Urban Transfromation of Riga's Microrayons

URBAN TRANSFORMATION OF RIGA‘S MICRORAYONS

FROM A SUSTAINABLE URBAN DESIGN PERSPECTIVE

CASE STUDY: MEŽCIEMS

JOMANTE VALIULYTE2013

INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE URBANISMISU

Master Thesis, 30ects, Spring Semester 2013

Spatial Planning with an emphasis on Urban Design in China and EuropeBlekinge Institute of Technology (BTH)Karlskrona, Sweden

Institute for Sustainable Urbanism (ISU), TU Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany

Tutors:Prof.Jana Revedin (BTH);Prof.Dr. Vanessa Miriam Carlow (ISU)

Pictures, maps and drawings are made by the author, the ones which are used from other sources are explained in APPENDIX 2 of this thesis.Copyright©Jomante Valiulyte ([email protected])

CAD drawings were provided by ISU.

3

Today, almost every town in Europe has a district of mass housing estates. Espe-cially European countries, which were in the former Soviet Union, are facing ample issues on dealing with mass housing districts, which cover a great part of cities. Most of them are in a critical condition and in necessary need of renovation. Never-theless, they are strongly criticized by researchers, as uncomfortable places to live, which do not fit the human scale. These post – Soviet mass housing estates, which are called ‘microrayons’, is an immense headache to all post - Soviet countries.

Riga, which is the capital of Latvia and the biggest city in the Baltic States, can be considered as a special case because of its historical and political situation. While in the past, serving as a western hub for the former USSR, today it is an independent city which is located in a democratic country. Despite the fact that Riga’s historical center is included in UNESCO world heritage list because of its unique Art Nou-veaux/Jugendstil architecture, almost one third of the city is covered with post – So-viet mass housing estates. Mežciems is one of them. Once been a soviet ‘microray-on’, today Mežciems is a challenging place for sustainable urban reconstruction.

Sustainable transformation of ‘microrayons’ sounds like a promising future. Sus-tainable development is based on creating comfortable zones for humans, practic-ing the use of renewable resources and developing a nature friendly environment. While sustainability itself is focused on the future, not only the present.

In this project the case of Mežciems is investigated. Mežciems was chosen because of its unique location and surroundings. Crucial was it to find appropriate approach-es of sustainability which could be implemented in Mežciems ‘microrayon’. The ones which extend the life of Mežciems, preserve the history and improve urban structure of the whole city, were used.

In order to understand the scale and the real situation of Mežciems, on - site inves-tigation, literature studies and analysis were done. From these it was observed that Mežciems as well as other microrayons possessed many problems. Thus some strategies are used in this project to show that these problems can be solved in the most economic and efficient way. This ends by proposing a new design which if im-

plemented, would transform Riga into an attractive and sustainable city. These strategies also have the potentials to transform other areas plagued by the prob-lems associated with mass housing estates.

Key Words: mass housing estates, sustainable revitalisation, microrayon, urban transformation, sustainable urban design.

ABSTRACT

4

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Two years of Master studies of Science Program in Spatial Planning with an emphasis on Urban Design in China and Europe at Blekinge Institute of Technology was full of new experiences. This program gave me the opportunity to gain knew knowledge in the professional field.

This thesis would not have been done without an Erasmus Vocational Training Pro-gram, which gave me the possibilities to gain professional experience in the Institute for Sustainable Urbanism, TU Braunschweig, Germany. The thesis was made in a col-laboration with two great proffessors: Prof. Jana Revedin and Dr. Prof. Vanessa Mi-riam Carlow.

I want to give great thanksto Dr. Prof. Vanessa Miriam Carlow, Institute for Sustain-able Urbanism (ISU), TU Braunschweig, for giving me the opportunity to do a thesis in the ISU and for introducing me with many people in Riga, who made this thesis pos-sible, and also for her guidance during my thesis work by sharing her knowledge with me;

I am equally grateful to Prof. Jana Revedin, DNS School of Planning, Bleckinge Insti-tute of Technology, for guiding me the right direction, exchanging her knowledge with me and providing me with valuable advices.

A great amount of people has helped me during my visit in Riga. Without them this thesis would not look like it is today. I am particularly overwhelmed with their help.

Last but not the least I want to address a special thanks to my family and friends, who gave me their moral and financial support throughout my studies. Thanks for your encouragement!

5

INTRODUCTION....................................................................7

• Riga - general facts....................................................................................9• Microrayons in Riga..................................................................................10• Riga - Official image..................................................................................11• Riga - in reality..........................................................................................12

INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM ....................................13

• Post-Soviet mass housing ......................................................................14• Mass housing districts in Riga.................................................................14• Land ownership and privatization in Riga ...............................................16• New housing projects in Riga...................................................................16• Urban sprawl............................................................................................17• Conclusions...............................................................................................17• Mežciems..................................................................................................18• Aim...........................................................................................................19• Delimitations.............................................................................................19• Research question....................................................................................19

THEORY AND METHOD.......................................................20

• Method......................................................................................................21• Literature review.......................................................................................21• Mapping process.......................................................................................21• Site visit....................................................................................................21• Interviews.................................................................................................22• Theory and Background............................................................................23• Microrayons – The beginning....................................................................24• Historical aspect.......................................................................................24• The establishment of Microrayon.............................................................25• Conclusions...............................................................................................26• Microrayons in Riga..................................................................................27• The urge for renovation............................................................................27• Possible participants in Renovation process............................................27• Renovation examples...............................................................................28• Bijlmermeer (Amsterdam, The Netherlands)..........................................28• Hellersdof – Marzahn (Berlin,Germany)..................................................30• Conclusions..............................................................................................31

• Understanding the notion of comfortable living environment..................32• Work.........................................................................................................32• Dwelling....................................................................................................34• Self – worth...............................................................................................35• Evaluating the theoretical approach of qualitative living environment....37

MICRORAYONS IN THE CITY’S CONTEXT............................38

• Age of microrayons...................................................................................39• Landscape................................................................................................40• Location of microrayons............................................................................41• Connectivity..............................................................................................42• Motor roads:.............................................................................................42• Bridges:....................................................................................................42• Bicycle routes and pedestrian network:...................................................43• Transit services:.......................................................................................44• The scale...................................................................................................45

