*
a place of otherness A Study in Urban Design and Architecture
*
CHRISTIANIA
a place of otherness A Study in Urban Design and Architecture
• •
Acknowledgements
Daniel Mallo and Armelle Tardiveau This edition of European Study Visit (2011/12), part of the MA in Urban Design, emerged out of a conversation on misused, disused and underused urban spaces with Prof. John Pløger (Department of Environmental, Social and Spatial Change, Roskilde University, Denmark) in the autumn 2008 when he was invited to the School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape at Newcastle University as a visiting fellow by Prof. Jean Hillier. Since then, the conversation has carried on remotely and John has been of great inspiration to articulate this student project on living together in difference. John suggested envisaging the new challenges of the Freetown of Christiania and address ‘experimental’, habitual, and ‘legal’ living as well as an urban process still in the making. Christiania is exemplary in making territorialisation, place-identity and involving all Christianiates in developing the area socially and spatially. Helen Jarvis (Reader in Social Geography at Newcastle University, UK) was also instrumental in guiding our research on Christiania, pointing to the invaluable publication entitled ‘Space for Urban Alternatives? Christiania 1971-2011’ (Thörn, Wasshede, Nilson, 2011). Some of the authors have made this project possible in particular Signe Sophie Bøggild (freelance
researcher and curator). In addition, the research of Anne Tietjen (Assistant professor in Urban and Landscape Studies at Copenhagen University) on heritage and polarised territories became an essential aspect for our reading of Christiania. John Pløger, Signe Sophie Bøggild and Anne Tietjen were active participants providing the students with an invaluable perspective when we were in Copenhagen, our deep thanks go to them. Their input together with the vitality of the City of Copenhagen has led us to a second edition in Christiania (2012/13), this time not an inward looking gaze (see brief page 15) but rather seeking connections between Christiania and Copenhagen. Finally, in the true spirit of Christiania and the Christianhavn neighbourhood who for a great part embrace and support the spirit of the Freetown, we would like to thank Bruno Modesto Leal and Thomas Østerlin who generously offered a space to work in Christianhavn community house (Christianshavns Beboerhus) in exchange of a design proposal for the space made available to us for our workshop in Copenhagen. A group of students led by Ali Mishari took the brief on board and developed a proposal that can be seen on page ii.
…i
Full function
Front room function Storage Shelves
Folded Chair Storage
Storage
Storage
ii ‌
Fold out table
Pull out seating cubes
Floor storage drawers
Back room function Storage
Ladder Storage
Fold down table (small)
Artwork to disguise table
Hidden projector
Fold down table (large)
Full function Library Shelves
Small Cupboards
Fold out table
Storage
Reception table
Storage
Hidden projector
Fold out tables
• •
Bartering skills to secure a workspace
Mishari Ali, Irina Korneychuk, Aly Sabaa, Stuart Taylor and Daniel Mallo Projector hidden in wall unit
Project on to opposite wall
During our trip it was important to provide the students with an area where they could carry out there work. To stay true to the philosophy / inspirations of Christiana we were fortunate enough to have the opportunity to ‘barter’ our skills for workspace. We would redesign the workspace that was given to us during our stay in Copenhagen to accommodate our host’s desires for the space. Initially it was clear there was no real function to the space and it appeared as one open planned space. The room, however, had great lighting and head height that gave the space a much bigger feel. With large pieces of furniture it was clear there was a need to have smaller units, which would allow more movement in the space.
What came from the brief was a goal to develop a space that could follow many functions, a meeting room, a workspace, an events area or just a place to relax. All of these components would be combined into a single wall unit that the space beckoned. By creating this one wall unit we unified the two spaces that existed whilst creating a sense of separation of the two spaces. All the while giving the space much needed storage and turning ‘awkward’ space into ‘useful’ space. By using one material throughout (Chipboard) we created a homogenized area where all furniture could be embedded into the wall unit, ultimately creating an interactive and adaptable wall.
…iii
\\ Contents \\
Acknowledgements Daniel Mallo and Armelle Tardiveau
i
Bartering Daniel Mallo and Armelle Tardiveau
ii
Heterotopia, Sites and Utopia John Pløger
1-5
Space Oddity: Copenhagen’s Freetown and New Town Signe Sophie Bøggild
7 - 13
Design Brief Daniel Mallo and Armelle Tardiveau
15 - 17
Mapping Christiania 18 - 19
Unfolding Christiania Behnaz Djabarouti, Rebecca Frost and Jessie Xu
Alternative Paths Olga Elkoniuk, Jesus D Hernandez-Rangel and Ruifangyi Xu
Bridging Chen Cheng, Aly Sabaa, Stuart Taylor and Annabelle Sarah Whiteley- Walker
20 - 27 28 - 35 36 - 43
Christiania’s ReGenesis Jeremy Murray, Davoud Hafshejani, Lan Gao (Gary) and Xinrui Wang (Jane)
44 - 51
Growing a Social Care Structure of Wellbeing Matt Lippiatt, Nan Li and Zidan Lin
52 - 59
Empowering Children Jesse Kiely, Jerzy Smolarek and Jing Yuan
60 - 67
Christiania Skilled James Cogan, Kamila Bobrzak and Xiao Feng Lu
68 - 75
The B-Hive Irina korneychuk, Minh Dung Le and Hsiu-l Lee
76 - 83
John Pløger is Dr. Art & Associated Professor at ENSPAC, Roskilde University. He also works as consultant for architects in Copenhagen and Norway. He has written articles on among others Michel Foucault, urban planning, the event city, and agonism and planning.
*
Heterotopia, Sites and Utopia
John Pløger
Introduction
Heterotopia
There is currently a strong thread of experimenting with what might be called urban utopianism for instance, guerilla gardening, and/or the making of ‘free’ or autonomous spaces for entrepreneurial and experimental art, temporary spaces for art-practices, events and festivals. However, the free-town Christiania, Copenhagen has in fact enabled more than 40 years of such experimentation (Miles 2008, Hellström 2006). Using the word utopia is so seen now more often related to the not-yet idea of utopia (Ernst Bloch) than Thomas Moore’s classical Eutopia (good place) plus Outopia (nowhere). As with most lived utopias, Christiania is first and foremost to be considered as a heterotopian space. Such places may by its inhabitants be thought as utopias, but it’s more likely they in fact practice them as heterotopias. Departing from Michel Foucault’s short radio-talk on utopiaheterotopia, the aim here is to discuss the idea of heterotopia in relation to writings and research project done on Christiania, introducing some of Foucault’s points (see also Defert 1997, Genocciho 1996, Soja 1996, Teyssot 1980) and in particular discuss heterotopia as ‘alternate orderings’ (Hetherington 1997).
