THE NEW WATERFRONT

THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?

Levels of urban integration and factors of integration in
some operations of renewal of harbour areas.
1. Introduction: the renewal of harbour areas as a territory of the
post-industrial city.
If we could define a spatial process, which specifically occurs at
the post-industrial city, the urban renewal of harbour areas would
certainly be one of the nominated.
The globalisation phenomenon, recently analysed by several
authors such as Manuel Castells and Saskia Sassen, has several
territorial consequences, occurring simultaneously at the local,
regional and global levels [Borja, Castells].
Regional/international phenomenon as the network urbanism, the
"metapolisation" of towns [Ascher] and the global cities [Sassen],
occurs simultaneously to local phenomenon as the urban
regeneration and the historical city centres qualification.
Territorial models are developed, such as the polinuclear urban
networks, e.g. the Randstadt; conceptual settlement patterns are
proposed, such as the Mitchell’s e-topia.
The informational city elects the public (social) space as one of its
main priorities – the physic space of social interaction by
excellence, complementary to the virtual space.
Multifunctional and intensive use of spaces is another priority for
the future, providing efficiency and sustainability to the cities
[Costa], although some indicators announce a tendency for the
urban sprawl, being the dominant post-industrial landscape in
some parts of the world [Dunham-Jones].
The urban renewal of harbour areas takes part on this complex
and multi-faced phenomenon; it is a local/regional/global
process, reflecting the contemporary aspects of the economy
and town planning.
Local, attending to the specific circumstances, which occur in
each operation, such as the local town planning management,
the urban actors involved, the site characteristics, urban
integration, local climate, and others.
Regional, attending to the dimension of the hinterland of harbour
areas, to the scale of influence of some infrastructures,
equipments, and waterfront public space, to the high level of
investment required, and others.
Global, because being each case a single case, the operations of
renewal of harbour areas are a phenomenon which occurs all
around the world, having in common its economical context,
identical town planning problems and types of answers for urban
design, usually being key interventions for cities with special
finance and intellectual investments.
2. The renewal of harbour areas and the city.
Levels of urban integration in the renewal of harbour areas:
the town integration and the site integration; the factors of
integration.
Being each case a single case (resulting from local and regional
phenomenon), some common characteristics can be observed in
the operations of renewal of harbour areas.
One of the pertinent questions that can be asked to these
operations results from the possible relations between the existing
city and its new urban area:
Which type of relation exists between those new urban areas and
the cities?
Which type of relation exists between those renewal operations
and the planning of cities?
ANEJO I 7
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
Whose factors define urban integration or spatial segregation in
those operations?
Are these renewal operations producing a new segregated part
of town, or are they in fact creating a new part of the city,
integrated: (1) in the city as a hole and in the larger goals of its
planning, and; (2) with its confining urban tissues?
The form of this last question is intentional and advances the thesis
this paper wants to clarify: it should be considered two scales of
urban relations in the analysis of the integration/segregation in
those operations.
The thesis this paper developed is that there are two levels of
analysis, which I would nominate as "town integration" and "site
integration", referring to the Sir Raymond Unwin two levels of the
town planning [Town Planning in Practice, 1909]: the "town
planning" and the "site planning".
The town integration would be, therefore, the higher or lower
integration of an operation of renewal of a harbour area in the
planning of a city, e.g., being part of its strategic and physical
planning, being articulated with the urban management of the
city, answering to some specific urban goals for the city, etc…
The site integration would be the higher or lower integration of an
operation of renewal of a harbour area in the confining urban
tissues, e.g., having continuity in the main public spaces with the
same quality of design, suppressing urban barriers, articulating
urban functions, offering some new equipments to the existing
confining urban areas, etc…
Site integration refers at a first level to physical planning and to
public space projects, but it also means the integration of those
populations in a new urban reality, not only through the possible
physical benefits of their neighbourhood, but also by inducting
new employment and new opportunities for social interaction.
As an example, an operation of renewal of a harbour area could
be integrated in the strategic and physical planning of the city
and articulated with general infrastructure investments, being a
strategic "star action" of urban development, but simultaneously
segregated from the confining urban areas, being the limits of the
area of intervention a frontier between high re-qualified town and
old unqualified urban areas.
Or, on the contrary, it could be an isolated urban action,
managed, e.g., by an autonomous port authority, having only
occasional coordination with the municipality, but simultaneously
attempting for site integration by suppressing urban barriers and
extending new public space into the existing urban areas.
As a hypothesis, site integration can be a previously defined
strategic goal for the renewal operation, between others, as an
action of town integration – it doesn’t mean that the final result
would achieve it.
Town integration and site integration can be object of analysis
both: (1) at the planning stage, when the operation is being
conceived and its projects developed, and; (2) on the territory,
when the operation is realised and finished; meaning that the
object of analysis is the plans or the new physical reality.
Although considering that each operation of renewal of a harbour
area is a single case, some common phenomenon occur in both
scales of analysis, at the town integration level and site integration
level.
Based on comparative analysis, some factors might be identified
as key factors in the occurrence or not of town integration and
site integration, which I would denominate as factors of
integration.
The factors of integration are those frequent occurrences in the
operations of renewal of harbour areas that contribute to its urban
integration, separately at the town integration and at the site
ANEJO I 8
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
integration, and which, when not occurring, contribute to the
physical segregation of those new urban spaces.
The question is, therefore:
Which occurrences should be established as the factors of town
integration?
Which occurrences should be established as the factors of site
integration?
Separately, both at town integration and at the site integration
levels, the next lines will analyse some operations of renewal of
harbour areas, trying to identify: (1) which are the common
relevant factors of integration, and; (2) which are specific factors
in a single operation that do not occur on the others.
The criteria for the selection of the operations results exclusively
from the data material available by the author and from the
knowledge of the selected operations, assuming that some
important operations weren’t object of analysis and, therefore,
the elected factors could have slightness variations.
The field of analysis includes operations of renewal of harbour
areas, some realised, some being done and others still in plan.
These case-study operations are: (1) the Expo98 area, in Lisbon,
realised; (2) the 1998 Margueira plan for urban renewal, in south
Lisbon; (3) the Marseille Euromediterranée urban project; (4) the
Kop van Zuid operation, in Rotterdam, in course; (5) the Eastern
Docklands operation, in Amsterdam, in course; (6) the Canary
Wharf operation, in London, in course; (7) the Western Docklands
operation, in Helsinki, partially realised – phase 1 of 3; (8) the Aker
Brygge operation, in Oslo, realised; (9) the Bjorvika operation, in
Oslo, being planned; (10) the New Victoria’s Waterfront, in
Melbourne, just started; (11) the Lu Jia Zui, in Shanghai, in course;
(12) the Bund, in Shanghai, done; (13) South Boston, being
planned, and; (14) the Port Vell operation, in Barcelona, done.
3. The factors of town integration.
3.1. THE RENEWAL OF HARBOUR AREAS AND THE PLANNING OF CITIES: SOME
PERPECTIVES.
Apart from the case-study analysis, some key bibliography on the
renewal of harbour areas covers the relation between the cities
and those operations, justifying therefore its over viewing in these
lines.
The survey of Han Meyer [City and Port, 1999] on operations of
renewal of harbour areas in New York, Barcelona, London and
Rotterdam clarifies the relation between: (1) the local and
regional context, the relation between the cities and the ports,
and specific aspects on the urban management of the
operations, and; (2) the election of different priorities on its urban
design, consequently on the physical form of those new areas.
Meyer analyses town planning in those four cities, evaluating the
links with the operations of renewal of harbour areas, some
visionary, some previous ideas and some at last realized or in
course.
He addresses the question of "the degree to which, and the
manner in which, urban planners are accountable for the cultural
significance of the design and redesign of infrastructural works
(…): seaports. Four types of port cities are featured (…). Each type
is characterized by specific special form of the relation between
the city and the port, and by a specific cultural appreciation of
this form" [pp.9].
Meyer concludes that urbanizing infrastructure is an urban design
project.
He notices the problem of the confrontations and relations among
various levels of scales, and suggests complementarities among
the large-scale networks and the local urban networks.
To solve this problem, he suggest to look at it as a project, "the
objective of which is to solve the problem or at least to find an
ANEJO I 9
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
acceptable response. Such a project can be worked as follows:
‘Design large-scale infrastructure in such a way that the local
situation thus created leaves the function of the infrastructure itself
intact and, at the same time, lends added value to the
immediate urban context’"[pp.382].
Joan Busquets [Anvers, Barcelone et Buenos-Aires: quand les villes
s’occupent de leur ports, 1992; Planeamiento: Pasado reciente y
futuro próximo, 1995] emphasis the characteristic of those
operations, being unique opportunities for coordination of
different interventions such as new infrastructures (main road
accessibilities, bridges, etc., frequently with special investment on
its urban design), public transport systems (regional train, subway
railroads, light train), new urban equipments (profiting from the
special location in the waterfront of the city, sometimes also near
the historical centre), urban infrastructures (projected and
constructed in a coordinated form), green structures, and others.
Those operations justify the coordination of all those different
urban actions in a unitary urban project for the area and its
extensions to the city; different urban management entities
integrating the process.