MICRORAYONS IN DETAILS................................................46

• Self infill...................................................................................................48• Local business - Self-transformation of flats..........................................50• Public spaces: challenges.........................................................................51• Public spaces: potentials..........................................................................55• Conclusions of the analysis......................................................................57

URBAN RENOVATION STRATEGIES FOR RIGA’S MICRORANS........................................................................58

• Study area: Mežciems 1977-1985.............................................................58• Mežciems in Riga’s context.......................................................................59• Mežciems in Riga’s context.......................................................................60• Surroundings.............................................................................................61• Mežciems built character..........................................................................62• General situation of public spaces...........................................................63• Built height...............................................................................................64• Built type..................................................................................................65

TABLE OF CONTENTS

6

RENOVATION STRATEGIES FOR THE STUDY AREA:MEŽCIEMS............................................................................66

• Strategy Nr. 1: Better connection with the city center................................68• Strategy Nr. 2: Mixed use infill:...................................................................69• Strategy Nr. 3: To create new and encourage existing forms of entrepreneurship........................................................................................70• Strategy Nr. 4: Lively public spaces:............................................................71• Strategy Nr. 5: The mix of functions within a walking distance..................72

DESIGN PROPOSAL FOR MEŽCIEMS....................................73

• IDEA: To improve bicycle links from the city centre to Mežciems ..............75• IDEA: Removal of Gailezera iela and creation of extra speed redusement barriers in Sergeja Eizensteina iela and in Hipokrata iela..........76• IDEA: Renovation of houses by extendengin their size...............................77• References of housing renovation..............................................................78• IDEA: Designing new buildings in the area.................................................79• IDEA: More enterpreneural activities in the area.......................................80• IDEA: Enclosed courtyards divided with small pockets of spaces..............81• IDEA:Open public space with the variety of functions.................................82• IDEA: Bus stops are located in that way so it would take 3 minutes to reach the destination.................................................................................83

EVALUATION OF THE DESIGN PROPOSAL............................84

CONCLUSIONS......................................................................88

APPENDIX 1: BIBLIOGRAPHY................................................89

APPENDIX 2: PICTURES........................................................91

7

INTRODUCTION

8

Reconstruction of mass housing estates is a hot topic today. Facing the changes of climate, energy crisis and rapid urban sprawl in the 21st century, it became crucial to modify the urban planning system of the city. Radical visions on the urban plan-ning structure born in the 20th century, which denied the setup of a traditional city.

The famous organization of the 20th century called ‘CIAM’ (International Congres-ses of Modern Architecture) with Le Corbusier in the front, had visions for the city, which structure supposed to work as a mechanism of a machine with ‘over scaled urbanism of freeways’ and ‘repeating, massive housing blocks’. His new concept of planning became ‘the lingua franca of internationalist modernisms’ proponents’. (Polyzoides et al. 2012, p.51). Therefore, the mass production of building is highly criticized these days.

Even though Stefanos Polyzoides (2012, p.56) asserts that these mass housing dist-ricts, which became common these days, usually are an architectural pieces of ‘les-ser hands and minds’ than Le Corbusier, he still contends the conception of it: ‘For half a century, the measures introduced by most architects to ameliorate perceived urban problems have wreaked a level of chaos-by-design worse than the problems that invited architectural mediation in the first place’ (Polyzoides, 2012, p.56). Pro-fessor Jana Revedin criticizes mass housing if it neglects the human condition, the connection to the local culture and social dimension, to the historical and geographi-cal character of the site. Sustainable Urbanism has, in her theory, to follow not only ecological and economical, but also cultural and social aims to become a planning that respects the populations necessity to flexibility and individual interpretation of dwelling, also through the creative occupation of the public ground and the self-buil-ding of necessary living and service spaces. She claims that mass housing of “inter-national style”, at least in Germany and the Northern countries, pushed away the ideas of the reformatory Early Moderns (Tessenow, Taut, May, Sharoun, Poelzig, Gropius together with autarkist “social-green”-landscapers and urban planners as Schumacher or Leberecht Migge) which were focused on upgrading the dreadful ur-ban living conditions of the industrial age (Revedin, 2009) instead of following dishu-man masterplans that proved unaccepted by the populations and, unloved, aged badly, Jana Revedin proposes, in our times of migration and knowledge exchange, her theory of the “Radicant City”, an organic and homogeneous urban tissue that grows, as the radicant plants, where it needs nourishment and hold following the inhabitants true and individual needs, “creating itself and then continuously upgra-ding itself from within, using the simplest means“. (Revedin, 2013).

Kenneth Frampton (2007) denies the rightness of mass housing construction by drawing the reasonable comparison with the car production. According him, mass produced houses differs from cars because of their limited ‘spatial flexibility and technical refinement’. Additionally, dwelling cannot be mass produced because his framework does not fit into consumer oriented manner. While a car has a guaran-teed market because of its ‘indispensable means of private transport’. A car itself describes a term ‘consumer good’ because it is not required to be connected to the site. While a house obviously cannot fit this term because of its necessity to be in a relation with the site. Finally, except the amount of fabrication, housing is not able to gain the same ‘benefits of industrial production’ (Frampton, 2007, p.124).

The theories of both researchers of course follow a school of philosophical thought who claims a difference between “building” and “dwelling” and shows that profound social and political development happens in a sustainable way only “subscribing to such values as Hannah Arendt’s work, Martin Heidegger’s dwelling and Ivan Illich’s self-worth.” (Revedin 2013). Thus this thesis focuses on the transforamtion of mass housing estates guided by the principles of sustainability.

