community. The developers invested in the site and hoped to build this building into the fabric of the newly forming urban area. Normally office buildings are gated off and lack social space that invigorate cities. This is a prime example, in terms of the office and government building typology, of how strategic urban design can begin to push architecture’s relationship to the city to new heights.
The redevelopment of Norreport Station takes into account the historical importance of the site in its design aesthetic as well as its strategic planning. The project focuses on the existing entrances to trains which could not be moved during the design of the new above ground portion. The designers mapped current walking and biking paths between the sites to entrances and uses the negatives as spaces for the massing of the project. Other negatives in the site map were used as slightly sloped bike parking areas. A street on one side was closed to through car traffic. The area was designated a shared space for bikes, cars, and pedestrians. The area now becomes an efficient travel hub but also connects better to the walking streets of the surrounding area by allowing continuation of the foot traffic.
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
47
Despite the myriad of excellent projects that consider the urban environment, there are a examples in Copenhagen, of projects that have a weak connection or consideration to the urban environment through lack of connection or public programming.
Gemini Residence / Islands Brygge
Israels Plads / Nørreport - Indre By
MVRDV 2005
COBE / 2014
Residences
Israel Plads During the Day
Private Plaza with no activity
Section Connection Silos and Bryggebroen
Limited Actvity
Lacking connections to the neighborhood through limited programming and separation As one of the first new developments, in the Islands Brygge Neighborhood the Gemini Residences are constructed from former grain silos harkening back the area’s industrial past. The project is an exemplary look at adaptive re-use capabilities to reinvigorate the harbor region, however, the building’s design has caused many issues in the relationship to its urban context. The building’s main programming, a series of luxury apartments, are cantilevered high above a large plaza which has been a source for criticism. The large plaza is void of any programming except for an entrance and a series of signs pointing out the system of surveillance cameras around the area. Despite the security, some of the site is used, especially as a shortcut for pedestrians from the harbor front and bridge, further into the neighborhood. The building is suspended away from the street, the entrances are small and hidden from view, and there is lack of benches, seating, or any urban strategy. The building’s lack of connection has spurred controversy and an adjustment of rules in harbor front development in Copenhagen.
48
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
Lacking programmatic connections to the surrounding neighborhood and its context Israels Plads is an extensive urban square situated in the Norreport area of the inner city. Despite the project’s high design aesthetic, the project has failed to attract the level of visitors of a park its size, especially in comparison to the exceptionally popular glass markets to the East which provide a density and variability of programming to produce a comfortable and social atmosphere. Despite the occasional Basketball players and skateboarders in the area. There are not a lot of programmed seating areas or social zones. The size of the park does not allow for a cohesive system of social spaces or active spaces. The project also lacks a connection to the surrounding housing blocks, or to the glass market across the street.
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
49
8-House / Ørestad
NCC Silos / Norhavn
Bjarke Ingels Group / 2010
COBE / 2017 (In Progress)
Top of 8-House
Nordhavn Current Development
Balconies and Front yards in the Sky
The isolated city, a dense mixed-used program building with no connections to the area 8-House, one of the most talked about projects in Copenhagen, situated in Ørestad attempts to create a street into the sky, rising like a ramp in the form of a figure-8, creating the ability to have a courtyard and backyard high in the sky. The concept is experimental, however, the building’s location and connectivity are lacking. Situated at the Southern end of Ørestad up against protected cow-grazing lands, the building is connected to the rest of Copenhagen with a series of streets and boulevards as well as the Vestamager stop on the Copenhagen metro. But these arteries are a short walking distance away, through a series of unbuilt plots and dirt patches as well as traditional parking garages cladded in parametric facades. The ‘street’ in the building begins in the inner courtyard entrance, but does not feature an actual connection to a street in the city. The theory was that the building would create a feeling of a neihgborhood in the sky with a street for biking and walking that would be leisurely, but because there is no connection to existing high density pedestrian and bike traffic, this has become mostly a dream and a tourist endeavor. Signs around the building are posted to ward off onlookers, even though its tourist attraction days are numbered. The project represents an experimentation of an idea still in its infancy. Perhaps also a dated modernist idea which relies on the troublesome theory that neighborhoods can be constructed from nothing.
50
Discussions
Silos
Diagrams of building concept
→
Architecture with a Capital A
Under Construction
An adaptive re-use office building with a public space below Situated in the new Nordhavn neighborhood, the Portland Towers are designed as a series of office buildings use a similar concept as the Gemini Residences. It is an adaptive reuse project that cantilevers the programming above over an exisiting site. Despite the fact that the project is not completed, there are plans to learn from the mistakes of the MVRDV designed Gemini Residences by providing usable urban space below the project, which will provide a social center for Nordhavn. Despite the vision, there may be difficulty fostering a social scene in this square due to its distance from the main urban traffic areas of the city. Despite this, the project shows that both the city and the architects are learning from the mistakes of the past. Urban designers and planners are putting more pressure on architects to activate the public space of their residential and commercial projects so that the problems of the Gemini Residence do not happen again.