The importance of those operations in the planning of cities is
demonstrated, being key interventions in strategic urban areas,
frequently associated with the realizations of special international
events.
Busquets understands that the several scales of planning can exist
complementary to the «proyecto urbano», in a philosophy of
concurrence of scales and operative compromises.
The «proyectos especiales» are "forms of urban planning
articulation, capable of integrate specific infrastructures with a
general urban vision" [1995, pp.15], frequently "produced trough
«strategies» or «labels» which motivate its status of special" [1995,
pp.16].
Richard Marshal [Waterfronts in Post-Industrial Cities, 2001]
identifies the new waterfronts as spaces of hope for urban vitality,
where we can see "new city-making paradigms, partial visions for
what our cities might be" [pp.3], in a general context of cities
resulting less from design and more from the expression of
economic and social forces.
Marshal tries to confront not only the success, but mainly the
challenges faced by cities such as Amsterdam, Genoa, Sydney
and Vancouver in their revitalization efforts with emerging city
operations in Bilbau, Havana, Las Palmas and Shanghai; San
Francisco and Boston are also examples of comparison.
The analysis focuses on the role of the renewal operations in the
context of the city planning: how does each one is related to the
city, specific aspects of each operation and its understanding of
what should be a waterfront space, models developed and its
role in the development of the city.
By Classifying those operations according to four mediations –
"connection to the waterfront", "remaking the image of the city",
"port and city relations", and "new waterfronts on historical cities"
-, Marshal elects some particular aspects of these operations.
Marshal’s comparative analysis accentuates the differences in the
planning support of each operation (its origin and urban context);
different management processes and local site characteristics
take part both (1) in the definition of different urban models and
physical forms, and; (2) in the relation between the cities and its
new urban waterfronts.
Joaquin Casariego [Waterfronts de Nuevo, 1999], as Han Meyer,
departures to a comparative analysis of some operations with the
goal of clarify concepts and ideas, in order to suport their
planning activities in Las Palmas de Gran Canaria and Rotterdam.
Synthesising the role of the water in the history of the cities and the
economical and logistical transformations of port activities since
the 1960’s, Casariego focuses on middle size cities waterfront
ANEJO I 10
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
transformations, trying to identify processes, planning forms and
implementation, main priorities, context and urban design
concepts.
imágenes 1 y 2
Aerial views of two case-studies before the renewal operation: Amsterdam Eastern
Docklands, Melbourne Interior Harbour
Different classes are established, such as: (1) the "re-conversion /
re-adaptation of ports", based on the operations of Hamburg
and Marseille; (2) the "re-encounter of the city and the sea",
based on the experiences of Boston and Barcelona; (3) the
"centralities by the water", cases of Yokohama and Rotterdam,
and; (4) "from the sea front to the theme park", cases of Baltimore
and Seville.
Lessons of waterfront transformation are achieved to middle size
cities.
Having several contributions, Cities in Transition [AA.VV, 010
Publishers, 2001] deals with the effect of globalisation focusing on
the relation of urban and port developments in the cities of
Rotterdam and Tokyo.
Based on the two cases, a duality on the contemporary relation
between city and port is established, being an integrated
planning the answer for the harmonious development of both.
A perspective of time and of the evolution of contexts, of the ports
activity and of the cities needs and tendencies is accentuated in
this relation, understood as a dynamic process.
Referring to our days, Kreukels notes that, "as in many cities
nowadays, in Rotterdam the master plan was no longer the most
decisive vehicle of urban planning; (…) the development of the
city is now guided by strategic projects and plans for particular
areas and locations."[pp.57], the renewal of harbour areas
included.
A relation between the management processes of those
operations and town integration might be established,
accentuating the perspective of Joan Busquets of these
operations as opportunities for coordination of different
interventions.
3.2. FACTORS OF TOWN INTEGRATION IN SOME CASE-STUDIES.
As we saw, town integration is subject of several expertise
publications, which define the main occurrences in specific
operations and in general theory of renewal of harbour areas,
therefore approximately defining the factors of town integration.
The observation of some operations of urban renewal of harbour
areas was the form achieved to identify those general factors of
town integration; the same method will be developed in the next
ANEJO I 11
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
lines, confirming and synthesising most of the defined factors,
although some exceptional or specifically local factors might also
exist in each operation.
(1) - The operation of renewal of the Expo98 area, in Lisbon has
been developed concerning some aspects of town integration.
From the first steeps of its town planning, the exhibition was
understood as a main opportunity to give new impulse to city
development and to create new high quality new urban areas in
the east part of Lisbon.
Having been developed as a special territory, by a development
corporation of public capitals, a coordination process occurred
with the municipality.
The area become a special planning area in the municipal plan
of Lisbon, in which infrastructure investments and detail plans for
surrounding the areas were predicted, although the limits of the
intervention marked a rigorous limit of planning jurisdiction.
Some city infrastructures were developed in the context of the
Exhibition such as road accessibilities, public transport systems and
equipments; others, as the new bridge over the river, can’t be
integrated in the operation, although it benefited from the
construction dynamic of the period.
imágenes 3 y 4
Aerial views of two case-studies before the renewal operation: the LuJiaZui District in
Shanghai and South-Boston
As factors of town integration in the Expo98 renewal operation
can be elected the following:
(a) The criteria for the selection of the site to the exhibition, in an
old industrial/harbour area in the east limit of the city (other
sites were also hypothesis), as a measure to compensate the
constant city development to west and to north and to try to
induce new development opportunities in the east part of the
city, through the creation of new tendencies and basic
infrastructures – a profound and intentional town integration
measure;
(b) The several plans developed during the previous 10 years, in
which town integration ideas were proposed, some adopted
in the final proposal.
(c) The inclusion of the area of intervention in the Master Plan of
Lisbon from 1994, in which infrastructure investments and the
planning of the existing urban areas in its surroundings were
previewed, although the area itself were excluded from the
municipal responsibility – it was a special development area,
developed by an independent development corporation;
ANEJO I 12
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
(d) The articulation of different forms of urban planning, by
different urban management companies, integrating specific
infrastructures, such as the underground city railroad, the
metropolitan train, the infrastructures supply companies, the
municipality, the development corporation and others, in a
general urban vision;
(2) - The 1998 experimental plan for the renewal of the harbour
area of the Lisnave Company [by Architects Carlos and Cristina
Ramos, Dias Coelho, João Pedro Costa], in the south part of
Lisbon, is an example of absolute inexistent town integration in a
proposal for the renewal of a harbour area.
Although the authors of the plan had suggested to the proprietary
of the lands (a public capitals company in the Ministry of
Finances) its articulation with several entities, such as the
Municipalities of Almada and Lisbon, the Lisbon Port Authority,
public transportation companies, regional coordination
administration, and others, in order to generate compromises and
to give to the plan an operative character, the Administration
adopted (and still adopts) an isolated perspective, against the
other urban actors, unacceptable in town planning and which
conducts to the ineffectiveness of any proposal.
Infrastructure integration, accessibilities, public transport systems,
integration in the surrounding urban areas, and the compromise
question itself of the vocation of those lands, which should be
participated by the populations, represented through the
municipalities, associations and public companies, weren’t
considered, generating justified public reaction to the later
proposals [1999, 2001, both by Arch. Graça Dias] and its
ineffectiveness.
This example shows that, in democratic countries, the question
shouldn’t be have or not have town integration; the variation
concerns the forms and types of town integration developed in
each operation and its effectiveness, defining both its operative
character and the quality of the resulting urban spaces.
(3) - The Marseille Euromediterranée is not an operation of renewal
of an harbour area; it is a transversal urban project from the
Eastern Port to the Gare de St. Charles and to the Belle-de-Mai
area, structured through autonomous operations articulated in a
general goal for the city transformation.
It is a coordinated action of several urban projects, some located
in the eastern harbour territories, such as: (1) the road
infrastructure transformation in the Littoral, through the
construction of a tunnel, articulated with the ZAC de la Joliette; (2)
the train tunnel and the investment on new public services in
Arenc, and; (3) the public spaced intervention Espace Saint-Jean,
a first waterfront intervention in released harbour cays on the
eastern harbour.
Its isn’t, therefore, a typical operation in old harbour areas, being
an urban project with specifically located measures covering
some harbour areas, the central station, old neighbourhoods
having social problems, public services, heritage buildings, and
others, in an integrated form.
The Littoral operation, the Arenc operation, the ZAC de la Joliette
and the Espace Saint-Jean operation aren’t isolated interventions;
they are part of a general integrated urban vision of urban design,
which isn’t anymore the typical Master Plan of a city.
The Marseille Euromediterranée is an operative and coordinate
group of «proyectos urbanos», which combines different scales
and urban management entities in a global idea for the city.
The question doesn’t concern, therefore, the town integration of a
renewal operation of an harbour area; town integration is a base
premise of a coordinated urban design programme, understood
as a key operative action for the modernization of Marseille,
complementary to regulative city Master Plan.
ANEJO I 13
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
(4) - In the Kop van Zuid operation, in Rotterdam, the possible
renewal intervention was debated during large periods of time,
progressively achieving new ideas until it gets the final plan form.