Introduction

9

Riga - general facts

Baltic countries

Russia

Estonia

Latvia

Lithuania

Belarus

Ukraine

Poland

GermanyNetherlands

Belgium

France

SpainPortugal

United Kingdom

Ireland

Iceland

Norway

Sweden

Finland

Czech Rep.Slovakia

Austria Hungary

Italy

SwitzerlandSloveniaCroatia

Bosnia andHercegovina

Greece

Turkey

Moldova

Romania

BulgariaMontenegro

Albania

Serbia

KosovoMacedonia

Latvia Facts:

Country of a Baltic States;

Location: Eastern Europe near the Baltic sea;

Neighbors: Estonia, Russia, Belarus and Lithuania;

Population: 2 220 000 people;

Pop. density: 36,01 sq.km

Area: 64,589 sq km;

Capital: Riga;

Climate: Humid continental;

Riga Facts:

The capital of Latvia;

Biggest city in Baltic states;

Population: 706 413 people

Area: 304.05 sq km

streets, 21,23

Ethnical composition of Riga‘s inhabitants, year 2012

Planned territoy use method (2009), in percents

Climate in Riga during the year

Source: www.shipdetective.com/maps/eastern_central_europe.htm

Source: map base from www.wikimedia.org, modified by the author

Source: www.sus.lv

Source: www.sus.lv

Source: www.climate-zone.com

10

Microrayons in Riga are built on the periphery of the city, around the city ring, (fig.1). The purpose of the building program in Soviet times was to create as many square meters of living space as possible. The construction began in ear-ly 1960s and continued until the late 1980s, (Grava, 1993). Therefore, none of them were totally completed. Nowadays there is a lack of public buildings in microayons, as they were not completed during the construction period, (Lei-jnieks, 2013).

Nowadays Latvia is a member of European Union which means that Riga’s de-velopment should be implemented according to the instructions and spatial de-velopment principles of it. Currently Riga’s Spatial Plan is focused on sustain-able and balanced development and creation of ‘active, vital and modern centre for business, tourism, trade, administration and recreation with a safe, comfor-table and environmentally friendly system of transport preserving the charac-teristic natural values, as well as the cultural and historic heritage.’(ed. Altrock et.al.,2006)

Riga is the biggest development region (ed. Altrock et.al.,2006) with a set de-velopment plan. In total, there are five regions, with set development plans. Currently the region has set three documents concerning the development, which consists of a long-term Development Strategy planned until 2025; zoning and land use planning for the year 2006 – 2018 and a mid-term planning and investment plan. The definite aim of these plans is to develop towards a sustain-able city. Current Riga’s development plans look promising, however they tend to concentrate on the central part and river banks, while the outskirts, built with mass housing estates do not have a particular development plan yet thus lea-ding to urban sprawl, where the city becomes more spread out and car depen-dent (see p.17).

1

2

34

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

1. Daugavgriva;2. Bolderaja;3. Ilguciems;4. Imanta;5. Zolitude;

6. Agensklns;7. Sarkandaugava;8. Vecmilgravis;9. Jugla;10. Mezciems;

11. Purvciems;12. Plavnieki;13. Kengarags;14. Ziepniekalns.

14

City center

Microrayons in Riga

Figure 1. There fourteen microrayons built in the perphery of Riga

1.Daugavgriva;2.Bolderaja;3.Ilguciems;4.Imanta;5.Zolitude;

6. Agenskalns;7. Sarkandaugava;8.Vecmilgravis;9.Jugla;10.Mezciems;

11.Purvciems;12.Plavnieki;13.Kengarags;14.Ziepniekalns.

11

Riga - Official image

Riga in tourist‘s booklets and books is presented as a city which has a rich architecure because of it‘s central part , which consists mostly from Art Noveaux buildings and is invoked into UNESCO world heritage list , (Unesco, 1997).Besides Art Noveaux architecture Riga also has an attrac-tive medieval part, rich with churches.

In 1997 Riga‘s city center was selected as a UNESCO world heritage because of it‘s rich Art Noveaux architecture, (Unesco, 1997).

1. 2.

3. 4. 5.

12

Riga - in reality

Mass housing estates in Riga are mostly divided into neighbourhood units called microrayons. Microrayon (neighbourhood unit) – ‘a complex of resi-dential buildings combined with a variety of services and retail outlets meeting the population’s daily needs’, (An-drusz, 1985)

Even 60 % of Riga‘s inhabitants live in mass housing estates, which were built under the Soviet Regime.

1. 2.

3. 4. 5.

13

INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM

14

Post-Soviet mass housing

Every post-Soviet city has at least one district built with houses from mass prefabri-cated panels. Those districts are called ‘microrayons’ (Rus.микрорайон, Eng. neigh-bourhood unit) because of their special planning purpose created in former Soviet Union. As Sigurd Grava (1993) explains, the idea of ‘microrayon’ planning concept came from classical British and American neighborhood theories, only these theo-ries were adapted to the Soviet regime rules. Assuming the fact that former Soviet Union was under a totalitarian regime, this notion of microrayon was ‘unquestio-nably accepted as the primary structural planning unit’ (Sazonov, 1973). As a result large amount of people are living in those dwellings today. Nevertheless, mass housing blocks are facing critical problems, including radically monotonous appear-ance of houses and unorganized parking spaces.

Mass housing districts in Riga

Riga is one of those post-Soviet cities, with a majority of city’s population living in ‘microrayons’( fig.2). The situation of the city becomes intriguing considering the fact that a part of its city centre is listed in the UNESCO heritage list because of ‚its finest collection of art nouveau buildings in Europe‘ (Unesco,1997). The city centre consists of ‘capitalist’ districts, the ones built before WWII, which embodies only the small part of the city (Grava,1993). Today Riga is divided into fifty-eight neighborhoods (Lat.apkaimes) (fig.3).

Figure 2. The population density in the city of Riga

Figure 3. The division of neighbourhoods in Riga.

15

14 neighbourhoods from 58 has microrayons in their composition. According to the map of built area (fig.4), mass housing estates (microrayons) occupies one third of the residential area in Riga (Industrial area is not included). It shows that those mass housing estates actually forms a real character of Riga. Furthermore they were not upgraded since they were built.

Microrayons could be divided into two groups: mono and mixed (fig.5) according to their built character. Mixed microrayons are the ones which were built on already

existing residential area and plays as infill between other buildings, while mono microrayons are the ones, which were built on a vast land and has a clear character of microrayon. However another aspect with mixed microrayons is that mass housing estates were built there without considering the existing situation and that is visible nowadays very clearly.

1

2

34

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13




14

MONO

MIXED

City center

Riga city border

Neighbourhood border

Figure 5. The typology of microrayons.

14

Microrayon

City center

Riga city

Built-up area

Industrial area

Figure 4. 1/3 of the built area is occupied with microrayons.

16

Land ownership and privatization in Riga

Another problem of these microrayons is the privatization of land. The land is divi-ded by different owners and those houses are actually standing on the private land. In consequence, inhabitants are paying rents to the land owners and the local municipality is incapable to initiate the changes (J. Leijnieks, 2013).As a result, pu-blic spaces stays abandoned or made into private territory.

