Meeting at “ours” (Cornelia Ahlstedt

MEETING AT “OURS“

CORNELIA AHLSTEDT

This key project focuses on developing an “ours” place where an Urban main street, a Local main street and Kvillestr ket intersect in a public square. The project aims to create a social-

General context

The area of this key project covers an area that is defined by the proposed masterplan to become what we call an “ours” place. The masterplan is founded on the idea to shift the hierarchy between human and infrastructure to create a more cohesive and human-scale area, as the area for the masterplan today is focused around car use.

The site for the key project is located on Hisingen in the area of Backaplan and Aröd.

Today the area for the key project is an industrial and commercial area with large-scale shopping which, by the masterplan, is proposed to change to a mixed use area more suitable for human scale movement and activities. The masterplan suggests an Urban main street and a Local main street which passes the area in an east-west direction and north-south direction respectively. The intersection of these two main streets and the green and blue structure of Kvillestråket is the midpoint and starting point of this key project.

Looking at the analysez made on the proposed network for the masterplan (next page) we can see that the location of the key project has good accessibility and high centrality. It tells us that there will be a flow of people on the site and that the Urban and Local main roads will be relatively busy streets. These conditions create a possibility for an economic cluster to appear on the site. The conditions that the network together with the masterplan provides gives the potential to create a strong urban life at the location, hence an “ours” place is created here.

Backaplan today

Kvillebäcken

The key project area today

Angular Integration 5k

< 405 405 - 745 745 - 1135 1135 - 1565 1565 - 2005 2005 - 2465 > 2465

Network Betweenness 5k

<2 600 000 2 600 000 - 9 850 000 9 850 000 - 22 500 000 > 22 500 000

MEETING AT “OURS“ | General context

Angular Integration 5k non motorized network Network Betweenness 5k non motorized network

Problem description

The current situation in the area within which the masterplan and the key project are developed is as follows; plots are big and one use only, e. i. “mono-functional”. The area is centered around car use and consists of mainly large-scale shopping and industry which leads to that the majority of the plots consist of huge hardened surfaces, which is good for cars but undesired for humans and ecology.

The green structures in the area always seem distant, usually present to some extent but never accessible. Kvillebäcken that runs through the area has a walking path running along it today, but it is poorly integrated and not that enjoyable. There is a sharp border where the local (the neighbourhood square) meets the large-scale anonymity (Gothenburg city center) and since all the neighbourhoods are the same scale, offering similar environments and services, there are little reasons for interaction between them.

Based on site visits and analysis that was made by the group in the early work of the masterplan four main problems with the area were stated. Each corresponds to an objective that together intends to realize the vision. This project touches to a greater extent three of them and has an extra focus on one.

1. Isolated and monofunctional land use Focus

2. Social disconnection

1. Cohesive and mixed land use 2. Strengthen social ties 3. Invisible and inaccessible nature

3. Strengthen green and blue structures 1. As a mixed land use is suggested in the masterplan, the proposal aims to create conditions for this to happen in the creation of plots and functions allowed in these.

2. Creating conditions that enable a strong urban life to take place, where a mix of people are present.

3. Letting the green take space and enable the use of the parks and Kvillestråket for many people.

MEETING AT “OURS“ | Concept

1. Social-Ecological meetingplace The main concept is the exploration and development of a site where both social and ecological aspects meet at an intersection point in a location with relatively high centrality.

2. “Ours” Place Focus on creating conditions for a strong urban life and take advantage of the potentials that the network and masterplan provides. Adding a nuance of urban life that is missing in the area today.

3. Highlight green Allow for the green to take place and utilize the potential in Kvillestråket. Create diverse green rooms in the area, which cater to various functions and activities, with both social and ecological aspects in mind. Make Kvillebäcken to the link instead of the divider of the areas on respective sides.

4. Privacy for residents Creating clear borders between public and private territories using building typologies in the form of closed blocks.

5. Human scale Shifting from large-scale shopping centered around car use to sequences of attractions easily accessed by walking. Prioritizing human scale movement with good walking and biking possibilities. Elements for good orientation possibilities.