Heterotopia describes spaces that have multiple layers of meaning and/ or relationships to other places; more than are immediately apparent. Foucault (1998:178) claims “we live inside an ensemble of relations that define emplacements that are irreducible to each other and absolutely nonsuperposable”. This is because our present age being a time where “we are in an area of the simultaneous, of juxtapositions, of the near and the far, of the side-by-side, of the scattered” (175) and our living spaces seem to be “represented, contested, and reversed” (178) for instance by the otherness of places. This erosion of lives, time and places forces us to ‘settle’ or emplace within heterogeneous spaces (178). Foucault points to six different characteristics of such space of otherness or heterotopian space. First he says they can’t be seen as ‘a single culture’ or ‘a constant’ and thus have diverse forms (179). Second, every heterotopia has a “precise and specific operation” within society, and he here thinks of the established heterotopias such as the cemetery and brothel (180). Third they have “the ability to juxtapose in a single real place several emplacements that
…1
2 …
are incompatible in themselves” (181) such as Christiania comprising middle class housing, pusher-street, business, and social dumping. Fourth they are “temporal discontinuities”; open to “heterochronias” linked to the transistory and precarious - rather than tradition and continuity. Fifth “presupposes a system of openness and closing” (193) and sixth heterotopias “have a function in relation to the remaining space” (184) either as the “space of illusion” or “creating a different space” towards these known spaces (184). Such spaces might to visitors and frequent users be imagined as a utopian rather than a heterotopian space. Foucault however compares a heterotopia as a place of ‘otherness’, lived, organized, imagined otherness to the utopia of ‘the unreal’ using the mirror as metaphor: “The mirror functions as a heterotopia in the sense that I makes this place I occupy at the moment I look at myself in the glass both utterly real, connected to the entire space, surrounding it, and utterly unreal – since to be perceived, it is obliged to go by way of that virtual point which is over there” (179). Heterotopias are thus
“counter sites” (Defert 1997:279) of both (potential) freedom and order, however an “alternate ordering”, but still “different modes of ordering” (Hetherington 1997:41). A heterotopian space is this way open or contingent, because it is a void between the known order and a contesting one, and have shifting, multiple meanings that makes a symbolic space that seems to be both “fixated and fluid” (Hillier 2007:275). Heterotopias thus belong to the force of emplacement as they are “spaces in which we are living, by which we are drawn outside ourselves, in which, as a matter of fact, the erosion of our life, our time, and our history takes place, this space that eats and scrapes away at us, is also heterogeneous in itself… we live inside an ensemble of relations that define emplacements… But what interests me among all these emplacements are certain ones that have the curious property of being connected to all the other emplacements, but in such a way that they suspend, neutralize, or reverse the set of relations that are designated, reflected, or represented [réflectis] by them” (Foucault 1998:177-8).
Heterotopia lived So a heterotopia represents many spaces in one space, having an order that is shaped by a vague and ephemeral mobile process depending on who is practicing in place and what assemblages are constituted. A heterotopian space is a place that has a definable edge, being at odds with, and a critical response to, the surrounding society or places, and is, therefore, marginalized having “some aura of mystery, danger or transgression” (Hetherington 1997:41) Giving the above point made by Hetherington, there are several rather different ways to describe a lived heterotopian space. There is for instance those ambivalent and uncertain ones (Soja 1989) the ones of aura of mystery and transgression (Shields 1991), and alternating space, and all with only the potential otherness as a common thread. To Foucault however, a heterotopia is not a permanent place, but a countersite, a contrast-site, a space of temporary deferral. Not necessarily a space of transition, but a spirit of being a kind of utopia or an experiment of something ‘new’ coming into being from nowhere. Even if not just to be new forms of spaces, these spaces are thought of and
used as spaces of “an alternate ordering” (Hetherington 1997:ix & viii). We find heterotopias almost everywhere. Bah Tuma is an enclave in Damaskus, Syria, where Muslims and Christians meet peacefully in cafés (at least before the civil war) and Christiania is to most people seen as a contrast and at odds with the surrounding city, an alternative way of living, and a ‘free town’ for people compared to the ordered and moral hegemony in society (for instance on using hash). A heterotopian space can be described as not fixed and defined in relation to other places, which might be a reason for giving them the aura of utopia. This is the case with Christiania that shapes forms of resistance to the surrounding society (Genocchio 1995).
Emplacement and ‘real’ heterotopian spaces Here it is thus worth considering Foucault’s words that these spaces on one side are able to “juxtapose in a single real place several emplacements that are incompatible” (1998:181) questioning ‘normal’ places but being a place for fantasy while on the other side being highly (in)formally controlled. ‘Real’ heterotopian spaces,
…3
4 …
according to Foucault, connect temporal discontinuities as well as, as said, intertwining several places in one place. It is important to notice Foucault’s use of the word ‘emplacement’, this signifies that it’s a place created at a certain location, and we therefore also have to look at the history of these places as well as the social processes and assemblage forces that turn these places into heterotopian spaces. This is why we might see today’s focus on heterotopian spaces as representing a relation to utopia; a utopia that is made of past history and future dreams, but thought from presence. Looking from Foucault’s perspective on heterotopia as a place of otherness and of potential liminality, these places are more precisely ‘emplacements’ that always are present as possible temporary spaces that might connote utopian wishes or as spaces of resistance. They are marks of ‘different’ thinking, living or valuing, meaning people there see this space as an identification of otherness in a now-time perspective. It might be imagined as the not-yet utopia, and most of the time they are enclaves without politics but rather only lived heterotopic-utopian as living otherwise. This might be the case with guerilla gardening, community gardening, slow
cities, and the many forms of ‘realized’ utopian livings around the world (Miles 2005). These heterotopian-utopian spaces and ways of living represent a felt lack in life, lack of ‘good’ values and ‘good’ ways of living, and as such a possible otherness to the defects in contemporary life or society. They may to participants represent ‘a lived difference’ to surrounding world, but you don’t skip your relation to the outside world (work, school, holidays etc). As said, if we take Christiania as example, it is a place of social ordering everyday life and public spaces by (in)formal norms, spatial ordering, social hierarchies, and timespace and work-time orderings. Such seen they might be part of a subjectification process which is the case to the permanent residents at Christiania, but most of the time heterotopian spaces are temporary experiments, retreats (for whatever reason), representing certain presence values, and people rarely turn these experiments into a way of life or life-form.
Outlook These experiments or alternate ordering of everyday lives see a hope in the not-yet. The not-yet utopia is a vital
force in everyday life (day-dreaming), but it might lack a direction and directorial forces for the long run of change. However their force might be, as Foucault says, that utopian places is “non-chronological moments”. These heterotopias are not for eternity, but “rather a temporary heterotopie” (2005:9&16). We tend to think that “utopia is the spatial nonplace, Heterotopie is the non-place of language” (Defert 2005:75), but rather, as Foucault himself would claim, they are in-between the visible and the sayable space and place. And as such memory, experience, experiment, vitalism, and affect are always present desirous forces for creating new heterotopias or a space of otherness.
References
New York, The New Press, 175-186. Foucault, Michel (2005) Die Heterotopien. Der utopische Körper, Frankfurth am Main, Suhrkamp Verlag. Genocchio, Benjamin (1996) Discourse, Discontinuity, Difference: the Question of ‘Other’ Spaces, in Sophie Watson & Katerine Gibson (eds) Postmodern Cities and Spaces, Oxford, Blackwell, 35-46. Hellström, Maria (2006) Steal This Place. The Aesthetics of Tactical Formlessness and ‘The Free Town of Christiania’, Doctoral Thesis No. 2006:27, Faculty of Landscape Planning, Hortigulrue & Agricultural Science, SLU/Alnarp Hetherington, Kevin (1997) The Badlands of Modernity. Heterotopia and Social Ordering, London, Routledge.
Defert, Daniel (1997) Foucault, Space, and the Architects, ‘Dcoumenta X – The Book’, Kassel, Cantzs Verlag, 274-283.
Hillier, Jean (2007) Stretching Beyond The Horizon. A Multiplanar Theory of Spatial Planning and Governance, London, Ashgate.
Defert, Daniel (2005) Raum zum Hören, in Foucault, Michel (2005) Die Heterotopien. Der utopische Körper, Frankfurth am Main, Suhrkamp Verlag, 67-92.
Miles, Malcolm (2008) Urban Utopias, London, Routledge Soja, Edward (1996) Thirdspace, Oxford, Blackwell.
Foucault, Michel (1998) Different Spaces, in Michel Foucault Aesthetics, Method, and Epistemology (ed. James D. Faubion),
Teyssot, Georges (1980) Heterotopias and the History of Spaces, History/Theory/ Criticism a+u, October 1980, 80-100.
…5
Signe Sophie Bøggild: Copenhagen-based freelance researcher and curator. MPhil History of Art, University of Copenhagen and MA Contemporary Art Theory, Goldsmiths, University of London - special subject Geographies with Professor Irit Rogoff. Focusing on the past, present and future of post-war Scandinavian New Towns, Signe has contributed to anthologies by Crimson Architectural Historians, The International New Town Institute, Gothenburg University, and Bauhaus University Weimar. Writing articles for magazines like the Journal of Urban Design, The Nordic Journal of Architecture and Arkitekten, she has presented papers at Danish and international conferences, and has guest-lectured at TU Delft, the University of Copenhagen and the University of Newcastle. Collaborators include NORD Architects, Crimson Architectural Historians, the Amsterdam-based discussion platform Failed Architecture, The International New Town Institute, the Danish Architecture Centre, and the Danish Town Planning Institute. Signe is active in the NGO Architects without Borders. Residencies in Danish Academies of Rome and Athens.