Discussions
→
Architecture with a Capital A
51
As Copenhagen architects work to produce more concepts and experimentations in their work, it is important to be critical on these ideas and to look at how these buildings give back to the urban environment. Copenhagen has many projects that are pushing the envelope on architectural form, but because of the needs of the city, these projects need to be able to connect with the urban environment to provide more seamless transitions from the personal scale to the large regional scale.
16 52
Discussions → Discussions
Architecture Capital → Architecturewith with aaCapital A
A
Discussions Architecture with Discussions → →Architecture with a Capital A a Capital A
17 53
future urbanism
Copenhagen looks to the future.
54
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
55
‘Copenhagen needs to re-use the urban fabric, densify and optimize spaces for people in a better way.’
Jacob Kamp, landscape architect of 1:1 Landskab suggests that Copenhagen has the tendency to overdesign its spaces, that it often becomes so confident in its ability to design urban spaces that it forgets that some sites should be left to develop on their own, which will lead to more interesting adaptations in the future. He suggests that developments like Nordhavn are creating generic parts of the city. Otherwise elements that can connect a city in the details are being forgotten in exchange for a futuristic vision of the city. Copenhagen’s future might be in creating a hyper-designed livable laboratory but Jacob Kamp hopes that it the city can retain the existing fabric.
- Rune Veile, BCVA
Model of Nordhavn
Concept for Ørestad Orestad2.0 2.0
Hall of Fame, Copenhagen
According to Rune Veile of BCVA, Copenhagen’s greatest challenge in the future is to create density as well as to utilize the existing urban fabric. Ørestad 2.0 is a concept developed by the office as a strategy to densify the Ørestad region development to increase the livability of the space. The plan centers around Ørestad City, the center portion of the masterplan along Ørestad Boulevard, and hypothesizes the implementation of new programming. It suggests the capping of the highway that connects the city to the airport, allowing for more cohesive connections in the neighborhood. The strategy shows how Copenhagen designers are looking at existing developments that have had issues and theorizing how they can be improved as the city grows, instead of implementing a new masterplan over the existing. BCVA is looking forward to the future of the city, and how to densify existing areas.
56
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
‘Copenhagen has a problem of wanting to design everything. I think we need to leave some spaces alone to grow on their own.’ - Jacob Kamp, 1:1 Landskab Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
57
‘Creating a better balance between nature and the city is where we are moving’
Jeanette Frisk, partner at Arki_Lab suggests that we need to design cities with people, not just cities for people and the new wave of Copenhagen development is the question of how to we make buildings that are more flexible and adaptable to new uses and how do we make architecture and urban design about what people want in their cities. She suggests a transition from the masterplan point-of-view to the master process which suggests that there should be a framework in how to develop spaces from the ground up that can be flexible over time. User involvement is key to this and the future of Copenhagen, Arki_Lab hopes is attention to how people themselves can change the city.
- Kristoff Pedersen, SLA
Copenhagen Harbor
Amagerfælled
Arki_Lab User Involvement
Pedersen at SLA believes that the future of the city and the future of Copenhagen is to reintegrate the natural environment back into the urban environment and to create a better symbiosis between the two. Kristoff suggests that this is a new paradigm in urbanism that we have not seen before and thus cannot predict what it would look like, but says that we can move forward with this thinking on a small scale to understand the ecological impacts of our designs in a city. Copenhagen is one of the most energy focused capitals in Europe, with a goal to go carbon netural by 2025, an ambitious plan. But like many cities in the world, the urban area still lacks much green space. The redevelopment of the harbor front is a big step towards increasing the use of the area and connecting the people in the city back to nature. Kristoff believes that the city can do more, and with more attention to these spaces, the city can benefit and the natural environment can as well.
‘We need to think about developing master-processes instead of masterplans’ - Jeanette Frisk, Arki_Lab
58
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
59
‘Nordhavn is learning from the mistakes made in Sluseholmen, it’s the new direction of Copenhagen development’
Jessen of COBE, suggests that the city needs to create more density in certain areas to allow for more programming and room for housing. The city itself needs to create more building mass due to the high price for square meters in the region, but the question still remains where is the best place to implement density. COBE is working in Nordhavn to create density to allow for necessary tension and friction between programs and spaces. Jessen also suggests that we need to inject more density in other privileged area to create a diverse city and not just focus on high-end housing.