6. Differentiate streets Create a differentiation between streets, in a homogenous network, using building heights and land use. 1. Social-Ecological meetingplace

4. Privacy for residents 2. “Ours” Place

5. Human scale 3. Highlight green

6. Differentiate streets

An “ours“ place

As pointed out in the problem description earlier there is a sharp border where the local meets the large-scale anonymity and since all the neighbourhoods are the same scale, offering similar environments and services, there are little reasons for interaction between them. Legeby et al. (2015) points out the importance of a variety of situations of co-presence in public space as they are all playing a crucial role for development of social inclusion and cohesion. Thus, what is missing in the area is this variety of urban life: a nuance between the local and the anonymous large-scale. Therefore the masterplan proposes three notions for urban life: “mine”, “ours” and ”everyone’s”, where an “ours” place should be created at the site of this key project.

An “ours” place is the step between the local small scale and the big anonymous city, where different neighobourhoods meet. It is a public setting that strengthens community and the sense of belonging for a larger area. At an “ours” place there is a mix of people and both primary and secondary relations are present. It should be an arena for co-presence to take place.

According to Legeby (2021) the level of mix of urban life in public space is encouraged by; closeness to streets with high centrality, well integrated neighbouring areas, centrality at different scales and spatial reach. These are conditions created by urban form, especially through the network. The network proposed by the masterplan creates these conditions on the site of the key project. Legeby (2021) also points out attractions and local goal points as an encouragement for a mixed public space; which are conditions that can be established by land use regulations.

mine mine

mine ours everyone’s

P r i m a r y Primary and secondary relations Secondary relations Co-presence; “The simultaneous presence of individuals in the same physical location, not necessarily engaged in face-to-face interaction with each other.” (Oxford University Press, n.d.)

MEETING AT “OURS“ | Urban design proposal

The key project explores the creation of a social-ecological meeting place and aims to establish an our’s place at the location of the project. In order to achieve this the project focuses on creating conditions for strong urban life to happen.

Elements from the masterplan; street typologies, density, greenery and land use have been applied according to the masterplan but explored in detail on a smaller scale.

Following the masterplan, the key project proposes mix use blocks along main roads and residential blocks deeper in the network. Mix use blocks have active ground floors, where offices, commercial activities and public functions can take place, with in general housing on top.

As the Angular Integration analysis shows a fairly homogeneous network in the aspect of centrality in the area the key project proposes a variation in building heights in an attempt to differentiate the streets and their hierarchy. Being a busy area with relatively high flow of people, creation of private and calm territories and clear borders between private and public becomes important. Therefore the design proposal suggests closed blocks throughout the area of the key project.

Plots are created so each block has a courtyard that contains both private parts and in the middle a mutual club good territory. A variation of plot sizes in mix use blocks allow different public and commercial functions to take place in ground floors.

Focus point in the project is the intersection of the Urban main street, Local main street and Kvillestråket at which a public square and park is located. The goal is to create an arena for social life and co-presence that brings the bigger area of the masterplan and surrounding areas together. To attract a mix of people to the public space activities for different ages are created along with a mix of functions.

Human scale movement with good walking and biking possibilities and elements for good orientation are proposed as well as sequences of attractions easily accessed by walking. The key project is an area where a human to human connection is established as the public spaces provide a setting for social exchange and interaction; where you can see, meet and talk to other people.

The design proposal allows for the green to take place and utilize the potential in Kvillestråket. Diverse green rooms are created in the area, which cater to various functions and activities, with both social and ecological aspects in mind. Kvillebäcken has shifted from being the divider to being the link between the areas on respective sides.

Densities, FSI and GSI, proposed in the masterplan are aimed for, however the key project has in general a bit higher density, both FSI and GSI, than the masterplan proposes. The figures in the masterplan were roughly calculated and based on slightly different plot sizes and street and building widths resulting in other values.

The project is influenced by lectures and literature by Ann Legeby and the work of Eva Minoura.