*
Space Oddity: Copenhagen’s Freetown and New Town
Signe Sophie Bøggild Why is the village-like Freetown Christiania, situated on an attractive heritage site, treated as Copenhagen’s unadjusted freak? How did the New Town Tingbjerg, planned to frame the good life during Denmark’s welfare boom, gain a reputation as a ghetto1? This paper examines these two Copenhagen cases of ‘urban dissidence’. Rising from planned or unplanned conditions, many regard Tingbjerg and Christiania as opposites. Nevertheless, their history and development suggest relating them to each other. The former wilfully chose a dissident-position in the hippie-spirit of ‘dropping out’, squatting spaces outside mainstream culture. Initially showcasing cradle-tograve services and modernity, the latter is currently marginalised into a position of ‘forced dissidence’ where alternative platforms or constructive critiques are difficult to establish. Emulating Cor Wagenaar’s statement that: ‘The urban landscape reflects specific ideals about happiness’2, I analyse Tingbjerg and Christiania as the welfare society’s brainchildren, equally redefining housing and lifestyles. Observing the city in a retroactive, cultural historical perspective, I subsequently examine how officials use urban planning to (re)integrate
‘the freak’, housing nonconformists and ‘the ghetto’, accommodating ethnic and social minorities, into society via ‘normalisation’ and ‘anti-ghettoisation’ strategies. Lastly, I review the post-war New Town and the post-1968 Freetown’s legacy vis-à-vis ‘new’ New Town design.
Planned and Unplanned Happiness In 1976, the Finger Plan’s co-architect Steen Eiler Rasmussen, Denmark’s first planning professor, published a book about Christiania. Disappointed by his own tabula rasa New Town, he compared Tingbjerg’s instant community with the Freetown’s ‘urban palimpsest’ - an abandoned military area, superimposed by cultural layers and social interventions: ”From Tingbjerg in the one end of Copenhagen, where everything is quite heartlessly regulated and normalised and forced into the right shapes, you can catch bus 8 to Copenhagen’s opposite end to Christiania, where everything is free, many believe too free3.” Tingbjerg encapsulated the modernist welfare city, underpinned by English neighbourhood planning and social democratic ideals4: nature, collectivism, shopping street, traffic separation, public space and institutions near central
…7
8 …
Copenhagen. Connectivity with other districts was limited to one bus line, although the Finger Plan suggested a train station. A high-rise overlooked long low blocks with rental apartments. Tingbjerg’s brick-wall architecture anticipated largescale housing estates like Urbanplanen, using industrial building methods to tackle a housing shortage, resulting from migration and rundown city-tenements. ‘Common housing’ for everybody, class and income notwithstanding, rather than ‘social housing’. Egalitarianism was key: ideally various segments forming a mixed community in neighbourhood units without single-family houses. Although Rasmussen envisioned a lively social environment, he feared qualities lacking compared to the historical city’s cultural diversity: ‘If you observe a modern residential area, you will often find that even if there is everything that must be there according to various rules, then there is still something important missing... It becomes a place that people inhabit, but they don’t live there. You must set as goal to create human surroundings that can enable every resident to unfold in the most harmonic and richest way.5 ’ Rasmussen also warned about ghettoisation. As feared, many who were
capable of choosing neighbourhood location, preferred suburban single-family housing. Subsequently, public housing associations allotted immigrants and ‘unresourceful’ to Tingbjerg. Like similar cases worldwide Tingbjerg stumbled into the gap between plan and reality, producing a historical narrative of grand utopia becoming dull dystopia. Rasmussen designed for different desires of future residents. Yet, some didn’t match the equation. Christiania’s ‘slum-stormers’ solved housing shortage differently, grafting desires onto a pre-existing built environment. While Tingbjerg developed from scratch, Christiania’s appropriation of former military territory represented slowness, process, and participation. Historical buildings were reprogrammed, caravans became houses, self-builder villas reinvented craftsmanship. Echoing avant-gardes and bourgeois revolutions, Christiania’s manifesto read: “Christiania’s goal is to build up a self-governing society, where whatever individual can expand under responsibility towards the community.6 ” This softened welfare discourse to embrace quality of life, self-realisation, personal relations, sustainability, individual choice, etc.
The Welfare City 2.0 For Rasmussen Christiania represented a co-creation and recycling laboratory: the Freetown materialised from ‘lack of planning’ before the slum-stormers’ arrival. After the military departed Bådsmandsstræde Barracks decayed because future plans were non-existent. Rasmussen interprets the squatting act as preserving valuable architecture from destruction. Reverberating 1970’s social planning discourses, he doubts Christiania’s necessity, if society was better at containing difference. Although he only sporadically mentions the over-idiosyncratic selfbuilder houses, he discovers the potential of users, co-marking the framework of their life: ’For me, who has been occupied with planning of dwellings and housing areas, Christiania has been a strange experience. Not in my wildest fantasy could I have imagined anything emerging from such chaos. It has not only been strange, but also uplifting, to see which positive forces people possess – even those standing weakest – when you offer them the possibilities… You shouldn’t demolish [Christiania].7 ’ In answering The Social Democratic mayor Urban Hansen, who ridiculed the
Tingbjerg-architect’s Christiania-support, Rasmussen emphasises how Christianites have chosen the Freetown whereas people ended randomly in the New Town. Willingness of participation unfolds the potentials of neighbourhood community better in Christiania than in Tingbjerg where everything was instantly organised. Rasmussen still finds Christiania more inclusive than Tingbjerg. Christianites of various backgrounds are reprogramming historical buildings and co-creating housing and institutions. Learning how Tingbjergteenagers ravage well-equipped youth clubs, he mourns his New Town’s inflexibility towards innovation8. He contrasts kindergartens ‘designed according to all the authorities’ rules’ with Christiania’s Children House, a military house without basic facilities: ‘a real environment, friendly and familiar’ that English experts describe as ‘better and more interesting’ than Tingbjerg’s pamperedness9. Hence, Rasmussen admires the urban palimpsest’s self-organisation, non-growth and recycling. Reactivating historical architecture, the Freetown contrasts the New Town’s context-alienation, demolishing the existing to restart from zero. Still, both possess top-down and bottom-up elements - and desire for welfare and happiness.