Municipalisation according to Lejnieks (2013) does not seem available possibility for Riga because, it might take up to three budgets of the state, for municipalities, to buy all the private land situated in microrayons.

New housing projects in Riga

Although, microrayons are left unreconstructed, newly built dwellings can be found inside. New houses do not help to update the existing condition of microrayons. New dwellings either are built as private houses inside the courtyards of microrayons, which become a fenced private property, either blocks of flats which are not adapted to the existing environment (fig.56 In some cases blocks of flats are also fenced with their own public space. This type of building inside microrayons can be named self - infill because their are made by individuals not considering the surroundings.

For example, new residential building built in one of the courtyards of Purvciems, steals public space from neighboring houses by placing a public space on the podi-um above the ground, which creates an access to the public space only to the inhab-itants of the new house, (fig.7). In consecuence, the value of neighboring blocks of flats decreases because they do not have such a good public space as the new house.

Figure 6. New houses in Imanta microrayon.

Figure 7. New residential house in one of the courtyards of Purvciems

17

Urban sprawl

Even though during the past two decades Riga experienced a decline in popula-tion, the number of inhabitants in the suburbs has increased, (Jansons, 2011). Statistics show that people are actively moving to the outskirts of Riga. The po-pulation in 19 out of 23 of these municipalities experienced an increase in 2003. During the last decade some municipalities have experienced an increase up to around 20%, even though most of the inhabitants work in Riga. For example in Garkalne village, only 20 – 30% of the inhabitants works within the borders of the township.

People’s migration from city to the suburbs may lead to the loss of agricultural land and higher investments on infrastructure. Such consequences had already happened in USA. Urban sprawl in Riga can lead the city to the increase of traffic jams, air pollution and higher investments on car roads, since inhabitants of the suburbs mostly have works in the city. The daily migration creates the depen-dence from car and increase the expenses on fuel.

Conclusions

Some of the major problems which Riga and its mass housing estates are facing are mentioned above. The effects of these problems on the inhabitants makes it necessary to solve them. If these problems are not solved, Riga can get into big-ger problems such as people moving to the periphery or even leaving the city. The complexity of these problems warrants a precise and logical approach in solving them.

A possible solution to these problems is proposed using Mežciems as a case study in the proceeding sections. Here Mežciems is examined and the principles of sustainability are used as a guide to upgrade the present situation into a more balanced living neighborhood.

Figure 8. Urban sprawl in 1990 ( marked in black colour)

Figure 9. Urban sprawl in 2008 (marked in black colour)

18

The ‘microrayon’ of Mežciems is a potential and encouraging place for sustainable renovation. The great potential of Mežciems lies in its sur-roundings: it has forests lying in the west and east sides of the area and the lake in the north. Such objects as a car museum and car racing track increase the popularity for the area. The planning structure of Mežciems differs from other microrayons: it has a structured plan-ning system with an architectural idea and a visible reflection of secret ambitions of architects. Therefore it faces the same problems as other microrayons in Riga and planning idea is still stuffed in the frames of ‘microrayon’ concept, which has strict planning requirements. Lo-cated relatively close to the city center, thus it is still disconnected from it with the forest.

Not only are the problems mentioned in the preceding section affec-ting the mass housing estates, but also are problems of smaller scale as shown in the analysis part of this work( p.38). Thus, in the case of Mezciems, a solution to all these problems is proposed. The satelite view of Mezciems Source: google maps

The lake viewThe streetThe courtyard

The square The parking lot

Mežciems:

19

Aim:

The main purpose of the thesis is to argue that the present conditions of post-Soviet microrayons has an outdated design for buildings and spaces between them. The buildings are too similar to each other and they create a monotonous and dull image of the neighborhood. In general microrayons lack individual ap-pearance because of the same building design. The problems with spaces bet-ween the buildings is that they are not designed for the current people’s lifestyle. The parking lots are too small for the present situation, which is why public spaces are occupied by cars. The ones which are not filled with vehicles, are ne-glected in other ways. Usually it is just a big area of grass-land with outdated equipment from the Soviet times. In order to reach the sensible argument, the state of human scale and the principles of sustainable urban design should be analyzed. Following various approaches of sustainable urbanism, certain, the most cruci-al, reconversion strategies, will be proposed for the typical microrayon.

The microrayon of Mežciems in Riga, Latvia will serve as a case of Soviet mass housing district which could be transformed into a sustainable urban structure, which increases neighborhood’s value and social interaction in it.

Delimitations:

The term sustainability is very wide and there are plenty of methods to trans-form mass housing districts into sustainable neighborhood. That is why the the-sis will focus on the aspect of human scale in sustainable urban design. The transformation methods for microrayons will be designed according to the main challenges and opportunities, which occurs after the analysis of those mass housing estates.

Research question:

How does the concept of sustainable urban design and its aspect of human scale can be used as a transformation tool for the outdated design layout of microrayon?

20

THEORY AND METHOD

21

Literature review:

Literature review on the planning system of microrayon was revised in order to un-derstand the current problems, which microrayons in Riga are facing. Theoretical studies were made in order to understand the notion of human scale and critical regionalism in Sustainable Urban Design, in order to find reconstruction methods for the Mezciems microrayon.

Mapping process:

The map of Riga according to the scale 1:10 000 was made and printed out. The who-le map was constructed using google.maps satellite view and constructing its pieces into Adobe Illustrator program. Google maps are made in such a way, that the map can be zoomed according to the scale needed. The design program called Adobe Il-lustrator has a ruler function, where the scale can be double-checked. The printed map of Riga in scale 1:10 000 was 2472mm wide and 3102mm long,(fig.10). The pur-pose of such map was to understand the real scale of the city of Riga and the micro-rayons. Later the digital version was used to analyze the current urban structure and its relationship with microrayons. In order to understand the general problems of microrayons, it is important to analyze their situation in the city context.

Site visit:

Site visit was made to analyze the current condition of microrayons built environ-ment. The human scale can be best judged on the site. The photos and notes made during the investigation serves as a data for documentation of present situation in microrayons. The challenges and opportunities of those living estates were mainly found from the site investigation.

Method:

Figure 10. Map of Riga, scale 1:10000, made by an author.

22

Interviews:

To deepen the knowledge about microrayons and to get additional information, which was not found in literature, and to get personal opinion of the local professio-nal, two people were interviewed.