Urban design proposal

0 100 250 m

Legend

Residential Mix use Private good Club good Kvillestråket Neighbourhood park District park Blooming trees, flower plantings

Distribution of flows in the new street grid. In the handbook, Romice et al (2020) defines different street types which were used in the masterplan and kept as precondition for this key project. An Urban main street in eastwest direction connecting Litteraturgatan and Björlandavägen and a Local main street running through the area in north-south direction.

A pedestrian zone is introduced on a part of the local main street to lower the speed and attempt to make a “seamless” transition between the square and park. The west path of Kvillestråket is for walking and biking while the east path is for walking only.

MEETING AT “OURS“ | Distribution of flows

0 100 250 m

Urban main street Local main street Pedestrian zone Cars, cyclists, pedestrians Cyclists, pedestrians Pedestrians Bus stop

B A

A

B

Street sections

Public

26 m

Section A-A Urban main street

Public

Proposed, by masterplan, Urban main street and Local main street with wide sidewalks, separate bike lanes, parking and greenery. The wide sidewalks allow for the public functions on ground floors to use the space; streets become active and strengthen social activities. Separate bike lanes promote cycling as a means of transport.

Buildings along the urban and local main street are proposed to be 7 floors high except the blocks facing Kvillestråket and associated parks that are proposed to be 5 floors high. The higher number of floors along main streets mark their hierar-

Section B-B Local main street 22 m

Public

chy in the street network and facilitates orientation in the area. To create a more human scale environment and improve light conditions the height of buildings towards Kvillestråket is a couple of floors lower, but they can’t be too low to still achieve desired densities in the area.

Trees, grass and bushes offer ecological benefits and increase the overall amount of greenery in the area. It has a positive effect on biodiversity and by choosing berry trees and bushes such as rowanberry or cherry trees and honeysuckle or rosehip bushes birds and insects are given food and protection.

Legend

Pedestrians Cyclists Cars Parking Greenery + water management

The key project proposes a variation in building heights in an attempt to differentiate the streets and their hierarchy. Higher buildings are proposed along the urban and local main street which is then stepped down towards residential areas. Building towards Kvillestråket is not more than five storeys high to provide better sun conditions and a human scale de-escalation in the intersection of it but can’t be too low to still achieve desired densities.

Being a busy area with relatively high flow of people, creation of private and calm territories and clear borders between private and public becomes important. Therefore the design proposal suggests closed blocks throughout the area.

The area has high density with relatively high buildings and rather narrow streets which is compensated with the qualities of large courtyards and parks. Therefore the size of the courtyards is important and to monitor that it is not allowed to build in another way than the plan shows, the buildings are placed on the plot boundary and extensions towards the yard are not allowed. However, with the exception for some mix use blocks where one or two floor extensions are allowed to increase flexibility for commercial and public functions; to enable a bigger grocery store or a restaurant, that requires more space, to be placed here. It is not permitted to build extensions but instead the large sized courtyards can allow higher buildings.

Building density, FSI and GSI*, proposed in the masterplan are aimed for.

FSI GSI OSR 2.6 0.4 0.23 1.9 0.4 0.32 1.6 0.4 0.38

MEETING AT “OURS“ | Building density

0 100 250 m

Plots

0 25 50 m

A variation in plot sizes in mix use blocks allows for different public and commercial activities to take place; both the big grocery store and the small coffee shop can be established.

Plots are created so each block has a yard that contains both private parts and in the middle a mutual club good; a spacious and enclosed yard which according to Minoura (2015) creates an ownership and use territory.

Since the courtyards in the closed blocks are well-sized it is possible to have both private and common parts. The private parts are intended to be used differently as a result of plot owners, as an extension of the residents’ different wishes and interests. You can use it for farming, build a greenhouse or a small shed for a workshop, create a flower garden, have an outdoor kitchen etc, you are allowed to do what you want. Important, however, is how the borders between the different plots are materialized. Here you are not allowed to do whatever as the intention is to avoid high fences or walls and therefore bushes or wooden fences should be used when marking a border.