…9
10 …
Welfairytales: Normalisation and Antighettoisation Both urban design strategies of ‘normalisation and ‘anti-ghettoisation’, launched after the national election in 2001, furthered critiques of the New Town and the Freetown as (out)dated utopias, nesting crime, drugs, antisocial behaviour, etc. In the political ‘battle of culture’, ‘the ghetto’ and ‘the freak’ constituted non-places where socio-economical challenges could be contained, although encompassing all districts. Occupying attractive land in central Copenhagen by the water, but outside market forces, Christiania’s collectivist ownership vexed the right wing government of 2001-2011 like Tingbjerg’s public housing, inhabited by immigrants and ‘unresourceful’ 10. Consequences were worst for Tingbjerg, degraded from emancipating Copenhagen’s slum-dwellers to be labelled as today’s slum, having trouble communicating more constructive critiques and stories than burning cars or gang rivalries. This is also part of Christiania’s image. Nonetheless, the disobedient ‘Pippi Longstocking’ has thriven oddly in conflict between inside and outside, prolonging Christiania’s existence while providing a reminder that other orders, spaces and
narratives are possible. After the military left Christiania the state-owner had no future plans for the preserved fortifications where Copenhagen Municipality pictured modernist housing estates. This void allowed Christiania’s growth within a permanent state of exception. In 2004, politicians voted for ‘normalisation’: registration of Christianites on individual addresses (previously Bådsmandstræde 43 was common address), construction stop, changes of allotment and ownerships – plus removal of self-builder houses on the embankment. Following Pusher Street’s broaching, public debates, a lost court case against the state, and overtaking the Ark of Peace (one of Christiania’s former military buildings), Christiania officially took over responsibility of the area in 2012 and now tests a non-profit, collective ownership model: a foundation of (inter)national shareholders. Multicultural Tingbjerg with its chameleon demography remains a lowstatus neighbourhood where few choose to settle. This obstructs attraction of newcomers, despite Rasmussen’s iconic architecture and numerous regeneration initiatives. Tingbjerg’s ghetto-reputation contrasts a general satisfaction level among locals, frustrated about discrepancies
between inside and outside perspectives. It is difficult to find reasons to visit Tingbjerg, isolated from society infrastructurally and mentally11. As centrally located tourist site, hangout, toleration zone and urban imaginary, Christiania’s porous enclave with openings in the fence invites outside impulses, although some describe it as silver wedding quarter, stuck in hippienostalgia. Spending money and working hours on homes according to ability, Christianites pay equal ‘rent’, while the community keeps the property’s value when they leave. Taking over responsibility of the area Christianites have started building again after ten years of construction stop. As the Christiania Fund has soley overtaken the right of occupancy of most buildings, the question of ‘whose heritage?’ continues to form a map of diverging interests: military heritage or Christiania heritage, modernist heritage, multicutural heritage... or new urban developments soon changing?
Copenhagen’s ‘New’ New Towns Switching from historian to prophet, I conclude with a panorama of Copenhagen’s ‘new’ New Towns and how we might trace legacies of Tingbjerg and Christiania. Ørestad is almost
realised. Displaying award-winning stararchitecture, the living environment is nevertheless criticised like its modernist uncles. Like ‘old’ New Towns some dismiss Ørestad as ghetto without life, history or identity. Designed during Copenhagen’s poor 1990s the ‘transit city’ with its metro and proximity to the airport and Sweden was planned as a catalyst, stimulating Denmark’s capital (both in urban and economical sense). The metro and Ørestad Boulevard’s axes separates nature from built environment. Shopping is concentrated in Fields’ giant mall. Apartments are well-planned, but many prefer their private balconies or taking the metro to downtown Copenhagen rather than socialising in Ørestad. Still, it is too soon to judge results. Remember it took Copenhagen centuries to reach its current complexity. Probably, Tingbjerg has not obtained it after six decades. Nordhavn’s foundation is under construction. This new extension of Copenhagen’s future New Town has seemingly learned from past experience, launching smaller plots, wider competition between developers and stress-less growing pains. While Ørestad was bound to materialise within two decades, Nordhavn is planned to develop gradually over 50 years (outstanding
…11
12 …
considering how ideals/paradigms have changed since Tingbjerg!). Nordhavn combines aspects of the New Town and the Freetown. Pioneering artificial islands with public transport, traffic separation, social institutions, community ideals, and blueprint, Nordhavn nonetheless is not (wholeheartedly) tabula rasa urbanism. It relates to the historical harbour’s context, developing organically, reusing heritage structures and the sea’s closeness, mixing functions, sustainable solutions, ‘unplanned’ wild nature, etc. This panorama illustrates how lessons from Copenhagen’s ‘dissidents’ continuously stimulate urban development elsewhere. While politicians, planners and locals are (re)negotiating Tingbjerg and Christiania’s future, they form significant watermarks within the city’s ecology. New neighbourhoods need time to cultivate life and identity. History shows that everything is possible and – usually – unimaginable/unpredictable. Perhaps the Freetown and the New Town symbolise segregation or enclavement, but they also disprove the welfare city’s ’identity crisis’, affirming its possible adaption into contemporary reality13. Copenhagen / Denmark’s homogenous, mono-cultural welfare society is adjusting to globalisation and multiculturalism. In
this process, Tingbjerg and Christiania are not opposite utopias, but real places (heterotopias) capable of absorbing difference without naturalising it.
…13
Notes 1. This paper is an edited version of two earlier papers: Marie Bruun Yde & Signe Sophie Bøggild: “Concrete Hells and Wild Imaginations: The New Town and the Freetown in Copenhagen”, in Michelle Provoost (ed.) New Towns for the 21st Century: The Planned vs. the Unplanned City. Amsterdam: SUN, 2010 and Signe Sophie Bøggild: ”Happy Ever After? The Welfare City between the Freetown and the New Town” in Space for Urban Alternatives? Christiania 1971-2011 Håkan Thörn, Cathrin Wasshede & Tomas Nilsson (eds.). Stockholm: Gidlunds Förlag, 2011. 2. Cor Wagenaar (ed.): Happy: Cities and Public Happiness in Post-war Europe. Rotterdam: NAi Publishers, 2004, p. 9. 3. Steen Eiler Rasmussen: Omkring Christiania. Copenhagen: Gyldendal, 1976, p. 35. Author’s translation -all subsequent translations are also by the author. 4. Like its brotherly nations Denmark’s postwar welfare society was virtually a utopia of the Social Democrats, governing either alone or in coalitions with few interruptions since the mid-1920s. 5. Steen Eiler Rasmussen’s Office (1963):
Tingbjerg forklaring til en byplan. Copenhagen: Steen Eiler Rasmussens Tegnestue, p. 21. 6. Formulated by Kim, Kim, Sven, Ole and Jacob in November 1971 ”with right to improvements”, the rest of the manifest reads: “This society shall be self-contained economically and the common goal must continuously be about showing that the mental and physical pollution can be avoided.” See: http://www.christiania.org/ modules. 7. Rasmussen: 1976, p. 51-53. 8. Ibid., p. 10. 9. Ibid., p. 13. 10. Bruun Yde & Bøggild: Op. cit., 2010, p. 88. 11. At the time of writing a contemporary art festival is taking place in Tingbjerg. Entitled Visit Tingbjerg it touches on this double foreclosure towards the New Town’s outside. See the website: http:// kennethbalfelt.org/visittingbjerg/ 12. M. Albæk: “Løkke tager hul på ghettoturné”, in Politiken, 11 August 2010, http://politiken.dk/politik/1033992/ loekke-tager-hul-paa-ghettoturn/ 13. Bruun Yde & Bøggild: Op. cit., p. 91.
• •
Design Brief
Individual Cultural Communal Individual
In 1971, a group of people set off to squat the abandoned military barracks located in Christianhavn in Copenhagen and established what is known as the Freetown of Christiania, a society ‘based on consensus democracy, financial autonomy and ecological life style.’ Since then, it has been a theatre of political, ideological, social and also spatial struggle until 2011 when Christiania struck an agreement with the Danish state whereby Christianites have become owners of the land.
Cultural Public Communal Individual Political
1. identifying the individual, communal and public: outdoor spaces and buildings;
…15Al
No Altern
2. establishing places where social interaction, commerce, cultural and political activities unfold: outdoor spaces and buildings;
Cultural Political Commercial Consumption Public Communal Cultural Commercial Consumption Political Commercial Production Public
3. assessing the number of people in each area and locating rubbish and recycle points: collection and transportation to the reuse station;
No No Wa
Individu No Ele
Litter Bin Ind Commercial Consumption Commercial Production Commu This Political project addresses the new challenges and unknown future posed by the current Shelter situation where revenue needs to be raised to repay theProduction fund made available Commercial Consumption Co Commercial Recycle Point Public Litter Bin to purchase the land. In addition, a 4. surveying the landscape for scattered Shelter vision on how to Imported preserve this unique stack material worthy of reuse; social experiment, while engaging in a Commercial Production Pu ‘normalised’ relationship with the Danish Recycle Point St Stack Material government and the rest of the society, Imported Cu Shelter Pre 1971 5. registering typologies of dwellings, is to be sought. With view to draw from shelter, imported, pre 1971, self-built; Christiania’s rich socio-cultural, political Energy Alternative and environmental identity, the project Pre 1971 Cultura Shelter Imported Pol SelfofBuild seeks to map the traces life and ways of living in the Freetown in order to grasp 6. noting dwellings off the grid and No Water Alternative Energy the unplanned and permanently in- the- alternative energy sources. making Self Build Co Imported Prearea. 1971 Politica The elements mapped are as follows: No Electricity No Water Alternative Comme Pre 1971 Co Self Build Energy No Electricity
16 …
The urban responses included in this book address three main challenges relevant to the current context of Christiania:
1. Widening the notion of heritage Heritage not only related to the military barracks, self-built houses and military ramparts but also to the socio-cultural heritage (social organisation, selfgovernance, autonomous status). Whose (hi)story is to be preserved? What could be the transferable lessons from Christiania addressing ‘alternative ways of living, social and cultural processes, creativity, art and technical innovations’ ?