Janis Lejnieks works as an Economic Development Manager in Riga’s City Council and has a deep knowledge about current property situation in the city of Riga. He lived in one of microrayons called Purvciems for twenty years and can compare the quality of life in Soviet times and in present days. Also he was involved in building process of microrayons, only in other cities of Latvia. He helped to understand the present situation of property ownership situation in Riga and to see into Riga’s microrayons with the eyes of local Riga’s inhabitant.

Artis Zvirgzdins is a chief editor of the website www.a4d.lv , which is the platform of Latvian Architecture and Urbanism. The website is a publisher of news and va-rious discussions in the fields of Architecture and Urbanism. The website is very popular among the architects in Latvia. As an editor, Zvirgzdins is always updated with current situation and events in the field of Architecture. He did the presentation about microrayons to the students of Gent University, Belgium and lives in one of them for seven years already. As a current inhabitant of typical microrayon he told about his personal experiences of life there and his insights about present situation were helpful from a perspective of a young professional.

23

Theoretical chapter consists of two parts: first part analyses a socio-historical background of mass housing estates in former Soviet Union, in order to understand what reasons caused the concept to fail; the second one looks deeper into the theo-retical aspect of human dimension in his living environment, which is the base for the sustainable urban design, and how does self-made environment affects him. Only the theoretical knowledge about the general comfort of human being can prompt to the good transformation solution of mass housing estates.

Nowadays a dwelling property in sustainable neighborhoods is accessible only for rich people but that is not equal, nor logical, considering that the primary idea of sustainability is not to be expensive (Bruntland Report, 1987), and in contrary sus-tainability should serve as a tool to create social equity in society. While mass housing estates are left to the ones who are socially vulnerable. Unfortunately, this situation extends the gap between the rich and the poor, which, in consequence, strongly affects cities by creating social segregation and insecurity among its inha-bitants.

The situation of mass housing estates in former Soviet Union is slightly different from the Western countries because they were built on the ideology of socialism, where everybody is equal and the whole property used to belong to the government. However, nowadays, the result of living conditions is similar everywhere in Europe – inhabitants are unsatisfied. In order to reach a successful transformation of these estates, it is important to understand where the former government of Soviet Union failed, when it comes to a notion of comfortable living environment.

While, the right description of comfortable living environment is also important in order to transform unpopular mass housing estates into a successfully functioning and vibrant urban form. Jana Revedin argues that sustainable development can suc-ceed amongst majority not by provision of basic needs or by the setting of certain rules, to which majority has to obey, but by inviting people to discover and create things together. She criticizes western mindset, which became spoiled because of it comfort, and have lost a belief that actually very simple things can make a change. It is not necessary to have expensive and innovative tools in order to come to the sus-tainable development, her given example about how citizens of one neighborhood called Zabbaleen in Cairo improved their dwellings just by collaborating together. A shanty town which was unsafe because of filthy and dark streets at night and shrin-king businesses on the ground floors transformed into an attractive district full of

light just because of a collective collaboration of its inhabitants. The collaboration which created independent light for the district, by making lamps which improved the urban condition of the district, created a safer environment and engaged people into work. ‘Sustainable development is not a question of high technology, but of the appropriate use of it’ - states Revedin (2013) and Zabbaleen is a great example of it.

The example of Cairo neighbourhood shows that simple actions, without the need of very expensive innovations are possible in order to create a sustainable neighbour-hood. They succeeded because their collaboration was based on three values men-tioned before: work, dwelling and self-worth. This type of success can also be rea-ched in mass housing estates.

Theory and Background

24

Microrayons – The beginning

The development of mass housing dwellings dates back to 1920, when architects and urban designers generated new visions and ideas for the future cities. The poli-tical situation and the development of industrialisation had shaped the vision of the future in a totally different manner than before the 1920: ‘In the changed social and political conditions in Europe after the First World War, the limited pre-war efforts to make a more socially responsive architecture took a new and decisive turn’, (Mumford; 2002). The housing shortage and expanded birth rate made a great im-pact on the vision of the new urban city, (Mumford, 2002). That is when the idea of mass housing districts was born.

The housing shortage had drastically jumped in USSR as well. The actions of WWII had destroyed many cities in USSR. The investment policy created in 1930, which had a purpose to reduce housing shortage in the country, became complicated and the government had to make greater investments for building new dwellings. In order to accomplish the plan, the State had a strong motivation to make the process faster and cheaper. Industrialization of the whole process was considered as one of alter-native solutions, (Andrusz, 1985).

In contrary with Western Europe, mass housing estates in Eastern Europe had emerged under Socialist setting which was implemented by Soviet Union. After the WWII such countries like: Poland, East Germany (now Germany), Czechoslovakia (now two separate countries: Czech Republic and Slovakia), Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria became Eastern Bloc countries, while Baltic countries: Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia were forced to join the composition of Soviet Union even before the war. It meant that Baltic States were under the full influence of this Political Regime. All operations in Soviet Union were maintained under the strict supervision of Commu-nist party: ‘The Communist party was the originator, the prime mover, and the moni-tor of all activities’ (Grava, 1993). Communist party was the one taking all decisions, which shaped and built the nation towards the ideology of communism. In 1960s it was believed that the phase of ‘high socialism’ was already achieved, while the total communism, where every day needs will not be important, will be achieved after twenty years. (Buchli, 1997).

The ideology of USSR ruling regime was based on equal society, where the differen-ces between the classes did not exist. However, everything was owned by the state and all decisions were made by it too. Government was in control of industry, housing provision, every day needs, people’s lifestyle and media. Literally government was controlling and shaping peoples lifestyle through their daily needs. (Grava, 1993)

The borders of Soviet Union were closed and possible to cross only to a certain class and amount of people, while lives of common working class was based on govern-ment’s propaganda.

