© A R Beer,2001 Return to Home page

Greenspace Management in Denmark and Sweden

Summary

The Danish experience

The Swedish experience

Regenerating greenspace in and near high density multi storey housing -
Case Studies

DENMARK
Aedalsparken
Gillesager
Hvidovre
Lyngby - Town Green
Mortenshupvej
Taestrup

 

SWEDEN
Alingsås
Angered
Bergsjön
Eriksbo
Gårdsten
Lomma  
Malmo-Holma
Malmo Bo01
Östra Uggledal

-------------------------------

 

Greenspace Management in Denmark and Sweden

Summary

The Danish experience

The Swedish experience

Regenerating greenspace in and near high density multi storey housing -
Case Studies

DENMARK
Aedalsparken
Gillesager
Hvidovre
Lyngby - Town Green
Mortenshupvej
Taestrup

 

SWEDEN
Alingsås
Angered
Bergsjön
Eriksbo
Gårdsten
Lomma  
Malmo-Holma
Malmo Bo01
Östra Uggledal

-------------------------------

 

Greenspace Management in Denmark and Sweden

Summary

The Danish experience

The Swedish experience

Regenerating greenspace in and near high density multi storey housing -
Case Studies

DENMARK
Aedalsparken
Gillesager
Hvidovre
Lyngby - Town Green
Mortenshupvej
Taestrup

 

SWEDEN
Alingsås
Angered
Bergsjön
Eriksbo
Gårdsten
Lomma  
Malmo-Holma
Malmo Bo01
Östra Uggledal

-------------------------------

 

Greenspace Management in Denmark and Sweden

Summary

The Danish experience

The Swedish experience

Regenerating greenspace in and near high density multi storey housing -
Case Studies

DENMARK
Aedalsparken
Gillesager
Hvidovre
Lyngby - Town Green
Mortenshupvej
Taestrup

 

SWEDEN
Alingsås
Angered
Bergsjön
Eriksbo
Gårdsten
Lomma  
Malmo-Holma
Malmo Bo01
Östra Uggledal

-------------------------------

 

Greenspace Management in Denmark and Sweden

Summary

The Danish experience

The Swedish experience

Regenerating greenspace in and near high density multi storey housing -
Case Studies

DENMARK
Aedalsparken
Gillesager
Hvidovre
Lyngby - Town Green
Mortenshupvej
Taestrup

 

SWEDEN
Alingsås
Angered
Bergsjön
Eriksbo
Gårdsten
Lomma  
Malmo-Holma
Malmo Bo01
Östra Uggledal

-------------------------------

 

Greenspace Management in Denmark and Sweden

Summary

The Danish experience

The Swedish experience

Regenerating greenspace in and near high density multi storey housing -
Case Studies

DENMARK
Aedalsparken
Gillesager
Hvidovre
Lyngby - Town Green
Mortenshupvej
Taestrup

 

SWEDEN
Alingsås
Angered
Bergsjön
Eriksbo
Gårdsten
Lomma  
Malmo-Holma
Malmo Bo01
Östra Uggledal

-------------------------------

Innovative solutions to the design, management and maintenance of urban greenspace

Bo01 - City of Tomorrow - Malmo, Sweden

 Example of a new city district designed as a sustainable urban unit. The impact of a "green point system" on the design of greenspace within the new housing

The European Housing Expo was held in Malmö from 17 May to 16 September 2001. The site is a new city district on reclaimed land by the Västra Hamnen (Western Docks). It is a magnificent site overlooking the Öresund strait between Sweden and Denmark. The conditions are difficult for plant growth and survival and the site is potentially very wind-swept - the soil conditions are poor because it is underlaid with reclaimed industrial land, having been below sea level about 100 years ago.

In these pages Bo01 Expo as a whole is not reviewed - only the solutions used for providing greenspace within the main housing areas of the site and the experimental approaches taken are considered.

Bo01's main residential blocks - one of the foremost examples of sustainable housing in Europe

The houses, flats and terraced housing are all for sale and mostly sold already. The greenspace within the housing areas is mostly communal in the form of residential courtyards with small private gardens or balconies. A Green Area Factor system was introduced to ensure that all developers met an adequate standard in relation to ensuring design and management solutions which support an enhanced level of biodiversity.

The site has been planned as a sustainable development. Wind power, solar power and hydro power are produced locally and supplied to the site. Greenspaces are seen as essential to enhance the level of biodiversity within the site. The Bo01 area uses the most up-to-date ecotechnology for the treatment of water and waste. For example, all food waste is sorted by means of food waste disposers and a mobile vacuum system, which has been built underground to deal with both food waste and residual waste in separate tanks. A vacuum waste vehicle then collects the waste when the tanks are full. Phosphorus is extracted through new technology, KREPRO, and recycled. All materials (newspapers, packaging, batteries, etc.) are sorted and recycled. Waste water is treated as elsewhere in Malmo - treated clean water from the site goes into the Öresund Strait and raw sludge is sent to the digester plant and turned into biogas. Waste that cannot be sorted is incinerated and the energy extracted to transform into heating for housing in Malmö and Burlov. Bo01 has been nominated as part of the EU's "Campaign for Take Off" initiative as the foremost example of renewable energy source development in Europe. [Summarised from The Ecocycle at Bo01 - a brochure available to visitors.]