Examples were: (1) the debate to renovate the city to the west
(Delfshaven Buitendijks) or to south on the former harbour lands
(Kop van Zuid); (2) the AIR – Architecture International Rotterdam
event on the Kop van Zuid area, in 1982, with urban design
proposals by Aldo Rossi, Josef Kleihues, Oswald Mathias Ungers
and Derek Walker, and the debate on urban form in the context
of its initiatives; (3) the Carel Weeber Peperklip experimental
housing complex, in 1981, on Kop van Zuid; (4) the society’s desire
for innovation in the late 1980’s, when several "government
reports, books, and conferences included the adjective ‘new’:
The New Rotterdam, Renewal of Rotterdam, and so on" [Meyer,
1999, pp.352]; (5) and others.
The Kop van Zuid operation is developed simultaneously to the
new concept of port centrality in the Maasvlakte area and its
integration in the urban and natural landscapes, in a perspective
of coordination between city and port, characteristic of town
planning in Rotterdam.
The port itself was represented in the Kop van Zuid plan (first plan
by Teun Koolhaas, 1987), through a new nautical centre, its new
headquarters and a cruise terminal.
"The plan for the Kop van Zuid was one example of a renewed
search for a mutual relationship uniting city, river and port. It
represented an attempt to rewaken the city’s awareness of the
river and the port. Other exemples of this renewed pursuit were
new plans for Botlek, Europoort, and the Maas Plain: the modern,
working area of the port." [Han Meyer, 1999, pp.371].
In Kop van Zuid, the town integration is a culture, results from the
local philosophy of town planning under which city and port are
managed together as part of human activity on the territory.
The form of management of city and port and the development
of the renewal operations by the Department of Urban Planning
and Public Housing are the basis of this form of town integration,
allowing for effective and coordinate planning and action
independently from specific infrastructure and urban design
measures.
The understanding of the renewal operation as an opportunity: (1)
to connect the city to its south neighbourhoods; (2) to transfer the
new centrality to the river, creating new offices in the
Wilhelminapier; (3) to continue its cultural politic, and; (4) to mark
the new centrality with an art object – the Erasmus bridge; is a
second factor of town integration, although it results directly from
the urban management model of Rotterdam, allowing for an
integrated planning of the city as a hole.
(5) - The redevelopment of the Amsterdam’s Eastern Docklands
takes place between the first municipal resolutions of 1975 and the
2000’s, being a renewal operation based on separated
interventions on different peninsulas and islands, each one with
specific premises of urban design.
"The basis of all the plans is that new building development should
distinctly respond to the specific character of the former harbour
area.
Because in practice this amount to a completely different
‘personal’ interpretation for each peninsula, the transformation of
the former harbour area has turned out to be a sort of laboratory
in the field of urban development and architecture." [Eastern
Docklands, 1995, pp.9].
Again, as in Rotterdam, the renewal operation is managed by the
city, through the Department of Physical Planning, being this form
of urban management the basis for the understanding of the
operation as a part of the city, therefore being a key factor of
town integration.
ANEJO I 14
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
The assuming of the new urban areas as an extension of the city’s
urban fabric and the assuming of the opportunity for urban and
housing experimentation on the compact city are also factors of
town integration, meaning the conceiving of the new district in a
city perspective.
Being located near the central station, the new mainly residential
district has no continuity to other urban areas, maintaining its
character of harbour peninsulas.
(6) The Canary Wharf operation, in London, started in the middle
1980’s, although some proposals exist to the area since 1970/73
(e.g., proposals in 1973, or the 1976’s ‘London Docklands Strategic
Plan’, both mainly residential proposals), after the sudden
disappearance of the big shipping companies from the area,
leaving the gigantic docks vacant behind.
After some evolution of the renewal concepts to be applied to
the London Docklands, the key occurrence was the changing of
the Government to the Conservative Party in 1980, changing not
only the substance of the plan itself, but also the methods and the
decision-making, being created in 1981 the London Docklands
Development Corporation.
Four different special strategies occurred from 1981 to 1995: (1) a
balanced urban planning concept to the entire Docklands, from
1981 to 1983, which failed; (2) an urban plan restricted to the scale
of an enclave – the Enterprise zones; (3) the development of a
new centrality to London – Canary Wharf, and; (4) A posteriori
urban planning, from 1994 to 1998, after the debacle of Canary
Wharf. [Meyer, 1999, pp.98-110]
This was the general context of the Canary Wharf operation,
developed by the Canadian real-estate developers Olympia &
York, since 1986, based on the master plan by Skidmore, Owings
and Merril.
The proposal understands the new centrality as an autonomous
enclave, being the main criteria of design market criteria and the
creation of a public realm.
The isolated situation of Canary Wharf together with the
insufficient capacity of the Docklands Light Railway and the
occurrence of a period of uncertainty in the real state marked
lead to the bankrupt of Olympia & York in 1992.
It is very difficult to identify factors of urban integration in the
Canary Wharf operation.
Although the Docklands renewal operation has been progressively
conceived since the 1970’s, the fact is that the developed
philosophy brooked the first 10 years of debate, introducing new
methods and processes, which lead to a different urban planning,
therefore having no continuity.
The pre-existent road infrastructures and light railroad weren’t
conceived as part of such a huge operation, and the concept
itself of Canary Wharf was to be an autonomous area, having no
relation to the city except the concurrence with the city’s offices
real-state market.
The process of development, based on ‘urban development
areas’, referring to the New Town Act of 1946, managed by Urban
Development Corporations directly dependent of the
Government and resistant to outside influence, and the transfer to
a real-state private enterprise of the entire operation didn’t allow
for participation by the city and its citizens.
Urban integration was an insignificant value in comparison with
the real-state goals of the operation, although the main objective
of the LDDC was being full field: the creation of a new offices
centrality in London.
(7) - The Western Docklands operation, in Helsinki, partially realised
(the Ruoholahti area is finished, corresponding to phase 1 of 3), is
previewed in the Master Plan of Helsinki from 1992, being
ANEJO I 15
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
considered both in the ‘Strategic Planning Advice’ and in the
‘Master Plan’.
imágenes 5 y 6
Plans for the renewal operation of two case-studies: a previous plan for the
Margueira Lands in South Lisbon, the plan for the ZAC de la Joliette and Docklands i
the Marseille Euromediterranée
n
The Master Plan previews a 3 phases operation, corresponding to
the areas of Ruoholahti, Jatkasaari, and Munkkisaari, the three
land areas conquered to the sea for harbour use, which is
progressively being transferred to the new peripheral zone of
Vuosaari.
The three phases were staged over time in four periods: until 2001,
2001-2010,2011-2020 and after 2021, being the programme
essentially residential, including an area of expansion of the
central business district and a new car-ferry passenger terminal.
The Helsinki’s Western Docklands renewal operation is an example
of harmonious town integration, being defined in the general
planning as a part of the city and developed through specific
master plans for the three areas of intervention.
Its general definition in the Master Plan of the city, resulting from a
global overview of the city development instead of being an
isolated or casual action is the main factor of town integration in
this operation.
This articulation with the general planning of the city defined the
programme of the intervention as part of the general conception
of the city, being a rare example of success of planning in a
‘cascade of plans’, from the upper level to the lowest level.
The main infrastructures already existed, so they didn’t take part in
the operation.
(8) The Aker Brygge operation, in Oslo, a shipyard area
abandoned in 1982 at the Pipervika bay, was initially previewed to
be realised in three stages, which occurred respectively in 1984,
1989 and 1991; during the 1990’s the area was completed with a
fourth group of constructions in its west part.
The area was owned by the Aker Group of Companies, which
developed the operation, although it also benefited from public
investment in the surroundings, such as the road-tunnel
construction in the Pipervika bay, allowing for the City Hall Square
to be entirely free of motor traffic and immediately connected to
Aker Brygge, since 1994.
The process of development of the operation was regulated by on
the Norwegian Planning and Building Act, which is based on the
idea that both private and different public interests have the right
to propose new local development plans.
It was based on this Act that, in 1982, on the initiative of private
property owners and public authorities was launched the ideas
competition "The City and the Fjord, Oslo year 2000", which
ANEJO I 16
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
consisted on a general plan for the whole waterfront of the city
and a detail plan for Aker Brygge.
imágenes 7 y 8
Plans for the renewal operation of two case-studies: plan of the Helsinki Western
Docklands and plan of the Shanghai’s LuJiaZui Finance District
About 170 proposals were delivered; in the winner proposal Aker
Brygge and the West Railway Station were proposed for urban
development, and the motorway across the City Hall was
proposed to be laid in a tunnel and the City Square to become a
leisure pedestrian area – as it was done later in 1994.
The Area Plan for Oslo’s Central Waterfront passed political
approval in 1988, being the first legal area plan, which arranges
the relationship between the city and the fjord.
The urban design concept for the Aker Brygge area was to
develop a complete district, which would be shaped as a
compact traditional urban area with modern architecture, where
streets and squares were coordinated in such a way that outdoor
spaces were activated by pedestrians.
The programme combined offices, shopping centres, boutiques,
restaurants and cultural attractions with apartments on the upper
floors, linked together with a system of aerial passages.
The participative process of private investment, debated in the
society and coordinated with complementary public investment is
a key factor of town integration in the Aker Brygge operation.
Although being developed on private ownership lands and
financed with private investments, its planning was participated
by the society and approved by the city, in a efficient democratic
process.