Historical aspect

After 1917 Revolution in Russia communist party started to rule. It changed the valu-es and the whole system which existed in the country before. The aim of the commu-nist party was to create the nation of working people. The change started with a mass relocation of workers from barracks located in the outskirts of the city into the houses located in the city center, which belonged to bourgeoisie. Spacious apartments were transformed into shared flats, where every family was provided with a private room and shared kitchen and bathroom facilities. A vision of dom-kommuna was born, which had a purpose to create a collective life-style. (Andrusz,1985)

A vision (Andrusz,1985) of a collective lifestyle got a more realistic outlook after 1920, in parallel with constructivist movement in architecture, based on the mixture of art and technology, which in Russia was adapted to the ideology of Soviet Union(Pal-mer,2008). In 1925 a second competition for collective house design was organized. Architects came with various constructivist ideas of shared households. The main vi-sion of ‘dom- communa’ (communal housing) became a woman’s liberation from ‘do-mestic slavery’, which meant a provision of ‘collectivized dining rooms, pre-school facilities, dormitories, laundries, a range of repair shops and centers for hiring wha-tever might be required to meet temporary needs.’ Freeing a woman from domestic work meant her integration into industrial work. There was a vision to gradually erase a patriarchic family structure through the changes of daily life style, such as collective facilities and women independence from domestic work. The aim of collective houses seemed as a solution to a better life, where all facilities are in place.

However, these ideas did not have opportunities to be established as Stalin gave a priority to the investments into heavy industry. He did not succeed to provide a proper home for workers, who exchanged their country life into the work in industrial sector. People were still living in crowded dwellings with poor conditions. The average living space per person in 1950 was as low as five square meters. (Morton, 1980)

25

Architects visions about a ‘dom-kommuna’ seemed unrealistic at that time because people’s relocation from country side into the city was much faster than the building processes. In addition, Stalin‘s era was marked with a cult of his personality, which was expressed not only by propaganda and restrictions on freedom of citizens but also with oversized and richly ornamented architecture.

Loses of WWII worsened the situation in housing sector. The war damaged over 1710 towns, which was 70 000 000 m2 of living space, which even increased already exis-ting housing shortage before the war. (Andrusz, 1985) These reasons caused the debates, which purpose was to contra pose a richly decorated architecture with a more economic and simplified solutions (Osborn, 1966). In order to eliminate these problems a good plan had to come up.

As a response to the critical housing shortage, government increased the invest-ment in housing sector and industrialized the building processes. A proposal and implementation to build houses from industrially produced concrete panel blocks was Krushchev’s (Chief secretary of Soviet Union) solution to the problem. In his secret speech in 1954 Krushchev pointed out some specific factors, which indicates the need of change in building sector. His proposal accented the industrialized me-thod of building and rejection of excessive decoration elements. He proposed to select a particular design for schools, kindergartens, shops and living houses which could be changed every five years in case a better design occurred.

The establishment of Microrayon

Krushchev’s speech led to the approval of new rules for the city planning, which were called „Rules and Norms of Planning and Building Cities” (Pravila I normy pla-nirovki i zastroiki gorodov) and was approved in 1958 by the State Committee on Matters of Construction (Gosstroi). Those new rules were quite strict and had a very precise technical information for every case of city planning and building. The rules were applied for all cities planned in USSR, except the ones situated in exceptional climatic zones.(Osborn, 1966). These „Rules and Norms of Planning and Building Cities” also approved a new conception of neighborhood unit called microrayon, (Os-born, 1966). Microrayon (Rus. Mикрорайoн, Eng. neighbourhood unit) can be descri-bed as ‘a complex of residential buildings combined with a variety of services and retail outlets meeting the population’s daily needs’, (Andrusz,1985). Activated under the rule of Khrushchev this type of neighborhood planning was proceeded by later leaders as well. Grava explains that the roots of microrayon planning concept can be found in the classical neighborhood theories of Great Britain and USA and they rea-ched USSR through Scandinavia. Even though, the original idea of the planning lay-

out was borrowed from the West and ‘superblocks’ of microrayons were an adopted version of Western mass housing districts, microrayon served as an extended versi-on of ‘dom-kommuna’ (communal block). It meant that the ideology of communistic society was hiding behind the physical master plan. The main aim of the government was to form people’s attitude through their daily life basis, which meant that people’s daily activities were focused on creation of a collective profit instead of the fulfil-ment of everyone’s individual needs. The property was also collective. Nobody owned the land except the government, (Grava, 1993). This ideology was clearly im-plemented in the planning layout of microrayon, which main purpose was to shape inhabitants life’s on their daily basis by implementing public services within borders of microrayon . The original idea of microrayon was a combination of dwellings and various public services which was generated into one unit.

(Andrusz,1985) A planning layout was made up of a group of residential dwellings which created ‘a superblock’, (fig.11). Each superblock was enclosed by major car roads. Daily services such as day care centers, elementary schools, kindergartens and service centers were planned in the center of microrayon. Service center suppo-sed to have such facilities like ‘a general retail store, a library, a drug store, cafete-ria, meeting rooms, and ‘perhaps repair and rental places for equipment and appli-ances’(Grava,1993).

Figure 11. A scheme of microrayon planing layout.

26

Service facilities were planned in a distance of 500 meters and could not exceed the size of 250 ha. Kindergartens were planned inside the neighborhood in order to save women time for work (Andrusz, 1985) and that children could reach them without crossing any roads. Around the schools are the housing blocks which are made up of a number of ‚sektsii‘: a core with lifts and staircases - ‚podezd‘- and the apartments itself. The entrances are located inside of the block and are served by small se-condary roads - ‚proezdi‘. (‚Volume 21‘, p.14, 2010). The design of “high-rise buildings in a park” (Grava,1993) in the west, which was adopted in Soviet microrayon, made the possibility to industrialize the building process, (Grava,1993). It became faster and cheaper. Today, one can see that many of those buildings were built from prefa-bricated concrete panel blocks, which are all of the same size and material with a slight variety of colors or patterns. The building construction from panel blocks was so common because it did not require an additional cost for transportation. Main parts of building construction usually were produced in the place of building, (Lietu-viskoji Tarybine Enciklopedija, 1981).

The industrialized building of flats, however, did not entirely solved the problem. The new building plan (Morton, 1980) had increased the demand for housing because the perception of living had changed from communal living (one room for each family with shared bathroom and kitchen facilities) into a private flat with private kitchen and bathroom. The statistics of 1974 had shown that citizens of Soviet Union were experiencing the worst housing conditions in all industrialized nations at that time because even 30% of families who lived in cities were still sharing flats. A high de-mand of new housing created a very long queues in the waiting list, which meant that waiting period for a new flat reached 10 years and even more. The priority was given to those families who had as less as 5 square meters per person, while newly mar-ried couples had a very low chance to get a new flat immediately. Even after the fall of Soviet Union the numbers waiting lists were high.