Some of the terraced houses have roof gardens consisting of sedum.

Others are more adventurous with substantial roof gardens using a wide range of plant material - these areas

are maintained by the house owners.

The courtyard areas vary: each is laid out according to a points system which gives a higher grade for "greener" features, e.g. a tree or a water feature counts for more points than a square meter of grass; this system has encouraged variety in the gardens.

 

There are also some low rise small dwellings on this mixed site - many of these have very small gardens which open out onto a communal greenspace.

The whole site is pedestrian only; parking of residents' cars will be in designated parking areas outside the housing area itself. The housing is exceptionally expensive, with service charges of 20,000 SKr (£1300, Euros 2200 per month) in addition to the actual cost of buying the apartments. Note: Malmö city is home to a substantial number of multi-national companies and this might explain the ability of people to buy and pay the service charges on such houses - almost all the houses have sold.

Residential Courtyards in Bo01 (summarised from documents for visitors)

From the beginning the intention was that greenery or water should be visible from all dwelling units.

To ensure consistency of quality of the residential courtyards, a series of rules was drawn up for architects and landscape architects relating to the greenspaces. Landscape architects had to be employed if a developer wanted to build on the site and the developer had to set up a mechanism for the long-term management and maintenance of the outdoor spaces associated with the development, including all greenspace not designated as parkland. The same rules were applied to all developers.

The landscape architects had to consult with Bo01 and the city of Malmö Green Department. The aim was for the landscape architect to be engaged at a very early stage, since previous experience indicates that with few exceptions, there is very little appreciation of the importance of designing the greenspaces at the same time as the buildings, resulting in many cases in makeshift external environments.

The result is an interesting complexity of interlinked greenspaces at the core of the housing - with open expanses of water, retention basins, biotope variation, transit opportunities for wildlife between courtyards and the public space, private patios, sunlit spaces for play, and meeting spaces for socialising. The designers and developers were allowed a fairly free hand so that sufficient diversity of design solution could be achieved. However, the city and Bo01 organisers were insistent about two aspects in relation to greenspaces within the housing areas:

Greenspace factor and Green points

A "greenspace factor" has been worked out, partly inspired by experience in Berlin during the 1990s. This factor is measured as an average value for the whole area of the plot, with values of between 0.0 and 1.0 awarded to the different sub areas, according to the opportunities they afford for vegetation, ecology and local storm water management.

The rule for these housing areas was that the average value for any greenspace or courtyard within the housing must not be less than 0.5.

There are many possible ways of making such a scheme work - green roofs and walls, for example. It was noticeable that the developers and architects liked this scheme, even if some ecologists and landscape architects remain dubious about reducing greenspace provision to a series of rules. Note: it may well be that local residents in other areas would also like what would be to them a "clear guidance" on the qualities that their adjacent greenspaces should have.

Every residential courtyard in Bo01 had to be provided by the developer with at least 10 green measures from the list entitled "Green Points". The aim of these points is to give Bo01 a distinct and interesting profile as regards the ecology and sustainability.

Green Points focus above all on measures helping to reinforce biodiversity.

Example from Bo01 of calculating the Green Factor for the residential courtyards - the following is only an extract from the full scoring system - there are many more items which can gain a point (the original list is available in Swedish from Malmö city).

m2

Factor

Score for a site

a garden plot

951

0.5

476

green on the ground

129

1,0

127

green on the wall

112

0,7

78

green roof

330

0.8

264

open water

23

1.0

23

climbing plants

72

0.2

14

Large trees to be provided and maintained by the developer

As part of a more conventional approach to ensuring a high quality of visual image, the residential courtyards had to be planted with big trees. This policy was in keeping with Bo01's `Trees in Time project´, for which quantities of big trees were organised as soon as the site planning started. This allowed the trees to be properly prepared over several years for the difficult conditions of a new building site. The trees were grown in a special cultivation system which made it possible for them to be planted fully in leaf, and also in bloom - they have made a major contribution to the visual and spatial qualities of the external environment. To ensure that the trees were properly planted and looked after, each developer had to organise long-term management and maintenance as part of the service charges. The developers paid for the trees and all that needed to be done to prepare them for the site. (This is all too rarely done in Britain, with the result that many of the trees planted by developers on new housing areas die within a few years - often just because the ground conditions were never properly created to allow a tree to grow)

 

© Anne Beer, 2001

Return to Home page