2. Creating alternative economic models Building or expanding on the existing economy of Christiania and introducing new economic/productive activities relevant to the local scale. Reflecting on social and spatial innovation in Christiania as well as considering economy of exchange.
3. Making room Addressing the challenges posed by an ageing population and people who do not fit in the welfare-system whilst envisaging
‘new comers’ in particular the younger generations. Reflecting on how the ‘new comers’ could participate to the socio, economic and political structures of the Freetown. In order to frame these challenges, a series of design parameters were set to develop a spatial proposal within one of the eight study areas in which Christiania was subdivided for the purpose of this study: 1. The area of project is defined by a tactical approach whereby students engage with an existing element to preserve or build upon (this could be an existing building, an activity, a revenue source or cooperative patterns). 2. The proposal is consider within guidelines of timescale both for the spatial design and the participant commitment. 3. The project aims to reflect the processled approach of Christiania as opposed to a closed strategy. 4. The project engages in an economy of means both materially but also in land consumption, whose spatial consequences are to build on, adds to and fill in.
1
*
2
7
3 5
6
4
…17
8
Map of 8 Study Areas
References Delanty G. (2010), Community, Oxon, Routledge Hellström, Maria (2006). Steal this place – The Aesthetics of Tactical Formlesness and ‘The Freetwon of Chrsitiania’. Diss., Alnarp : Sveriges lantbruksuniv., Acta Universitatis agriculturae Sueciae: http:// pub.epsilon.slu.se/1319/ Lefebvre H (1996), The Right to the City in Writings on Cities, Oxford, Blackwell
Tietjen Anne (2008), Polarised territories and new spatial prototypes, Working Paper #5, Department of Landscape and Urbanism, Aarhus School of Architecture. http://aarch.dk/fileadmin/grupper/ institut_ii/PDF/Arbejdspapir_05_2008_ AT.pdf Thörn H, Wasshede C and Nilson T (Eds) (2011), Space for Urban Alternatives?, Gothenburg, Gildlunds Förlag
Mathie, A. & Cunningham, G. (2002), From Clients to Citizens: Asset-Based Community Development as a strategy for community-driven development. Occasional Paper Series, Nº4
Web resources
Mollerup Merete Ahnfeldt, DirckinckHolmfeld Kim, Keiding Martin, Reddersen Jakob (2004), Learning from Christiania, Arkitektens Forlag
http://www.crir.net/about.html
Provoost, Michelle (Ed.) (2010), New Towns for the 21st Century - The Planned versus the Unplanned City, Amsterdam, SUN
Maps: http://kbhkort.kk.dk/ Christiania Researcher in Residence (CRIR): Christiania tours: http://www.rundvisergruppen.dk/ indexENG.htm Christiania’s web site: http://www.christiania.org/
Shelter
Cultural
Imported
Political
Individual
Pre 1971
Commercial Consumption
Communal
Self Build
Commercial Production
Public
Mapping Christiania
N
Alternative Energy No Water
Litter Bin
No Electricity
Recycle Point
Stack Material
People make places more than places make people
“
“
Worpole and Knox 2007
> Unfolding Christiania Behnaz Djabarouti, Rebecca Frost and Jessie Xu Christiania is notorious for Pushers Street and the act of ‘pushing’; while this embraces the idea of a ‘freetown’ it can dominate the street scene. There is not a true path that exemplifies the other unique elements of Christiania and the skills of the residents. There are many workshops, cafe’s, halls and gathering points but a lot of these are internal spaces; we want to ‘unfold’ these to expose the heart of Christiania – tradition and skills sharing. Using theories of ‘LOOSE SPACE’ by Franck and Stevens 2006; our urban intervention opens up an alternative route for us to explore. We have proposed a combination of temporary and permanent structures to identify the route, but we want the residents of Christiania and visitors to play with the structures by building their own using stack material, adapting them and using them as they wish. Franck and Stevens (2006, p.12) identify this adaptability and diversity as being key to creating loose space - “the emergence of a loose space depends upon; first, people’s recognition of the potential within the space and, second, varying degrees of creativity and determination to make use of what is present, possibly modifying existing elements or bringing in additional ones”.
Many workshops are very successful in Christiania such as the Christiania bike shop and the Kvindesmedien (metal workshop), we want to utilise these to kick start activity through skills sharing and space to exchange. The permanent structures would be installed first to designate the route, each would have specific roles such as community boards to advertise events, artwork to mark the route, structures to enable tables or work space to share skills or exchange goods and screens to shield pushers street through sight (plants) and smell (flowers), but to not totally disconnect the space. The temporary structures act as interactive elements in public spaces throughout the route. We want them to be part of Christiania so they would be made from stack materials (a core principle of Christiania being to reuse and recycle), and by local artists (although everyone is welcome to build their own). The core focus is on the public space to the south of Pushers Street, something we feel is a missed opportunity. It already showcases artwork made by residents, so why not unfold it and show it off? We have modified the space with this ‘new’ public place as the focus to create a new community hub for all to enjoy.
…21
An alternative route through Christiania
22 ‌
Existing activities, social hubs and materials
Analysing the site
‌23
Understanding the space
Material location and temporary structure storage
24 ‌
Wood-Scrap
Temporary Structures
Wood -Stack
Interact
Metal
Bricks
Slate
Clothes
Sit
Display
Temporary structures can have different uses - people can make what they
Permanent structures and associated uses
Screen
Some would act as a screen to Pusher Street visually, but also add different smells through the use of flowers
Signage Community notice boards can be used to shield Pushers Street but also connect residents and visitors
Build
Artwork
Local artists can construct their own archways and showcase their work, unfolding Christiania’s true skills
Exchange Exchange spaces would be created to enable the sharing of skills and ideas
Exchange
want with them, loosening the space and inspiring people to get involved
‌25
26 …
…27
“
“
This route... will help visitors discover another Christiania - artistic, unique and creative.
> Alternative paths Olga Elkoniuk, Jesus D Hernandez-Rangel and Ruifangyi Xu The studied site is located near the main entrance to Christiania and include as a large amount of empty public spaces as an extremely private territory. These circumstances cause the conflict between private and public and create uncertainty in orientation in the space. According to Jane Jacobs, one of the key future of pleasant environment is a clear distinction between private, public and semi private space. Once our group found out that our site does not response to those principals, we decided to resolve this conflict by reinforcing public space and reorganizing tourist movement across the site. Using basic laws of legibility, described by Lynch, we decided to create a strong rout from the entrance to the big square in the middle of the site which will be satturated with a large amount of activities, such as learning, performance, leisure and trade. This rout will be an alternative to the existing path from the entrance to pusher street and will help visitors to discover another christiania - artistic, unique and creative. The strong accent on public space will help tourists to navigate in space and the new playground between residential area and active square will serve as a buffer zone
and protect private life of dwellers from unwelcomed intervention. In order to achieve our goal we decided to use all benefits and heritage of Christiania such as a large amount of stored materials and sculpture work. We decided that bricks wood and stones from recycling points and dwellers’ courtyards could be used for providing leading surface. Sculptures and works of Christiania’s artists could serve as a landmarks. These tools will lead people to the focal point of the project - square which will represent to visitors all beauty of christiania and will focus their attention on the one of the most important public buildings - The Grey Hall. In our project The Grey Hall plays a key role since it is both a space for events and a hostel with making rooms. We strongly believe that our project could help to resolve not only environmental problems of the site but could also help to Christiania to gain a profit from unused territories. We represent a square which is now completely empty as a strong commercial point which will give a large amount of business opportunities for Christiania dwellers.