After the fall of Soviet Union, which happened in 1991 the country shattered into fifteen different countries. The elimination of the ‘curtain wall’, which was built after the war of two strong powers, had caused the changes of ideology (Goldhoorn and Sverdlov, 2009) which led to an unavoidable changes in society. In consequence it affected peoples living environment, mostly in the negative way. The problems which already existed during Soviet Era had mixed with new problems from the west: ‘In order to adapt to the new condition, the typical Soviet neighborhood has acquired new paraphernalia’ (Goldhoorn and Sverdlov, 2009). Capitalistic ideology had brought social inequality to the neighborhoods, which caused insecurity, free mar-ket, which caused self-refurbishment of flats and building facades and totally chan-ged the transportation system, which caused the expansion of private vehicles.

Conclusions

Even though mass housing estates in Post-Soviet countries are built according to si-milar model of the ones built in Capitalistic countries, they differ because they were built according to socialist ideology which do not fit the current, post-socialist times, based on capitalistic system. Current situation of mass housing in Post-Soviet coun-tries shows that the living environment is not adapted to the present times. Capita-lism brought a freedom to choose, what did not exist in soviet times. In Soviet times industrially produced mass housing blocks were accepted as a highest standard of life because there were no better option, while capitalism has brought new concepts of housing, which lowered the standards of mass housing estates. Even though the cur-rent situation of mass housing estates in Post - Socialist countries do not show social decline, as it is so common in Western countries, it is crucial to find appropriate solu-tions which could prevent social problems to emerge.

The case of Riga shows that the inhabitants of mass housing estates (microrayons) copes with existing problems, such as dull architecture and over scaled public spaces, through self-expression, by repainting facades of buildings, building external addi-tions to houses and creating flower gardens by themselves, and etc. However these actions do not influence the quality of microrayons but it shows the necessity to upgra-de them not only for the better life of existing inhabitants, but for increasing the popu-larity among other city dwellers as well.

27

Microrayons in Riga

In 1940 Latvia has lost its independency and was occupied by Soviet Union. It went into a composition of USSR and remained Latvian SSR until 1991, after it became “inde-pendent and democratic republic” (Municipal Portal of Riga,2011).

Riga, the capital of Latvia, was set as the center of the western part of USSR in order to keep an eye on the Eastern Block and on main enemy NATO. The main government of Soviet Union had a plan to develop all Baltic States into a strong industrial center as fast as possible and very soon Riga became a main center of military, a main core of railway system and an air network in the Baltic region. Many large industries were also settled in this city. These actions led Riga to experience a high immigration rate of people from other Soviet countries.

The population had risen to 900,000 by 1985. Rapid population growth had caused a great housing shortage, (Grava, 1993). That is why the rapid building of microrayons in Riga was implemented as well.

After 1991, when Latvia became independent from the former Soviet Union, the poli-tical situation in country has changed and those changes strongly affected mass housing estates. Firstly, the collective ownership was eliminated and most of the flats were privatized and the land was given back to previous owners. A statistics of 1999 shows that 54% of flats in Riga were private. However, mass housing estates still fa-ces privatization problems, due to the fact, that not all inhabitants are capable to pri-vatize them. Some of them do not have appropriate documents, due to social or bu-reaucratic reasons, (Marana and Treja, 2002). Since the property is not entirely private, the question of responsibility within common sectors arises. Critical condi-tions of unmaintained staircases and outdated equipment show that neither the mu-nicipilaty, nor the private actors took that responsibility. Another problem existing in mass housing estates, which was mentioned before, is overlapping ownership which makes flat owners and local municipalities incapable to take care of the public spa-ces. Because of that, the environment in mass housing estates is in poor condition. Although, the positive factor is that the social composition in microrayons is highly diverse, consisting of different social statuses, different income levels, and different nationalities.

The urge for renovation

Present situation shows that microrayons in Riga are facing a stage of critical condi-tion. The houses and environment were not maintained since they were built. During the Soviet Era the Government was focused only on the building sector, while today this action is in stagnation due to the unsolved problems in privatization and main-tenance sector. It is obvious that those houses need a renovation and maintenance plan, otherwise the image of mass housing estates will continue to drop and it is very possible for it to reach the unpopularity level of the existing estates in the west. It is crucial to act, in order to stop the downgrading process.

Therefore, the negative factor is the present economy of Latvia, which budget doesn’t give such financial freedom as in Western European economies. Because of that, some approaches are not possible in Riga’s case, however an economic renovation version adapted to Riga’s funds can be reached.

Possible participants in Renovation process

As renovation examples in the Western Europe shows, the initiators of renovation plans are usually the government of the country and local municipalities. Inhabitants are taken seriously as the decision makers and transformation methods are selected according to inhabitant’s opinion. In Riga’s case the municipality of Riga and local mu-nicipalities of microrayons could collaborate with private owners of the properties in microrayons in order to reach an adequate solution. However this model can be com-plicated and be prolonged for many years because the composition of many actors can raise intersecting opinions, which raise the danger to delay the process. On the other hand it is difficult to find alternative collaboration solution for this type of situation.

28

Renovation examples

Two examples of implemented mass housing renovation projects are selected for a review: one case is from Western Europe, the Netherlands and another one is from former Eastern Bloc countries – Eastern Germany. These two cases were chosen in order to see the differences between capitalistic and socialist mass housing estates, however, both cases face more or less similar problems and renovation projects led to similar results, even though The Bijlmermeer high rise neighborhood (the Nether-lands) had one large renovation project, while Hellerdorf – Marzahn (East Germany) had several different revitalization projects.

Bijlmermeer (Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Biljermeer is one of the drastic renovation examples because the three quarters of the area was actually demolished. After the renovation Bijlmermeer reminds very little of what is used to be in the past.