It was this process that allowed for the coordination of other
public interventions such as the road-tunnel, the tramline, or the
public space in the City Hall Square.
Those were city’s main infrastructures which helped on the success
of the operation, and that might also been considered as other a
factor of town integration.
(9) - The Bjorvika operation, in Oslo, was also considered in the
winner proposal of the ideas competition "The City and the Fjord,
Oslo year 2000", above-mentioned, although in this case the area
is publicly owned, being occupied by the port, a main-road
system and the railway infrastructures.
ANEJO I 17
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
The area hasn’t be developed immediately due to the lack of
financing, although in 1993 it has started the planning of a main
infrastructure investment which will allow the future renewal
operation: the last link of the main road east-west, in tunnel,
connection the 1990 tunnel under the City Hall in west to the 1995
tunnel through the Ekeberg Hill in the east.
In 2000 four propositions were presented to a contest, contributing
to the achievement of new ideas and the clarification of
concepts for future planning, continuing the process of
progressive participated planning of the area.
The renewal plan hasn’t still achieved a final version.
The operation, to be realised through different phases, will start
with the construction of the new opera house, although it isn’t yet
defined the final plan for the area or decided the new allocation
for the containers dock, which will be occupied.
Public private partnership is the financing philosophy defined for
the operation, being the key city infrastructures (transfer of the
container port to other area, east-west road tunnel and railway
transformation) the public sector activity and the building
construction the private.
In the Bjorvika operation the investment on the above-mentioned
key city’s infrastructures will certainly be the main factor of town
integration, in this case resulting from public promoted planning
and not from a coordinated process of private planning.
(10) - The Victoria’s New Waterfront, in Melbourne, occupies 220
hectares of land and seven kilometres of waterfront, adjacent to
the city CBD; as the expansion and modernisation of the port
moved down stream, larger city-front port areas become
available for redevelopment.
Being a delta area, the renewal operation of the Victoria’s New
Waterfront is based on a conceptual planning and design
framework, which embodies ten urban design principles and
seven urban design goals.
The programme combines permanent housing for 15.000
inhabitants, commerce, leisure and entertainment, retail,
commerce, service and hi-tech industries areas, adjacent to the
city centre, with high quality public spaces, understood as an
integrated continuous part of Melbourne.
Its implementation is organised through the definition of several
precincts, which should be progressively implemented in five
stages until 2020.
The departure process philosophy is that a "viable, sustainable
place of design excellence can only through a strong partnership
involving the Docklands Authority, precinct developers, the City of
Melbourne, government agencies, and a range of other
interested parties" [Melbourne Docklands Victoria’s New
Waterfront Report, July 2000]
The participation of the private sector is seen, by the Docklands
Authority, as a key form of guarantee this objective, therefore
defining urban design principles and seven urban design goals.
Integration and design excellence are the main goals of the just
started operation (the stadium and two connections to the city
are done), which previews itself town integration as one of the
principles of urban design: principle 2 – responsive to Melbourne.
This principle assumes that the operation should respond to the
Melbourne needs, also searching for a geometrical continuity of
the existing street patterns – the new area is to be a part of the
city and not an autonomous urban area.
In the Victoria’s New Waterfront, site integration is also a measure
of town integration, as previewed on principle 3 – responsive to
the site.
ANEJO I 18
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
Main infrastructure investments consider: (1) a city integrated
transport network, and; (2) public and private transport strategies;
also being a factor of town integration.
(11) - The Lu Jia Zui district, in Shanghai, corresponds to the
creation of the new international financial district of China; being
previewed approximately 4.200.000 square meters of construction,
¾ being offices buildings, in the 1,7 square kilometres,
corresponding to 108 high-rise buildings, the highest having 350
metres.
The Lu Jia Zui CBD integrates the large urban operation of the
Pudong New Area, a 522 square kilometres developing area in the
south-east part of Shanghai, separated from the city through the
Huangpu River.
The Pudong New Area includes several districts, such as the Lu Jia
Zui CBD, the new profound waters port, the new airport, an
economical export area, a tax free zone, a new hi-tech
technological district, being the housing planning integrated in
several districts and also developed in some residential districts.
The Lu Jia Zui CBD is an enormous offices state programme, which
concentrates some public companies and banks and tries to
capture private investment.
The intervention, land ownership, construction, public space and
infrastructure investments are entirely governmental; town
planning was developed by the Shanghai Pudong New Area
Planning & Research Institute, under the authority of the Pudong
New Area Developing and Planning Bureau.
This renewal operation, on a former harbour, industrial and
residential areas, is a vital strategic project not only of the city and
the region, corresponding to a national objective, the intension of
creating a new finance centre in Asia, supported by the
developing economy of China.
In fact, the Lu Jia Zui district and the Pudong New Area are large
scale urban development projects articulated with the general
town planning and management of the city, which induced the
extension of the new building typology, the high-rises, to the entire
city.
Not questioning the criteria for the general city development, the
established process under which the government development
corporation manages the project, in articulation with the city of
Shanghai, is a factor of town integration.
Other factors of town integration in the Lu Jia Zui operation are:
(a) The main infrastructure investments on the city’s scale, such as
the road-tunnels under the river, the main urban connections
and the public transport system, providing good accessibilities
to the new centrality of Shanghai;
(b) The new public equipments on the area, some exceptional,
which become new architectonic symbols of the city – e.g.,
the TV tower;
(c) The integration on the complementary large-scale main
infrastructures transformation in the Pudong New Area, such
as the new airport, the new port and others, which are
conceived as an inter-dependent urban system.
(12) - The Bund waterfront renewal, in Shanghai, developed during
the 1990’s, is a public space intervention in the symbolic
waterfront facade of the city.
The bund was originally the location of the British open port,
established in 1843 after the opium war.
Progressively, from the middle 19th century to the 1920’s, a group
of high architectonic value buildings was constructed in the front
facade of the Bund, most of them being banks and international
enterprises Shanghai’s headquarters.
ANEJO I 19
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
The operation was firstly previewed in the beginning of the 1990’s,
as a public space renovation, included in the Historical City
Centre Plan.
The renovation considered the increase of the land areas and was
developed during two phases, the first finished in 1992 and the
second in the middle 1990’s.
Its first phase corresponds to a 711 meter-long and 7 meter-high
flood prevention wall protection against high tides, seen once in a
century, supporting a 15 meters elevated platform of public
space, which is separated from the 10 lines traffic lanes by a treelined
boulevard.
The public space renovation simultaneously resolved the traffic
congestions, doubling the car circulation capacity, and created
more generous pedestrian areas, mixed with a small size green
structure, although its elevation brook the existing direct relation
between the Bund architectonic facade and the river.
The increasing of the car traffic parallel to the river also generated
a strong barrier between the waterfront and the historical city.
The operation was integrally public planned, projected and
constructed.
The construction of the wall flood protection in Bund waterfront
renewal, having direct consequences to the entire existing city,
was therefore a factor of town integration; being the key link of
this factor the action of the municipal planning and engineering
services.
(13) - The South Boston Waterfront operation, in its planning phase,
is located in an old harbour and industrial area, being separated
from the Boston's Financial District by the Fort Point channel and of
the Logan airport, in the north, by the main interior port’s fluvial
channel.
In this operation, the Massport (Massachusetts Port Authority)
continues the renewal of the Commonwealth Pier, on World Trade
Centre area, realised in the middle 1980’s, which had inadequate
infrastructures of transportation functioned as a barrier.
Started in 1998, the key action of the renewal operation is the
investment on the new underground accessibility infrastructures,
the Central Artery/Third Harbour Tunnel and the South Boston Piers
Transit way.
The Central Artery/Third Harbour Tunnel Project tries to answer
three main objectives to the city of Boston: (1) the new tunnel
under the port duplicates the road accessibility from the city
centre to the airport and allows for its continuation to north,
without having to cross the downtown; (2) the elevated highway
which crosses the downtown becomes an underground tunnel
and allows for the creation of system of linear parks, connecting
the Financial District to the waterfront, and; (3) the new highway
serves the South Boston Waterfront, conferring it an enormous
centrality.
This infrastructure is complemented by the South Boston Piers
Transit way, a road tunnel that connects the South Boston
Waterfront to the inter-modal terminal of transports of South
Station, at the Financial District.
A previewed enlargement of the Logan airport, managed by the
Massport, the new Federal Courthouse, the new Boston
Convention and Exhibition Centre, offices and an hotel also
integrate the operation.
The South Boston Waterfront operation might become a paradigm
of the integration of the renewal of harbour areas in the context of
modernization of main city’s infrastructures and as coordinated
action in the new systems of accessibilities, although it is
development and managed by the Port Authority.
The development of the described mainly city’s infrastructures,
within the area of intervention, is the key factor of town integration
of the operation.
ANEJO I 20
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
Other smaller aspects, such as the program of the operation,
might also have some importance to the city, although certainly
at an inferior level of importance.
(14) - The Port Vell operation, in Barcelona, being an intervention
not developed by the municipality but by the Puerto Autonomo
de Barcelona, is a case where some factors of urban integration
can be observed.