‌29
Phasing Diagram Main visitor path.
Bricks will be used for paving (p.5)
Wood will be used for seating(p.6)
E
NC
RA ENT
REY
G
30 …
AL NTI
A ARE
E
ID RES
ER SH PU
FE
CA
T
EE
STR
CONTEXT E
NC
RA ENT
$ $ $$
$
STAGE 1: FESTIVAL
S NT
ME RT A AP
LL
HA
$ $ $$
$
Income
Accommodation
E
NC
RA ENT
…31 $ $ $$
$
STAGE 2: YOUTH ACTIVITY E
NC
RA ENT
n tio c e S
$ $ $$
$
STAGE 3: CHRISTIANIA MARKET
$ $ $$
$
on
ti Sec
Section and DetailsPLAYEXISTING RESIDENTIAL
TRIBUNES
STAGE
EVENT: PER FO
ING EW
D
RI TOU STS
LA
TS RTIS
NC
KI
DS
E LOCAL AN
RS
ANCE RM
LOC A
DE
EVENT :V I
TR A
LOCAL DWELL
ACTORS
E
WEEK DA Y
S:
KS H
OP
AL
AC CO M M
LO TM EN
TS
OD AT IO N
Step-seating, composed of modular pieces.
Grey Hall, adds workshops and accommodation.
SE AT S
PA RT Y
SP AC E
W OR
CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
AUD IE
32 …
CHANGE OF ACTIVITIES
SECTION
GROUND
REA ET A UI
CE PA
L CRAF CA
LO
SM ORT EN SP
Brick pavement, decorated by Christianites.
mm
300 mm
ST AG E
PA VE
M
EN
T
500
…33
LO CA LLERS
ERS TOURIST S
EN SM
FOR CROW D
WE LD
M TO
T
CU S
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
EVENT :S
ARE SQU
Q
S:
JOGGING PATH
WEEKDAYS:
WEEK DA Y
MARKET
Stage, consist of modular pieces from seating.
Perspective View
34 ‌
…35
“
“
People are lonely because they build walls instead of bridges. Abraham Lincoln
> Bridging Chen Cheng, Aly Sabaa, Stuart Taylor and Annabelle Sarah Whiteley-Walker Whilst researching within Christiania, it became apparent that the nature of the environment varied greatly; from main land Christiania to the adjacent barrack strip. Unlike the urban slum perceived around the area of Pusher Street, across the wooden bridge lies a man-made longitudinal green island historically used as a military barracks for the protection of Copenhagen. The existing natural beauty and the country lane aspect of the strip are of major significance to Christiania’s heritage and are in need of protection. The strip is not completely connected to the network of Christiania. We observed the northern area drifting towards urbanization with a higher dependency on cars. This fragmentation is ultimately resulting in the gradual dissolution of core Christiania principles. As John Montgomery advocates in ‘Making a city’ an active public realm is needed, which is supported by a network of spaces where meeting, interaction, movement and exchange are possible. To develop our understanding, investigations involving the study of movement patterns across Christiania were carried out, using mapping exercises focusing on the various speeds of travel, user’s movement preferences, frequency and intensity.
In the northern area we propose an intervention that will ensure connectivity of the strip with the rest of Christiania; to prevent the outlying communities from further fragmentation via the improvement of the public realm. The proposal includes the installation of a second bridge linking the strip to main land Christiania. The bridge will primarily be installed in a rustic form serving its most basic function of connectivity. As time progresses, collected resources will allow the bridge to evolve increasing its quality and functionality. The increase in footfall across the bridge will provide additional trade for the existing cafe helping to boost trade all year round. The adjacent play and decking areas will also benefit; creating a vibrant environment, bringing activity back to an under used space. Taking influence from a traditional village market; the provision for temporary stalls across the bridge will allow members of Christiania to sell produce and crafts in their own environment as an alternative to Pushers Street. The integration of all the elements within our proposal are designed to create a cohesive, sustainable and vibrant environment that focuses on connectivity, economy, recycling and the reclamation of disused space.
…37
Context The strip “Dyssen” is surrounded by diverse urban context that demonstrates the sources of users that ranges from cyclist, dog walkers, hikers, joggers and passing by pedestrians, and the arrows show intensity and the frequency of using the routes inside Christiania.
4
1 5 2
38 …
3 3
11 4
10
9
7 5
11 6
8 2 6
Existing Movement Pattern
7
8
9
10
Dyssen Cafe
11
Concept The path through the area of Dyssen extends and meanders along the strip allowing a prolonged interaction with the natural environment. This scarcely inhabited portion of Christiania hosts a seasonal cafĂŠ, a humble wooden jetty and small beach, that will be enhanced by the proposed scheme.
Dyssen Cafe Focus Area
Christianshavn Christiania
Cafe
Proposed Movement Pattern
‌39
Project Process
Banks Cafe opens for the summer Use of local Materials DK
Rope Ferry
Public realm improvement Increased user group
40 ‌
DK
Cafe opens all year Will developed regular customers.
Rope Bridge
Community activities DK
Rope and boat are provided DK
The cafe will start affecting the surrounding area, making it more popular to visit resulting in the improvement of the rope ferry
Pontoon Bridge
Money is raised for a first bridge DK
The improved connection further increases activity and interest in the area
More money for improvement raised bridge
Bridge Shelters
Improvement increase accessibility
DK DK
Bridge Project Further development of the connection with the rest of Christiania. This can lead to the development of more sustainable water front space
Plan The improvement of the public realm along the strip will encourage increased flow. The bridge will act as a magnet attracting people from north, south Dyssen and main land. This will reconnect Dyssen with Christiania.
Cafe Activities
‌41
Bridge Users and Activities Cyclist
Seasonal Cafe
Bike Racks Dog Walker
Horse Rider Runner Social Shelters
Pop up Stalls
Young Parent Precedents and Axonometer
Across the Bridge
Development Area
42 ‌
Through the Site
On the Bridge
‌43 By the Cafe
“
‘We want to grow our own food. We want to be self sufficient. We want permaculture. But the soil is too polluted.’
“
> Christiania’s ReGenesis Jeremy Murray, Davoud Hafshejani, Lan Gao (Gary) and Xinrui Wang (Jane) Due to extreme soil pollution, Christianites have found it impossible to grow their own food. Yet, all around, you’ll find evidence of those trying to grow vegetables in containers, raised beds or the like. The local buzz word is ‘permaculture’. At the local visitor’s center we found this image of a dandelion. And like Christiania, this is considered a weed invading the accepted normal surround. But what is often not considered of dandelion is it’s usefulness; they can be consumed and they act as pollinator, while improving soil quality. We see this image as symbolizing a new beginning Christiania, how outsider perception can change, how the local environment can improve and how this can grow into a global methodology. This can be accomplished by implementing a soil rehabilitation program. The process is simple; let plants absorb contaminates. While this is not an immediate solution to growing edibles, this process lends itself towards future generation’s ability to grow food. This program is also allows for trifold benefit. By selecting plants which clean the soil while providing a by-product, local
community members are afforded job opportunities. This would be seen in byproducts that would either not contain pollutants or not be consumed. Such plants include sunflower (Helianthus annuus), hops (Humulus lupulus), and hemp (Cannabis Sativa Indica). Sunflower seeds would not absorb metallic toxins that the parent plant does, therefore it can be used for oil production. Hops can absorb organic pollutants, yet such would be destroyed during any fermentation process of creating beer. Hemp absorbs the most harmful soil pollution, however it’s textile uses are endless. The third benefit is found in the educational opportunities this would provide the larger Copenhagen context. Local school groups, community members and novice gardeners would learn from Christiana as an inspiring environmental movement; towards permaculture and global stainability. Permaculture: Is a design system for creating sustainable human environments; based on observation of natural systems. It aims to create a permanent culture.