- Ulrik Nelson, Gehl Architects
Sluseholmen
New Copenhagen Housing Nordhavn Nelson of Gehl Architects suggests that the city is always learning from its mistakes. At Sluseholmen, a development in the South harbor area of Copenhagen, the site has been criticized for its generic qualities and lack of connections to the city physically and character-wise. There has been a growing concern that these areas have become to generic and lack the adaptability the other neighborhoods in the city have. Sluseholmen consists of a masterplan designed by one urban designer and a series of large buildings designed by Arkitema, but whose facades have each been designed by new architects. Nelson agrees that this is a superficial way to produce uniqueness in the city. He suggests though, that the trajectory for Copenhagen development is upward despite these issues. Nordhavn has been successful in allowing different building types, different architects as well as more stakeholders in the process.
60
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
‘We need more building mass, but the issue is where to create densification’ - David Engell Jessen, COBE Architects Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
61
62
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
Discussions
→
Future Urbanism
63
Copenhagen is one of the leading cities in considering an urban design strategy along with an urban planning outlook. The city is trying to reach further and further into a more livable, eco-friendly, and socially strong environment for its citizens. Other cities and countries can learn a great deal from the ideas explored in Copenhagen urban design and architecture: how to focus on the people-scale, getting rid of major automobile traffic, connecting buildings better to their surrounding landscape, and integrating more nature into urban environments. The city continues to learn from its mistakes and move forward as all great cities should. Copenhagen is a model for cities around the world but also must continue to be introspective and critical about its direction. In the coming years Copenhagen will undoubtedly continue to innovate to become an even greater city for people.
64
Conclusion
Conclusion
65
WORKS CITED WORKS CITED "Bjarke Ingels." TED: Ideas worth Spreading. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 May 2016. "COBE Envisions Urban Silo for Copenhagen's Nordhavnen District." Designboom Architecture Design Magazine COBE Envisions Urban Silo for Copenhagens Nordhavnen District Comments. N.p., 02 Sept. 2014. Web. 14 May 2016. "Copenhagen's New Cool Neighbourhood." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 09 Oct. 2009. Web. 13 May 2016. "Finger Plan." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 14 May 2016. Gehl, Jan. Cities for People. Washington, DC: Island, 2010. Print. Gehl, Jan. Life between Buildings: Using Public Space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987. Print. Hanak, Christian, and Ingelise Ihle Andersson. New Architecture in Copenhagen: Copenhagen X/2007 ;. Copenhagen: DAC - Danish Architecture Centre, 2015. Print. "Nordhavnen." COBE -. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 May 2016.
"3 Warp-speed Architecture Tales." Lecture, TEDxOxford, TED Global, Oxford, England, January 1, 2009. "A BIG New York Debut: West 57th." ArchDaily. February 7, 2011. Accessed March 16, 2016. "Hedonistic Sustainability." Lecture, Bjarke Ingels on Hedonistic Sustainability, KTH Arkitekturskolan, Stockholm, February 15, 2012. Mcgrane, Sally. "Mountain Dwellings Urban Development in Copenhagen." Dwell. July 21, 2009. Accessed March 16, 2016. http://www.dwell.com/house-tours/article/mountain-dwellingsurban-development-copenhagen. Olsson, Lea. "The Story Behind Failure: Copenhagen's Business District Ørestad - Failed Architecture." Failed Architecture The Story Behind Failure Copenhagen's Business District Restad Comments. September 13, 2013. Accessed March 16, 2016.
"Nørreport Station." COBE -. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 May 2016.
"Creating Public Spaces That Matters - DANISH™." Danish. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2016.
"DANISH™ Architecture in Copenhagen - DANISH™." Danish. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2016.
Saaby, Tina. "Copenhagen Development." Lecture for European Urban Design Theories. DIS Abroad, Copenhagen. 6 May 2016.
"Process Urbanism | The City as Artificial Ecosystem." Process Urbanism | The City as Artificial Ecosystem. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2016.
IMAGES
Themonthlyvideo. "Cities for People: A Lecture by Jan Gehl." YouTube. YouTube, 02 May 2013. Web. 14 May 2016.
Most Images Taken by Robert Svaia - January 2016 to May 2016 Other images compiled from the websites of offices.
Denmark. Danish Ministry of the Environment. The Finger Plan. Copenhagen: n.p., 2013. Print.
Other Images:
"Bicycle Culture." Bicycle Culture -The Official Website of Denmark. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2016. "User Involvement Makes for Better Solutions - DANISH™." Danish Design. Danish.tm, n.d. Web. 15 May 2016.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/03/SAS_ Royal_Hotel,_Copenhagen,_1955-1960.jpg https://www.thestar.com/content/dam/thestar/news/gta/201 4/11/12/jan_gehl_on_making_toronto_liveable_hume/jan_gehl.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Gemini_ Residence_from_west.JPG
"On Copenhagen's Bicycle Bridges - DANISH™." Danish. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2016. "Three Danish Takes on Modern Student Housing - DANISH™." Danish. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 May 2016.
66
Citations
Citations
67
Thank you to everyone who was a part of the interview process as well as Rasmus Frisk of Arki_Lab who provided the guidance for the production of this book.