The Port Vell is a 54 hectares area in the oldest part of the port,
developed since the 17th century, which had become obsolete,
as the port progressively grew to south into the Llobregat River and
allocated there their new and modern facilities.
Its remodelling and development project was determined by its
nature as a seaport, by its location by the city’s historical centre
and by the facilities that could be reclaimed [Puerto Autonomo
de Barcelona, in: Waterfront, una nueva frontiera urbana, 1991,
pp.33].
The project was lead by an urban development corporation
created by the Port Authority, the Port 2000.
Having existed in the past pressure for an intensive building in this
area (e.g., the Ribera Plan, developed in 1967 by the land
proprietary’s), the 1980’s represented a different town planning
reality for the city, with the democratic institutions trying to
articulate the regional proposals of the Plan General Metropolitan
from 1976 and the intermediate scale of the «proyectos urbanos»,
developed by the municipality.
imágenes 9 y 10
Aerial perspective and view of two case-studies: perspective of the Parque das
Nações in Lisbon and view of the areas of intervention of Bjorvika in Oslo
In 1982, in articulation with the municipality, the Architect Manuel
de Solá Morales was charged of the project for the urban design
of de Moll Bosch I Alsina.
This realisation, together wit the nomination of the city to host the
1992’s Olympic Games and other occurrences lead to the
realisation of a much more ambitious project [Joan Allemany,
1998, pp.259].
The basic philosophy of the project consisted on having all the
administrations in agreement, including the municipality, the
regional authority and the government ministry, a fact that would
be the basis for a comprehensive urban integration.
Therefore, the Pla Especial del Port Vell, approved by the port in
1988 and by the regional authority in 1989, was a part of
ANEJO I 21
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
coordinated group of operations of different types developed in
various parts of the city, such as:
(a) The construction of the Cinturon, a beltway that passed
through the city limits and waterfront;
(b) The operation of the Olimpic Games, covering four different
sites of the city, connected by the new road infrastructure;
(c) The definition of new centrality areas as a measure to create
alternatives to the congestion in city centre and the
"monumentalisation" of the peripheries as a measure a
improve the quality of those neighbourhoods, and;
(d) The use of the waterfront "new" attractive spaces for the
leisure of the people all over the city.
All these initiatives had a common basic philosophy, which passed
by the improvement of the quality of the public spaces through its
design.
The Port Vell renewal was therefore a part of a general concept
for the city, being articulated with the confining waterfront
spaces.
imágenes 11 y 12
Aerial views of two case-studies: Victoria’s New Waterfront in Melbourne and Port
Vell in Barcelona
Its original proposal, based on the articulation of the Moll de la
Fusta and of the Moll de la Barceloneta around the Pla de Palau
suffered later a change, when the port decided to accept a
proposal by an American development corporation enterprise,
which proposed the creation of a complet "fun city" in the Moll
d’Espanya.
Apart from that change, the operation full field its town planning
goals, the continue pedestrian connection of the Poble Nou
olimpic area to the Ramblas and the historical city centre through
the Barceloneta urban beach and the Port Vell, offering new
leisure public spaces, new offices, and new equipments for the
city and for the Ciutat Vella, opening the city to the sea.
The understanding of the project as a part of a larger concept for
the city, combined with its development, as a coordinated action
of town planning, was a factor of town integration in the
operation, allowing for the full field of the above-mentioned urban
objectives.
The integration of the city’s main road infrastructure, the Ronda
Litoral, in the Moll de la Fusta, can also be considered as a factor
of town integration.
3.3. THE MAIN FACTORS OF TOWN INTEGRATION IN THE URBAN RENEWAL OF
HARBOUR AREAS.
From the previous case-study analysis some conclusions might be
established.
ANEJO I 22
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
The first and important one regards the financing and managing
process of these operations: different interventions in different
realities adopt specific forms in the development of their
operations, meaning that one can’t establish some processes
types as factors of town integration.
As we saw, opposite integration success and quality urban areas
resulted from both the private and the public urban planning and
management of the renewal operations.
State ideology, local specific democratic legislation and
practices, attributions of central government and municipal
institutions and their coordination, local town planning habits and
methods, society’s culture and different forms and demands of
public participation define specific local contexts under which
those operations are developed.
On the contrary, one must recognise that each local town
planning reality has its local current practices on urban
management, having specific forms of public participation and
public services coordination.
As an example, both the success operation of Aker Brygge in Oslo
and the disaster of the Canary Wharf operation, in London,
resulted from private development enterprises, although in the
two cases the process of public participation was different.
Also as an example, both the Margueira renewal operation in the
south river bank of Lisbon and the Victoria’s New Waterfornt in
Melbourne are public central government initiatives, although an
opposite attitude to local and other institutions determined its
failure and non-realisation or its success.
The Dutch operations of Rotterdam and Amsterdam or the Helsinki
Western Harbour operation resulted from the city’s initiative, all
having acceptable standards of town integration.
Non-coordinated, isolated or autonomous town planning actions
in these renewal operations tend to be factors of town
segregation, in the cases that they don’t fail before start and have
the capacity to be implemented.
Anyway, some common occurrences might be defined as
general factors of town integration, being synthesised bellow:
(1) the criteria under which it was selected the harbour area as a
priority for urban renewal, being or not include in the
realization of some special event, such as universal and world
exhibitions, sports events, cultural events and others.
In the selection of the site the general context of city
development supports the decision, which might
corresponding to:
(a) An intentional creation of new development tendencies
and basic infrastructures generated by the operation,
considered at the town planning level;
(b) The intention of enlarge the dynamic effect of the local
operation to the existing urban areas in its surroundings,
inducing their transformation;
(c) The creation of new centralities and the connection
between different existent parts of the city, or;
(d) The understanding of the new waterfront space as the
excellence urban space for the development of some
specific program, including national level programmes as
the new CDB of Shanghai or regional and city’s
programmes as aquariums, conference centres and
others.
(2) the inclusion of the operation in the master and in the
strategic planning of the city, therefore being a part among
others of a general coordinated and global conceptual idea
for the city and its development, integrating the passive and
normative planning of the master plans with the operative
actions of these special operations, including other
simultaneous renewal operations in other parts of the city.
ANEJO I 23
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
In some cases the master plan is no longer the most decisive
instrument of urban planning in the development of cities,
being the «proyectos urbanos» most efficient forms of bottomup
urban intervention.
(3) the renewal operation as an opportunity for the coordination
of different main city’s infrastructure investments,
independently from the different forms of coordination
adopted in each case.
Several renewal operations allow for the articulation of
different urban planning actions, frequently managed
separately by different urban management companies,
integrating specific infrastructures.
Port’s transformations, the underground city railroad, the
metropolitan train, the supplying infrastructures companies,
the regional and city’s main road system, the public transport
systems, environmental infrastructures, new bridges and
others, approached in a general urban vision, are included
frequently as initiatives of the intervention, sometimes
extending the range of its proposals largely outside the
specific area of the operation, therefore clearly constituting a
city’s action.
Not having the value of a conclusion, another factor might be
considered as a method that tends to contribute for town
integration: the participated maturation of the proposals for the
renewal of the harbour area.
The public debate for some time of the possible forms and
methods of the renewal operation, in which main city concepts,
urban design patterns, site characteristics and new ideas are
progressively considered as hypothesis and jugged by the
participated process, tend to assure a probable most mature and
appropriate final solution, as we saw on some examples, such as
the Kop van Zuid in Rotterdam, the Expo98 in Lisbon, or both the
Aker Brygge and the Bjorvika operations in Oslo.
The Canary Wharf operation in London also verified this large
period of public debate, but it wasn’t a continuous maturation of
the concepts and methods, once suddenly a new strategy was
introduced, breaking with the work done until the moment.
4. The factors of site integration.
Contrarily to the town integration, extensive key bibliography on
the renewal of harbour areas covering specific subjects of site
integration does not exist; therefore not justifying it’s over viewing.
The next lines will directly develop some case-study analysis, trying
to identify which might be the general factors of site integration.
4.1. FACTORS OF SITE INTEGRATION IN SOME CASE-STUDIES.
(1) - Contrarily to what could be expected, in the Expo98 renewal
operation, in Lisbon, site integration was not a reality.
As we saw the area was a special planning area, developed by a
public capitals development agency, being the accessibility
infrastructures and the detail plans for the areas in the
surroundings developed by the municipality.
As a result, the areas around did in fact benefited from:
(a) The improvement of the accessibilities to the area;
(b) The extension of the network of efficient public transport
systems to the area, and;
(c) The proximity to the new centrality, its services, equipments
and high quality public spaces.
Apart from these indirect benefits, which don’t regard intentionally
site integration and result from the immediate proximity to the
area of intervention, the existence of such rigid limits on planning
jurisdiction, having different urban management institutions, lead
to a segregation on the public spaces, comparing both sides of
this limit.
ANEJO I 24
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
In fact, if one can consider exemplary the public space design
inside the area of the operation, on the contrary, immediately
outside of its limits on the other side of the train line, it decreases
substantially, having no relation at all with the interior areas.
One of the factors that might strongly contribute to this might be
the non-continuity of the public spaces outside the area of
intervention, due to the maintenance of the existing elevated
tramline, which constitutes an effective barrier between the area
of intervention and the surrounding areas.