The club good is mutual for all residents in the block intended to hold functions that are suitable for sharing or is a common wish from all owners/residents. It can be a playground, a barbeque area or a tool shed or why not a pool. The club good also provides everyone with the possibility to have a nearby outdoor space with sun. All this brings the opportunity for the courtyards to be well used and filled with everyday life and activity creating the possibility for social exchange and interaction.

Following the masterplan, the key project proposes mix use blocks along main streets and residential blocks deeper in the network. Mix use blocks should have active ground floors, where offices, commercial activities and public functions can take place. In general mix use blocks have housing above the first floor. The map shows a suggestion for potential ground floor use. (A more detailed suggestion is shown in the zoom in of the square)

Housing Commercial Commercial or office Restaurant Public Office Sports hall Gym Grocery store Existing buildings

MEETING AT “OURS“| Distribution of functions

0 100 250 m

Urban rules

1.

3. 2.

4.

1. Active ground floor obligatory in mix-use blocks

2. A variation of plot sizes in mix use blocks to allow different functions and activities

3. Plot structure that creates a club good territory in the yard.

4. Building typology: closed blocks to create a clear border between public and private and to create privacy for residents. Frontage ration 100%.

MEETING AT “OURS“ | Zoom in square

In addition to offices, stores and restaurants more public functions are also proposed around the square, such as a gym, a youth recreation center, a cinema, health facilities and a church. These functions are chosen according to the conditions provided by the area’s urban form and reflect the kind of urban life that an “ours” place is intended to create. To have a mix of functions, both regarding when in the day and year they are used and in attracting people in different ages and with different interests increases the possibility of getting a mix of people using the public space. As seen in the zone map I have worked with creating zones for different activities that will attract a mix of people. In the design development of the square and the work of creating a good public place I have used Jan Gehl’s; “Twelve quality criteria”, a check-list to assess public space qualities, as a reference. The criterias are grouped in three main themes; protection, comfort and enjoyment that when fulfilled makes the public space more inviting to people of all ages to spend time in (Gehl & Svarre, 2013).

Residential Mix use Private good Club good Kvillestråket Neighbourhood park District park Blooming trees, flower plantings

A

Representative view over square

Perspective A

MEETING AT “OURS“ | Zoom in park

C C

The design proposal allows for the green to take place and utilize the potential in Kvillestråket. Diverse green rooms are created in the area, which cater to various functions and activities, with both social and ecological aspects in mind. Kvillebäcken has shifted from being the divider to being the link between the areas on respective sides.

Kvillestråket is the park and green path following the stream Kvillebäcken. The greenery is organic with old trees and unplanned areas with bushes and flowers as this green part in the area is existing today. On the east side, in the north part of the district park, the path creates a platform along the water that allows you to walk really close to the water.

The north part of the district park transitions from arranged plantings and mostly hard surfaces at the square to a play and exploration area for children at the middle with a lot of trees, to a more leafy an organic area furthest north with less hardened surfaces, trees and bushes as a visual buffer from the traffic, several groves and meadows. The south part of the district park is more structured with mainly open grass areas, arranged plantings and trees. Also here trees and bushes create a visual buffer from the traffic.

Residential Mix use Private good Club good Kvillestråket Neighbourhood park District park Blooming trees, flower plantings

Section C-C Representative section Kvillestråket

References

A. Legeby (lecture, 2021, 7 oktober)

Gehl, J., & Svarre, B. (2013). How to study public life. Island Press.

Legeby, A. Berghauser Pont, M., & Marcus, L. (2015). Street Interaction and Social Inclusion. In L. Vaughan (Ed.), Suburban Urbanities: Suburbs and the Life of the High Street (pp. 239-262). UCL Press. Minoura, E. (2015). Uncommon Ground, PhD thesis KTH (ch 1 and 3.3).

Oxford University Press. (n.d.) Co-presence. Oxford Reference. Retrieved 2022-01-07 from https://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/ authority.20110803095638654

Romice, O., S. Porta and A. Feliciotti (2020). Master Planning for Change – Designing the Resilient City, RIBA Publishing, (p. 3-31)