…45
The Process
46 ‌ Sunflowers are used with high organic pollutants. Plantings are usually around 20,000-22,000 per acre or 6 plants per m2. Hemp is used in areas of high metal contamination. The entire plant must be removed at the end of the growing season to ensure no metals return to the soil. Hemp requires little field preparation and grows like a grass. Harvest yields around 2.5-3 t/ac.
Phytodegradation: Plants which take up and break down organic pollutants through photosynthetic reduction. These pollutants are incorporated into the plant. Hops
Contaminated Soil: The most common soil pollutions found in former military compounds are metals and organics. Metals are composed of iron and lead; while organics include oils and various poisons and pesticides.
Hops are for use in medium organic contaminant areas. The hop plant is a vine that produces annual stems from a perennial crown. Plants are grown on a trellis at a density of 800 hills/acre producing 3,200 lb/acre. Winter Rye or other grass is needed for crop rotation each year. This acts as a nitrogen replenisher.
Phytoextraction: Plants which take up metals and accumulate these in their stems and leaves. Plants must be harvested and disposed. Hemp
Phytovolatilization: Plants which take up contaminates, transform or degrade them into less toxic substances, and then release them into the air. Sunflower
‌47
Connecting Communities & Education with Economy
Production Model
48 ‌
Concept Plan & Phasing Bypass Pusher Street
Year 1 1st Sunflower feild acts as Catalist. Employment begins with few.
Proposed Movement
Central Plaza
1
Gardening EDU Year 3 Hemp, Hops & 2nd Sunflower feilds; & their required Production Shops. Greenhouse constructed for EDU. Employment increases.
‌49 2
Woodworking EDU 3
Greenhouse EDU
2
1
4
6
3
5
Year 5 P.O.D.s, Outdoor EDU Space (woodworking, recycle art & greenhouse); Connects to Local Schools. Employment High.
Recycle EDU
4
5
Outdoor P.O.D. Space 6
50 ‌
Main Entrance & Plaza, Greenhouse, Sunflower Feild & Hemp Workshop
Hops & Sunflower Production Shops Barrack
Workshop
Greenhouse
Skate Park
Hemp Field Workshop
‌51
Hops Feild, Play Feild & P.O.D.s Barrack
Play Field
Hops Field
P.O.D.s
“
This programme will allow for those concerned to be given a structured environment in which they can gain vital skills and a better life structure.
“
> Growing a Social Care Structure of Wellbeing
Christiania has progressed from a free town of local radicals to an established diverse community within the last 40 years. This has caused a shift in needs within this community. Initially Christiania had a relatively young population comprised of individuals with little need for long term social care. Today Christiania’s community is ageing, and there is little provision for not only the elderly but those with mental disabilities. At present there is a medical facility on site which is partially state-funded; however any long term care is directed outside of Christiania. The community is self-supporting in almost every other way apart from the long term care of the elderly and vulnerable. In this urban intervention an established community run centre had been provided. A waterfront education and community building is coupled with a series of allotment
Matt Lippiatt, Nan Li & Zidan Lin
which crosses Christiania. This axial route of allotments aims to connect existing allotments from within Christiania to ones within Copenhagen, while simultaneously connecting both regions. This rehabilitation is paramount within Christiania, and this programme will allow for those concerned to be given a structured environment in which they can gain vital skills and a better life structure. Food produce grown can then be used within the proposed education centre to teach cookery to individuals. Food produced will be for the community which reinforces Christiania’s ideals of democracy and sharing of resources internally, rather than for financial gain. This long term approach to Christiania’s social care needs not only helps to define its own cultural identity but that of its relationship with the rest of Copenhagen, which it will need to survive as a community.
THE CURRENT SITUATION WE MUST BE PROVIDED FOR
54 …
WE MUST CONNECT
OUR LAND CAN BE DECONTAMINATED
RESEARCH | STRATEGY LEARNING AND CONNECTING TO URBAN FARMS
CONNECTING TO THE EXISTING CARE STRUCTURE
…55
Phase 1 Absorb Toxic Substances with Mushrooms
Phase 2 Transition Flowers
Phase 3 Grow Food
SITE PLAN - 1:2000 N
1: PATHWAY 2: ALLOTMENTS 56 …
LT H C A
4: CONNECTION
C ATI
OT
L
MEN
T
NN
EC TI O N
CO
AL
DU
ON
E
EA
RE
H
3: COMMUNITY CENTRE
1. PATHWAY
…57
2. ALLOTMENTS
3. COMMUNITY CENTRE
TEACH
DEBATE
58 …
PRODUCE 4. CONNECTION
PREPARE
COOK
RESEARCH
ENJOY
…59
“
“
Children are great imitators, so give them something great to imitate. Anonymous
> Empowering Children: Jesse Kiely, Jerzy Smolarek and Jing Yuan An exploration through Christiania’s heritage and humble beginnings is an inspirational journey that has created a unique culture alongside a legacy of tradition, respect and overwhelming pride. The community faces the challenge of ensuring this special culture is instilled upon the next generation within a safe and happy environment; currently supported by the largest single expenditure of collected rent money directed towards the support of four children and adolescent facilities. Our project focuses on the area surrounding the very successful Solyst (After-School Centre) and adjacent building. Whilst this facility continues to thrive, there is a need for expansion to sustain an increasing population of children. We aim to build upon the existing facility with a three-part approach: The Udforsk Kultur Program, Arv Arks and Born Festival. The scheme will re-use derelict space, support alternative economy and create an empowered environment designed to teach Christiania’s heritage to children. Children benefit, experimentally, from having autonomy to create their own environment and should have access to interesting and adaptable space (Carl Theodor Sørensen, 1931, Danish Architect) Social capital networks within community engagement projects founded upon the ‘free-space movement’
encourage the exchange of skills, tools and local knowledge in the process of self-build construction. ‘A place where nothing goes to waste’ ensures large unwanted items and materials are sustainably recycled or re-used. Social fabric is enhanced by collective action through entrepreneurial initiatives such as festivals, music and theatre. (Helen Jarvis, 2011) The project is aspirational, and aims to inspire not prescribe. A natural, stimulating environment offering risk and opportunity through bespoke, self built Arv Ark structures that allow children to manipulate natural and fabricated materials, use tools and create, through imagination, using recycled or sustainably sourced materials. The Ramparts’ unique geographical features are used to add play value through exploration of space and creation of empowering vantage points.
…61
‘Udforsk Kultur’ Programme
(Explore Culture Programme)
62 …
This intensive, fun packed programme takes 3 years to complete and aims to keep the existing unique culture alive by passing down skills, knowledge & know-how to the children of Christiania. 20 children (aged 5-10) /Per Year
Adults volunteer their time to teach their skills to the children in the programme in one of the following subjects as well as aid in the fabrication of the Arv Arks.
The programme runs from September to May. After school hours, on saturdays & holidays (except summer). Below is the full timeline for each year of the programme:
‌63
‘Arv Arks’ (Heritage Arks)
64 …
The Arv Arks aim to contribute to the culture & learning of the children in Christiania. This is the best possible way to have children experience the ‘build it yourself’ culture that has always existed in Christiania. The Arks are essentially platforms built to facilitate a specific activity.
…65
‘Børn Festival’
(Childrens Festival) The Børn Festival is a one day festival, open to everyone, showcasing everything the children have learnt while participating in the Udforsk Kultur programme. Those who completed the first and second year of the programme have the opportunity to exhibit some of their creations, fix and decorate bikes, as well as perform theatre and music shows. Once the festival has reached its third year the Arv Arks that were created that year will be unveilled for all to enjoy over the summer.
66 …
…67
A place for the exchange of ideas and skills.