The crossings of the tramline, elevated bridges (over the elevated
tramline) for car and pedestrian traffic aren’t comfortable
pedestrian spaces, therefore not stimulating site integration.
Anyway, the fact that the main transversal structural roads have
continuity to the intervention area might be considered as a
factor of site integration, once it represents the attempt to mix the
new urban structures in a larger and continuous urban tissue.
In reality, it did happen for car traffic, although in terms of
pedestrian circulation and permanence it didn’t, having been
created segregated spaces.
(2) - The 1998 experimental plan for the renewal of the harbour
area of the Lisnave Company, in the south part of Lisbon, being,
as we saw above, an example of absolute inexistent town
integration, tries to establish some measures of urban design in
order to achieve some site integration – although the general
philosophy for the project didn’t allow for larger initiatives.
In fact, being the intervention area at the level of the river, and
the existent urban areas 30 metres above, the attempt to dissolve
the aggressive existent barrier caused by the relieve through
passages within the buildings and public elevators was a possible
form to break the urban barrier; this initiative might be a factor of
site segregation.
The proposal of complementary urban design initiatives in the
surrounding public spaces, in order to improve its public space
physical quality and integrate those spaces in a continuous of
high-qualified urban areas was certainly another factor of site
integration.
The continuity of the main road system of the area through the
connection of the two urban structural axes was another priority of
the proposal, also being a factor of site integration.
The 1998 experimental plan for the renewal of the harbour area of
the Lisnave Company is an example o how in fact the two levels
of urban integration are independent one from each other, and
how town integration regards to the general planning of the city
and site integration refers to the site urban design proposals.
(3) - The Marseille Euromediterranée urban project adopts an
original form of site integration, once the proposed operations,
including the ones in the eastern harbour territories, are
disseminated through the city, covering a transversal axe
perpendicular to the coast.
The group of operations doesn’t cover, therefore, a concentrated
territory, neither having a precise regular limit.
In the urban project of Marseille, including the harbour’s territories
operations, the disseminated form of contact with the existing
urban tissues not included in the interventions presents a higher
capacity of urban integration, once one can’t clearly establish a
perceptible frontier for those two areas.
Not being able to identify those territories, it is very difficult to
identify a segregation of spaces at the local level.
A second factor of site integration is the urban design
transformation in the area of the Littoral, being the road
infrastructure transformation, through the construction of a tunnel,
and the new profile for the local traffic, creating high quality
public spaces and large comfortable pedestrian areas, a form of
ANEJO I 25
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
suppress an urban barrier and allow for an easier contact with the
port territories and the waterfront.
(4) - In the Kop van Zuid operation, in Rotterdam, the plan
proposes the continuity of the southern main road axes, the westeast
and the two south-north roads, one of them crossing the
west-.east main road.
With this proposal, the plan assures the continuity between the
existing urban areas and the new ones, therefore being a factor
of site integration.
On its north limit, the same technique of urban design was difficult
to be extensively done, once the river is wide and can only be
crossed through important investments on bridges, as the Erasmus
Bridge.
When the area of the plan meats existing urban tissues, both on its
east and west sides, the solution adopted is to connect the two
areas through an urban street, parallel to the existent buildings.
The building difference is dissolved through the public space
design of these streets and the use of vegetation and two lines of
tress – one the eastern limit.
(5) - In the Eastern Docklands operation, in Amsterdam, site
integration wasn’t a main priority, once the area of intervention is
almost exclusively island and peninsulas on the IJ River.
Those new urban areas are entirely surrounded by the river, being
the main question, therefore, to solve its connection to the water.
The different peninsulas have adopted different proposals in the
connection to the water, allowing to the area to have variety –
from the houses over the water on the Entrepot-West, to the
houses on the water of the Borneo Island, and to the public streets
and squares over the water on the KNSM and Java islands.
The southwest limit of the area of intervention is a main railroad
line which connects the Central Station to the Airport and partially,
on the east-west part of this limit, although a canal.
This key infrastructure has become a strong barrier separating the
area of intervention from the city centre and can only be crossed
on specifically located points, enlarging the distances to the city,
therefore, partially segregating the intervention area from the city.
Being geographically near the centre, no natural continuity was
possible to establish with the surrounding neighbourhoods.
It is an eccentric urban area (which would always be due the fact
of be constituted by islands and peninsulas), accentuated by the
separation from the city through the railroad barrier.
This form of site segregation isn’t so important as in other
operations once the dominating program is residential and its
eccentric situation is, after all, its character.
(6) - As we saw above, it is very difficult to identify factors of urban
integration in the Canary Wharf operation, in London.
Regarding to site integration, once again the operation was
turned into itself, being the main accessibilities the only contacts
with the surroundings.
Those infrastructures characteristics are exclusively functional
circulation (the train and the car); its public space design isn’t
concerned with the pedestrian connection to the surrounding
areas.
In fact, in Canary Wharf, the connection to the City by car and
train is the main concern, from which depended the real-state
success of the operation.
The surrounding areas, still to be developed, weren’t particularly
considered in its design, once the area should function
autonomously, having its own restaurants, services and shopping.
(7) - In the Western Docklands operation, in Helsinki, a similar
situation to the Eastern Docklands of Amsterdam occurred, being
Ruoholahti and Jatkasaari (phases 1 and 2) a peninsula and
Munkkisaari (phase 3) another.
ANEJO I 26
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
Looking now only at Ruoholahti (phase 1), the only one realised at
the moment, the area connects to three different existing urban
areas (an industrial area in the north-west, a park in the north and
the city in the north-east), and to the Jatkasaari area (phase 2),
being the rest waterfront limits.
The connection to the industrial area and to the park is an urban
avenue, which corresponds to the access of the city centre to the
west, having the same urban design characteristics and quality as
its interior streets, but an higher intensity of traffic once its is a main
regional road-infrastructure.
The connection to the city is more difficult due to: (a) the
strangulation that happens in the local, having several streets
confluent, and; (b) the double tramline, the first serving the
harbour area of Jatkasaari, still in function, and the second
running through the perimeter of Helsinki, both crossing over the
small area of contact of Ruoholahti with the city.
This tramline, which justifies its crossing by bridge in the northern
main avenue, functions today as a barrier, being located exactly
in the most difficult point to be solved by its urban design.
Some alignment continuities established by the new streets with
the existent ones, in its connection to the city at east, are in fact
only visual alignments, once they are interrupted by the tramline
barrier, not allowing pedestrian and public space design
continuities.
imágenes 13 y 14
Site views of two case-studies: Kop van Zuid in Rotterdam, the Bund in Shanghai
(8) - The Aker Brygge operation, in Oslo, having as we saw some
characteristics of town integration, has different attitudes to the
areas in the surrounding, depending on whose we consider.
In fact, its connection to the City Hall Square through the
waterfront is natural and continuous, profiting from the west-east
tunnel constructed under this space and from the quality of the
public space design of its surface.
The integration in the northwestern existing city is resolved through
an urban avenue, the Munkedamssveien, which its curve form
accompanies the limit of the phase 4 of the operation.
On the northwest side of this street there are the existent building
and its south side the new ones, being its public space object of
high quality design.
The integration of Aker Brygge into the north-eastern existing
urban area and into the west harbour area is not resolved until
today, seaming that an urban project is still missing to complete
ANEJO I 27
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
those urban connections, being he second one more difficult
once it corresponds the traditional urban program of connect
new city with existing segregating port areas.
imágenes 15 y 16
Site views of two case-studies: Canary Wharf in London and Aker Brygge in Oslo
(9) - The Bjorvika operation, in Oslo, still in phase of planning, as we
saw, presents already several site integration problems, which are
subject of intensive debate.
The area is a bay, being surrounded by:
(a) The renaissance city to the west, having some old harbour
storehouses in between, interrupting some existent linear
streets;
(b) To the northwest, the square of the Central Station, needing
some public space design;
(c) To the north, existing urban areas, separated by the huge
group of tramlines of the Central Station;
(d) To the north-east, the new urban park, including some small
scale group of buildings and the ruins of the old Viking City,
and;
(e) To the east, the large group of road and train infrastructures,
followed by the Ekeberg Hill.
The final plan has the difficulty of connect all those different areas
with the program for the site of intervention, being the new
structure and the options to lead with the infrastructures barriers,
specially to the north, main tasks of its urban design.
(10) - At the Victoria’s New Waterfront, in Melbourne, site
integration is also a measure of town integration, as previewed on
principle 3 – responsive to the site.
As we saw, integration and design excellence were the main
goals of the operation, being the search a geometrical continuity
with the city’s existing streets on the east a major urban design
goal, which is clear in the final plan.
As the new area was supposed to be a continuous part of the city,
5 car and pedestrian crosses were proposed over the large
tramlines concentration, prolonging the existing linear main streets.
The maintenance of some harbour / industrial activities and of
main accessibility infrastructures on the south and west side of its
limits meant that difficult site integration could be done in these
directions.
ANEJO I 28
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
The public space design of the areas immediately on the other
side of the intervention, some industrial areas between the city
and the tramlines, is still an open question, which might contribute
for a better site integration.
(11) - At the Lu Jia Zui operation, in Shanghai, site integration in a
minor question, once the entire limits of the area of intervention
are: (a) the waterfront of the large Huangpu River, and; (b) other
new urban areas, corresponding to other operations of in the
Pudong New Area.
The urban design proposals include a major structural avenue,
which connects by tunnel the old city to the Central Green Park,
the heart of Lu Jia Zui, and continues through the Century
Boulevard until the Century Park, the central park of the Pudong
New Area.
The Century Boulevard is the structural axe that organises the
urban design of Lu Jia Zui and connects it with the Pudong New
Area, being an example of what also happens in other urban
axes, which continue outside Lu Jia Zui in existent and new
residential and industrial areas.
Apart from these concepts of urban design, the destruction of
some Chinese traditional two floors and high-density residential
areas that existed behind the harbour and industrial areas, justified
due to healthy reasons and to liberate the lands for the project,
might be questionable in terms of site integration, therefore
justifying the un-existence of urban areas in the surroundings to be
integrated in.
The large areas of quality public space and the well-designed
buildings existent within Lu Jia Zui continue outside the area of
intervention in a continuous form, not allowing for the perception
of its limits, therefore being a factor of site integration.
(12) - At the Bund waterfront renewal, in Shanghai, the 7 meterhigh
flood prevention wall protection against high tides, having
technical reasons to be done, constitutes in fact barrier that
brooked the existing direct relation between the Bund
architectonic facade and the river.
Being a 15 meters elevated platform of public space, it doesn’t
have contact neither with the water, neither with the existent highquality
architectonic facade and buildings, loosing a large part of
what could be the full potential of the waterfront space.
This fact is accentuated by the maintenance of the 10 lines traffic
lanes (created in the operation), which also constitute a strong
barrier that can only be crossed by uncomfortable pedestrian
tunnels.
The adopted urban design solution accentuated in fact the
longitudinal barriers (the elevation and the car traffic),
segregating the waterfront form the existing city instead of
reinforce the transversal comfortable pedestrian connections of
the city to its waterfront.
In this case, the urban design proposals them-self are a factor of
site segregation, corresponding to an urban politic under which
engineering problems such as floods and traffic capacity are the
main priority, relegating the public space design and the
pedestrian causes to a secondary plan.
(13) - Regarding site integration issues, the South Boston Waterfront
operation won’t be considered for the case-study analysis
developed at this chapter.
The reason is the fact that the operation is still in a planning phase,
being the site design relegated to a second period of the plan,
after defined the main town planning decisions presented above.
(14) - At the Port Vell operation, in Barcelona, complementarily to
the factors of town integration mentioned above, also some
factors of urban integration can be observed.
The very sensible connection of the former harbour area with the
existing building facade of the city was done having in
consideration integration objectives, due to:
ANEJO I 29
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
(a) The main longitudinal road infrastructure was object of a
special urban design project, by Manuel de Solá Morales;
(b) The public spaces in these areas were conceived as a hole,
from the building facades to the waterfront, creating an
unitary image;
Therefore, being a factor of site integration.
The searching for a continuity of the main existent urban axes, as
the Ramblas, through its prolongation in the water (the Ramblas
del Mar) was also a factor of site integration, although it was more
a conceptual idea than a reality, once it isn’t an immediate
continuation.
The physical continuity of different waterfront interventions itself
might also be assumed as a factor of site integration, although its
conceptual and abstract planning proposal being a factor of
town integration.
Finally, the creation in the intervention area of an answer to
specific deficits of the urban areas in the surroundings, in this case
the Ciutat Vella, being created large public spaces and specific
equipments that the area needed, might also be considered as a
factor of site integration.
4.2. THE MAIN FACTORS OF SITE INTEGRATION IN THE URBAN RENEWAL OF HARBOUR
AREAS.
Comparatively to the main factors of town integration, a first
conceptual difference can be established, being a characteristic
of the factors of site integration observed in the analysed
operations of renewal of harbour areas:
Site integration regards directly to the urban design, being the
factors of site integration options or proposals made by the urban
design projects;
Although, the conceptual abstract definition of site integration as
an objective for the operation might be considered a factor of
town integration, independently of the final success of this
measure after the plan implementation.
A note must be done at this moment regarding the previous
conclusion: the case-study analysis focused exclusively on town
planning and physical issues, not observing economical, social
and other interventions on problem areas of the surroundings,
which could exist parallel to the operation.
Those non-physical types of proposals could also constitute factors
of site integration, once they try to integrate excluded or
dislocated populations in the society, therefore being social and
economical actions of integration.
The question is, therefore, to identify which common urban design
occurrences might be established as factors of site integration.
From the case-study analysis developed above, it could be
identified as the main factors of site integration the following ones:
(1) THE BENEFIT OF THE SURROUDING AREAS FROM INVESTMENTS REALISED IN THE
RENEWAL OPERATION, DUE TO ITS PPROXIMITY AND EASY ACCESS, such as:
(a) Its benefit of the improvement of the accessibilities to the
area, being also directly served by these new
infrastructures, such as the extension of the main road
system;
(b) The extension of the network of efficient public transport
systems to the intervention area, such as light urban train,
subway or regional trains, and;
(c) The proximity to the new centrality created inside the
intervention area and from its services, equipments and
high quality public spaces.
All these three possible benefits of the existent urban areas
from the renewal operation depend directly on the existence
of easy pedestrian access from the surrounding areas to them,
factor without which the geographical proximity has no
ANEJO I 30
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
effective application to the reality, therefore not allowing to
the these areas to benefit from these aspects.
These indirect benefits might in some cases not correspond to
intentional site integration urban design measures, but they
can in fact exist even not programmed, being real benefits.
(2) THE APPLICATION OF EQUAL PUBIC SPACE DESIGN QUALITY CRITERIA TO PUBLIC
SPACES INSIDE THE AREA OF INTERVENTION AND TO THE NEAREST PUBLIC SPACES
OUTSIDE THIS AREA, as a form of guaranty a continuity between
those areas and dissolve the perception of the physical limits
of the operation.
The existence of public space continuity between the
operation and the surrounding areas is a technique to dilute
the contrasts between those areas, therefore diluting possible
existent segregation between them.
This urban design measure also means the extension of the
urban politic of high quality public spaces to the surrounding
areas, not confining the intervention exclusively to the
perimeter of the operation.
(3) THE GENERAL SUPPRESING OF THE EXISTENT OR PREVIEWED URBAN BARRIERS,
allowing for an effective connection between the area of
intervention and the areas on the other side of the urban
barrier.
The existence of longitudinal urban barriers is a very frequent
occurrence in harbour areas, once these areas were normally
limited and closed areas, which needed to be served by
good road and train accessibilities to connect to its hinterland
and to be economically viable.
Being closed longitudinal areas, its perimeter was also the
appropriate location for some urban main infrastructures,
which very frequently duplicate the harbour accessibility
infrastructures, such as:
(a) The closing of city’s beltways by the water, parallel to the
historical consolidate urban areas, which were frequently
constructed benefiting from the creation of land
extensions on the waterfront as part of the development
of the harbour areas;
(b) The regional train lines that were created in the end of the
19th century and in the beginning of the 20th, having its
departure station by the city centre, also benefiting from
harbour’s land extensions on the waterfront, and;
(c) The existence of relieve abrupt barriers with accentuated
level differences is another type of possible urban barrier,
which might not allow for the connection of the existent
urban areas, above, to the renewed harbour area,
bellow, possibly on artificial land extensions to the water.
The urban design proposals lead with these urban barriers is a
key action regarding site integration, once it will define the
possibility of create frequent continuities to the existent
surrounding areas or, on the contrary, maintain the barrier
between those two urban areas, therefore contributing to
special segregation.
(4) THE EXTENSION OF THE EXISTENT MAIN URBAN AXES TO THE AREA OF
INTERVENTION, integrating the structure of the new urban area as
part of the existent urban tissues.
The urban design search for continuities and alignments with
existing urban spaces represents the attempt to mix the new
urban structures in a larger and continuous urban tissue,
therefore being a factor of site integration.
Those existent urban axes could be from one of following two
types:
(a) Transversal main avenues and streets, which penetrate
into the territory starting in an existent longitudinal axe,
located immediately outside the former harbour area;
ANEJO I 31
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
(b) Longitudinal urban main axes, which were interrupted or
deviated from its natural course due to the special needs
of the former harbour area, including interior avenues and
waterfront pedestrian axes.
(5) THE CONSIDERATION OF THE ALIGNMENTS OF FACADES OF THE EXISTENT URBAN
AREAS IN THE DEFINITION OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE NEW URBAN AREA,
benefiting from its possible architectonic value and creating
specific urban design solutions, such as:
(a) Public spaces esplanades, as a form to directly connect
the existent urban facade with the waterfront, or;
(b) The duplication of the alignment of facades as a form to
create a new street or avenue, which should be object of
public space design as a technique to integrate the two
groups of facades.
(6) THE RESOLUTION, INSIDE THE AREA OF INTERVENTION, OF SPECIFIC NEEDS OF THE
SURROUNDING URBAN AREAS, APART FROM THE NORMAL QUOTE OF URBAN
EQUIPMENTS THAT IS AFFECTED TO THE AREA.