“
“
> Christiania Skilled James Cogan, Kamila Bobrzak and Xiao Feng Lu The future of Christiania as a selfautonomous and self-sufficient enclave within Copenhagen, Denmark relies on future generations of residents being equipped with the skills required to maintain the Freetown’s independence and, the preservation of the revolutionary ideology from which Christiania was born. The first forty years of Christiania’s existence is typified as a struggle against its normalisation by the Danish authorities, while this threat has passed, a new and more subtle threat has risen, that of normalisation via the increasing number of Copenhagen residents opting to settle in the Freetown while not subscribing to the principles that epitomise Christiania. The proposal is one that will provide the opportunity for residents to be trained in the skills that are needed to address the issues that they have identified, through the development of a skills exchange space. This skills exchange space will build upon the sites existing role as a place of exchange, cultural activity and craftsmanship, creating a flexible space suitable for the training of residents in any identified skill requirement. Physically the proposal adopts structures and building materials for flexible uses, ensuring that the proposal supplements Christiania’s built heritage,
linking the historic pre-1971 architecture and post-1971 urban character. The proposal also has strong links with the economic and social heritage of Christiania. The programme draws heavily from the principles of consensus democracy within Christiania, with the identification of needs and the recruitment of mentors based upon existing political structures in the Freetown from the Common Meeting to the Christiania Researcher in Residence (CRIR) Steering Group. Economically the proposal pays respect to the idea of Christiania as an exchange economy, with the exchange of good, ideas and skills as prevalent as the exchange of money, with mentors exchanging their expertise for accommodation and food. Although the proposal is designed to maximise the exchange economy within Christiania, Christiania increasingly requires contribution to the ‘common pot’ therefore the proposal has been designed so money can be recouped from the built elements at times of reduced exchange activity. Overall the proposal addresses the need to equip residents with the skills needed to maintain Christiania’s independence from Copenhagen in a way that respects the political, economic and environmental characteristics of Christiania.
…69
Existing Activity Hub
70 ‌
i diati o n
c
e
Ass t
e
e
S oc
ur
ia
Se
e
a re S truc
Based De e l o p m nt
Se
lC
ts
ve
Pu b
li
S q u a re
a ge N o
Pa
Pa
ge N o
ge
No
Se
No
Se e
Se
n
P
eN
o
o
tio n
C on
n
E mp
ec
r i n g C hi l d re
we
ag
Se
eP
a ge N o
l
ge
a
a eP
a ge N o
U nfo
Pa
C h ri sti
e
ng
ni
di
eP
em
Se
R
La nd
Identyfying Needs
Programme
Phasing
‌71
Advertisement
Benefits
al Livin g Me
un
Com
m
Accommodation and Studio
m bin g
tA
72 ‌
d Work
4
W
oo
1
2
cti viti es
Ar
P lu
Work
tal
Bi
epair ke R
accommodation access
an
L
3
Bed Bed Bed Common Bed Bed Bed Area
View 3
View 1
dscaping
Metal Work
>> Training Platform
Art
Woodwork
Bike Repair
Landscaping
View 2
‌73
o
n ha
En
io
cc
c
x eE
isti
ng Exchange and
cre
a
ub
ns
dA
h te
cti vity for a
Exte
Stu dios an
i on d at
View 4
sti ng
mo
74 ‌
o
xi fE
m
n
Skills exchange space
th
is
ta gS
ge -
precedent f or
tra
i
ng
ti n
tural style
tf orm
itec
p la
Ex
ce
ni
is
ainers - infl uen
ch ar
Ex
o nt
e
ti
C ng
‌75
“
True belonging is born of relationship not only to one another but to a place of shared responsibility and benefits. We love not so much what we have aquired as what we have made and who we have made it with.
“
> The B-Hive Irina korneychuk, Minh Dung Le and Hsiu-l Lee Located at the North end of Christiania, the study site gives an alternative vibe to the image of Christiania that belongs to artists and activities nestled deep in tranquillity and serenity of the landscape untouched by rushing human activities. Scattered across the site, captivatingly, we found a lot of original and unique sculptures, artworks that resemble a different touch and sense of place. There are two well-knitted communities of 39 people within our study site, which are the Blue Caramel, and BjĂ˜rnekloen. Each of them functions exceedingly well as a single community unit. The problem being is that there seems to be a sense of disconnection and isolation between the two communities and between them with the rest of Christiania. Therefore, their invaluable assets of innovation (democratic radio, eco-friendly lifestyle) and creativity (artworks) are hidden. With those findings, we came up with the idea of utilising the existing community assets to create a stronger connection between the communities and their people in order to provide the alternative image of Christiania and enhance the invaluable assets of creativity and innovation within the site. This
approach can be formally known as the Assets-Based Community Development (ABCD). This kind of approach also plays an important role in fulfilling of our three main objectives for our interventions, which are widening the notion of heritage by fostering creativity and skill sharing; promoting an alternative economic model by operating Christiania pedal boats; and making room by providing new social spaces. Our specific solution resolves in the creation of a new multi-functional space that runs as a small workshop, exhibition area and a social space. This space is located between Blue Caramel and BjĂ˜rnekloen; and will be managed by members of the whole community . The construction of the place is an upper-floor extension of an exciting building that is currently a workshop on site. The creation of such a space relies on the exciting assets of the whole study site literally and figuratively. In the process of building something, by themselves, people will move closer to each other and will developed a sense of awareness about their image within Christiania. Such space also gives way to future developments that tie the people together.
‌77
c hil d
re
re 39
n
si d e nts v is
sts ar ti
i t o rs
ex h
it & t ra d e
socializing
il sk
l s h a rin g
l eis
w o rks h
e
td
o or space
ex h
ib iti o n are a
ou
w are h
us
o
p
o
u re
a r t & cr
ft s
ib
s
Actors, Activities and Space
a
78 ‌
‌79
Aspiration, Inspiration and Action
From Macro to Micro
micro
80 ‌
meso
macro
ia oc
li z i n g
e
c a tio n
s
e
du
xh
ibi tio n
‌81
Imagine...
an d ro o ft op
iv e
a rd
r
H B-
6. b
t h e s h el te r
uil
di
u 2.
i ti liz
e th
4. building
p
en
to
1. r
n g a d ja c en
t ti n g
u
st r 3 . co n 5. p
h e work
n ie gp
re p a r i n g p
at s
ng cti
82 ‌
a ov
bo
cy
Spatial Manifestation
e
n
p ac sho
ub
ga
de
s en
p
r a n d p ro d u c
li
i ng
kl o
en
Bj o r
ne
el
Bl u e
Ca
m ra
arti sts
un
i
s ti e
‌83
un
it
cati on
y o f co m m
edu
39 r
es
de
i
biti
on
nee
ia
Ch
r
ng
i an ist
And it all started like that...
exh i
ac ti on
ing
d ef i ni
ializ
ds a nd g
oa
nt s
soc
ls
• •
Contributors
Mishari Ali, Kamila Bobrzak, Signe Sophie Bøggild, Chen Cheng, James Cogan, Behnaz Djabarouti, Olga Elkoniuk, Rebecca Frost, Lun Gao, Georgia Giannopoulou, Jesus Hernandez-Rangel, Jesse Kiely, Irina Korneychuk, Minh Dung Le, Hsiu-I Lee, Nan Li, Zidan Lin, Matthew Lippiatt, Xiao Feng Lu, Daniel Mallo, Davoud Moradpour Hafshejani, Jeremy Murray, John Pløger, Aly Sabaa, Jerzy Czeslaw Smolarek, Stuart Taylor, Armelle Tardiveau, Tim Townshend, Xinrui Wang, Annabelle Whiteley-Walker, Ruifangyi Xu, Yingbo Xu and Jing Yuan.
School of Architecture Planning and Landscape The Quadrangle Newcastle University Newcastle upon Tyne NE1 7RU United Kingdom Š 2013 Newcastle University Designed by James Longfield Photographs by Daniel Mallo
‘[Every heterotopia has]“the ability to juxtapose in a single real place several emplacements that are incompatible in themselves” such as Christiania comprising middle class housing, pusher-street, business, and social dumping.’ John Pløger
ISBN: 978-0-7017-0247-2