Those specific needs of the surrounding areas might regard to
historical areas, illegal urban extensions, extensive or dated
residential areas, being the specific needs large high quality
public spaces and green areas, and public equipments such
as schools, health services, sport and leisure facilities and
others.
Those needs are intentionally solved in the urban design
proposals, not corresponding the quote of city’s equipments,
public spaces and others that the new urban area has to fulfil
as part of its program.
5. Conclusion: from the factors of integration to the construction
of a method of analysis of the urban integration in the
operations of renewal of harbour areas.
The developed town planning theoretical definitions, regarding
the urban integration on the operations of renewal of harbour
areas, consists, at a first level, the synthesis of a group of practical
experiences, having the value of questioning the subject for future
professional activity.
Although assuming that each case is a single case, having its own
physical characteristics, urban management processes, town
planning practices, architectural aesthetics and technologies, site
characteristics, and other specific aspects, some general
questions can be identified on a comparative analysis of other
case studies.
That might certainly be one of the utilities of the conceptual
framing presented on the lines above.
But the definition of the two levels of urban integration and the
identification of the specific factors of town integration and
factors of site integration has also an academic potential.
It consists on the possibility to use these conclusions as a starting
point for the elaboration of a general theory for the evaluation of
the urban integration in these operations.
Evaluating, not as a simple evaluation act, but having the
objective of develop comparative analysis as: (1) a form of better
identify the problems, learning from other experiences, and; (2) a
technique for include urban integration as one of the criteria of an
urban design analysis of the city’s proposals, developed in those
operations.
To understand which new city are we creating today on those
new strategic urban areas, by using extensive comparative
analysis, the use of disciplinary techniques is a must.
As larger it is, comparative analysis must simultaneously be a more
objective and measurable technique; it will cover more examples,
therefore, not allowing to achieve such a deep knowledge on
each one.
ANEJO I 32
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
In this perspective, the main question might be: which questions
shall we do to each case study?
And that is the moment for the factors of urban integration to be
useful.
By defining at each level the factors of integration, one could
establish a method, based on a selected group of questions,
which could be used to verify the urban integration in an
operation of renewal of a harbour area, and compare it with
others.
The concept could be that, by the analysis of some previously
defined criteria, one could evaluate the urban integration of
different operations and compare the obtained results.
Each defined factor of town integration and of site integration
would be, therefore, a criterion to be verified in each operation of
renewal of a harbour area.
That means, if we would want to analyse the urban design
proposals of a case study and include in the analysis the relation
of the new urban area with the existent city, one should verify,
separately:
(1) The town integration of the operation, by verifying the
following occurrences:
1.1. The criteria under which the harbour area was selected
for urban renewal, being or not include in the realization
of some special event, and the reasons that lead to the
decision – to induce urban development to that part of
the city or to the surrounding areas, create new urban
centralities, to integrate main infrastructure investments, to
help re-convert the surrounding areas, to create new
waterfront leisure spaces for the population as part of an
urban network of leisure/environmental/cultural/touristy
spaces, and others -, and the fulfil of those urban
objectives.
1.2. The relation of the urban planning of the operation with
the town planning of the city/region, by verifying its
coordination with: (a) the regional, master and strategic
planning of the city; (b) other operative urban actions on
the city – other «proyectos urbanos».
1.3. The coordination of the renewal operation with city’s
major infrastructure investments, such as accessibility,
public transport, environmental and basic infrastructures,
justifying the opportunity for its realisation, even if those
investments are done by different urban management
entities.
1.4. How did it existed public debate and public participation
in: (a) the major decision of realising the renewal
operation, and; (b) the progressive maturation of urban
design ideas, concepts and physical proposals,
progressively achieving an agreement on some aspects
of the operation (although this 4th criterion might not
have direct implication on the town integration of the
operation).
(2) The site integration of the operation, by verifying the following
occurrences:
2.1. The benefits of the surrounding areas from investments
realised in the renewal operation, due to its proximity and
easy access, such as the improvement of accessibilities
and public transports, infrastructure benefits, and the
access to the services provided in the new central area.
2.2. The existence of pedestrian continuity with equal highqualified
public spaces, inside the area of intervention
and in the areas immediately outside, guarantying that
the new urban area isn’t a segregated space.
2.3. The suppressing of existent or previewed urban barriers,
such as main road and train accessibilities, both for port
and city’s use, or relieve barriers, allowing for physical
ANEJO I 33
ARTICULO: THE NEW WATERFRONT: SEGREGATED SPACE OR URBAN INTEGRATION?
continuity between the new urban area and the existent
surrounding areas.
2.4. The logical extension of the existent main urban axes into
the area of intervention, having pedestrian and car
comfortable continuity, both the transversal and the
longitudinal axes.
2.5. The consideration of the existent alignments of facades in
the new urban structure, benefiting from possible
architectonic or heritage value by the creation of: (a)
public space esplanades, connection again those
facades to the water, or; (b) new urban axes integrating
the existent facades within the new built structure.
2.6. The intentional answer, inside the area of intervention, to
specific needs of the surrounding areas, apart from the
quote of equipments normally affected to a new urban
area, such as un-existent high-quality public spaces and
green areas, health services, schools, sport and leisure
facilities, and others.
The verification of these criteria should be comprehensive and
should attend to the specific characteristics of the operation,
considering the existent situation and town planning practices in
its evaluation.
This means urban integration ca not only be measured simply by
the fulfilling of these criteria, but it also should consider the relative
importance of each criteria in each case study.
This technique should be able to be applied to different realities,
therefore being general, but should also consider that the
interpretation of a physical and planning reality implies the
understanding of its major site characteristics and history, of the
process developed and of the town planning reality of the region.
Finally, it should be mentioned that urban integration analysis is
only a part of what might be the development of a general
technique to the analysis of the urban design proposals in the
operations of renewal of harbour areas.
The operations themselves, its conceptual idea of city, its physical
proposals, its quantification, its program, will also integrate this
analysis, and will be object of similar previous technical definition,
as part of a methodology developed by the author to support its
research on the subject.
BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES:
AA.VV.; Cities in Transition, 2001 / ALEMANY, Juan; El Port de Barcelona, 1999 /
ASCHER, François; Metapolis, 1998 / BORJA, Jordi; CASTELLS, Manuel; Local y Global,
1997 / BAUDOUIN, Thierry; COLLIN, Michèle; Culture des Villes Portuaires et
Mondialisation de l’Economie, 1994 / BREEN, Ann; RIGBY, Dick; The new waterfront: a
worldwide urban success story, 1996. / BREEN, Ann; Rigby, Dick; Waterfronts. Cities
Reclaim their Edge, 1994 / BRUTTOMESSO, Rinio (ed.); Waterfronts: a new frontier for
cities on water, 1993 / BUSQUETS, Juan; Anvers, Barcelone et Buenos-Aires: quand les
villes s’occupent de leur ports, Sept.1992 / BUSQUETS, Juan; Planeamiento: Pasado
reciente y futuro próximo, 1995 / CASARIEGO, Joaquin; et al; Waterfronts de Nuevo,
1999 / CASTELLS, Manuel; La Ciudad Informacional, 1995 / CHARLIER, Jacques;
MALÉZIEUX, Jacques; Les Strategies Alternatives de Redeveloppement Portuaire en
Europe Occidentale, 1994 / COSTA, João Pedro; COELHO, Carlos; O Planeamento
Regional e os planos-projectos especiais, 2001 / CRAIG-SMITH, Stephen; FAGENCE,
Michael; Recreation and Tourism as a Catalyst for Urban Waterfront Redevelopment,
1998 / DA, Gao; The Bund Then and Now, 1995 / EDWARDS, Brian; London Docklands:
Urban Design in an Age of Deregulation, 1994 / HALL, Peter; Waterfronts: a new urban
frontier, 1992 / HOYLE, Brian (ed.); Cityports, Coastal zones and Regional Change,
1996 / KOSTER, Egbert; Amsterdam Eastern Doccklands, 1995 / MALONE, Patrick; City,
Capital and Water, 1996 / MARSHALL, Richard; Waterfronts in Post-Industrial Cities,
2001 / MEYER, Han; City and Port: Urban Planning as a Cultural Venture in London,
Barcelona, New York and Rotterdam, 1999 / MITCHELL, William; e-topia, 2000 /
PORTAS, Nuno; Cities & Waterfronts, 1998 / POWELL, Kenneth; La Transformación de la
Ciudad, 2000 / ROGERS, Richard; Cities for a Small World, 1995 / RONGMIN, Lou; The
Bund. History and Vicissitudes, 1998 / SASSEN, Saskia; The Global City, 1991 / Shanghai
LuJiaZui Master Plan, 2001 / VERMEERSCH, Laurent; La reconversion des zones
portuaires dans les centres-villes nord-américains; de 1950 à nos jours: vers une
redéfinition de la ville moderne, 1997 (Doctorat de géographie et d’amenagement,
dir. Paul Claval, Université Paris IV-Sorborne).
Promotional documents, plans and reports from:
Administração do Porto de Lisboa / Autoritat Portuària de Barcelona / Helsinki City
Planning Department / London Docklands Development Coorporation / Margueira
SGFII SA / Melbourne Docklands Authority / Oslo Kommune (Plan-og Bygningsetaten)
/ Parque Expo SA / Port Autonome de Marseille.