Bjlmermeer is a high rise mass housing district located in the suburbs of Amsterdam. It was built between 1960s – 1970s, a decade when building large housing estates was booming in all Western Europe. The houses were designed in the shape of honey comb and the master plan was designed according to the ideas of Le Corbusier and to the movement of CIAM. However, the interest in mass housing estates ended very fast and these modern cities became the most problematic areas. The same happened to the Bjlmermeer. Unfortunately it never became popular among middle class families and half of the flats stayed empty (Helleman and Wassenberg, 2003). This factor caused rent prices to drop which determined the immigrants and poor people to move in. Very soon Bijlmermeer got a negative image of multicultural neighborhood (Sterk and Za-hirovich, 2007). The primary vision of a ‘functional and radiant’ (Sterk and Zahirovich, 2007) neighborhood turned out to be a spring of problems instead,(Projectbureau Ver-nieuwing Bijlmermeer, 2008). According to Sterk and Zahirovich (2007) the failure of spatial structure caused middle class families to refuse to move in, and that decline caused ethnic minorities to inhabit the place. As Silvan Boer cited by Sterk and Zahiro-vich (2007) states, that this international environment has caused a radical change of neighborhood’s physical environment.

Helleman and Wassenberg (2003) distinguished 3 groups of problems which were in Bjlmermeer. First of all, the high rise neighborhood of Amsterdam was never comple-tely finished. Part of planned public facilities was never realized. Secondly, the physi-cal layout was not created for a comfortable life. The scale of buildings was too large

to maintain safe and cozy public spaces. The same situation was with outdoor spaces, where the scale was too big. Too big scale led the neighbourhood to become uncozy, dark and difficult to maintain, in consequence it became a favorable environment for criminal activities. Third group of problems was inappropriate housing market. Bij-mermeer was oriented towards the middle class families but the middle class fami-lies preferred to live in a single family house with a private garden. The increasing economy and existing social situation oriented people towards individual life style which meant living in single family house, having a personal vehicle and etc. These factors were totally opposite to the ideology of mass housing, which advocated a col-lective life style instead. A serious renovation started in 1992 which purpose was to help those inhabitants who do not have possibilities to afford better housing because of their financial and social situation and to attract higher social class inhabitants with new high quality housing within the area.

Joined forces of state institutions came out with the idea to change a negative image of international neighborhood into a positive notion of multicultural community. The renovation plan was not only focused on the physical upgrade of the area but the socio –economical aspect also took an important place. Government took into consideration

Figure 12. Bijlmermeer after renovation, F - section.

29

such serious factors as the upgrade of education level and provision of working pla-ces, (Sterk and Zahirovich, 2007).

A decision to demolish one quarter of flats was made due to the survey results, whe-re the local inhabitants had to answer the questions concerning the neighborhood renovation. According to Helleman and Wassenberg (2003) people’s opinion played a major role in Bijlmermeers renovation process. According to the survey, demolition was seen as an advantage rather than damage. After demolition of high rises, the neighborhood was densely built-up with mixed use low rise buildings, with integrated public facilities such like business, recreation and shopping.

The Bjlmermeer got a more mixed-use environment than before(fig.12). Two level streets which excluded pedestrians from cars were modified, large car parks were partly demolished and public spaces were redesigned. Two master plans: before and after (fig.13) shows that the change of Bijlmermeer high rise district was dramatic. It lost its primary shape of honey combs and new buildings got a denser built pattern. Government also invested into maintenance of renovated neighborhood with the pur-pose to preserve the quality of renovated environment and to upkeep the appropriate level of security.

Today Bijlmermeer is facing a great question: whether the renovation plan found its success. Sterk and Zahirovich (2007) state that the success of renovation is not yet there because the notion of multicultural neighborhood is still in the theoretical sta-ge. The lack of recognizable public spaces, such as squares and parks prevents the creation of multicultural interaction and the assortment of cafes and bars does not reflect the real character of the neighborhood’s cultural diversity. Loerakker (2013) Biljermermeer’s renovation plan sees as ‘nothing less than just another technocratic ‘drawing board plan’ that waits to be written off as a success or a failure’. He argues that government’s decision to replace the greatest area of high rises with low rise family houses is affected by the wrong understanding, that the ch-ange of urban fabric will change the composition of inhabitants.

Before

After

Figure 13. Master plans of Bijlmermeer showing the change.

30

Hellersdof – Marzahn (Berlin,Germany)

After the collapse of GDR in 1989 German government invested a lot of money in or-der to upgrade monotonous mass housing estates, which is now standing as a legacy of former Eastern Germany. German government started upgrading process from the renovation of building facades and the upgrade of flats.

Marzahn ((ed.Ciaffi, 2005) is a typical mass housing district, which was built in order to solve a housing shortage problem in former GDR. The construction period started in 1976 and ended in 1989, just before the fall of GDR. The mass housing district has 58 000 flats with applied socialist built concept, where the functions were separated. The height of buildings varies from six to eighteen story height. During the socialist era this Eastern German area was considered as a successful project and functioned as a fully-fledged local community, which consists of employed crowd and is socially diverse. Thus, this image totally changed after the shift of political situation in Eastern Germany. Expanded housing opportunities and changes in the economic sector led mass housing districts into decline.

Due to the spring of many problems in mass housing estates in the former Western Germany, which started to affect these neighborhoods already in 1980s, there was a lot of debates about the total demolition of mass housing estates in the former GDR territory. Still, the Senate of Berlin and the district of Marzahn took a decision to re-novate mass housing estates of Marzahn, located in the east- Berlin. The district (Knorr–Siedow and Droste, 2003) took part in general revitalization program which was in action from 1993 until 2005, where buildings were entirely renovated with re-designed facades and entrances and most of the public spaces were upgraded. The revitalization program successfully upgraded physical pattern of the neighborhood, however the number of inhabitants continued to decrease. Firstly the decrease of in-habitants hit the renting sector in 1995 because after the renovation of houses rent prices increased. This factor led people to rent apartments in more central districts due to a similar price. Also a negative neighborhoods image from the outside led the demand for housing to decrease. These factors influenced a change of demographic composition, from middle class German population into immigrants and people with the low income. This factor strongly affected the quality of neighborhood.

As a response to the demographical change Government initiated second revitalizati-on project in Marzahn (Feltins, 2012; Knorr–Siedow and Droste, 2003 ) called ‘Urban Regeneration East’. The partial demolition of vacant settlements and sustainable de-velopment of the neighborhood took place, In order to attract new settlers. The pro-ject cost was 2,5 billion Euros within seven years. The project included the change of

Figure 14. Typical public space of Marzahn - before and after the renovation.

31

1700 flats located Marzhn North of which 1000 was planned to be completely demolis-hed while 700 flats – newly built. In result 1670 flats were demolished (Feltins, 2012) and 406 were newly built, public spaces were upgraded (fig.14). Since public buil-dings, due to the change of economic structure after 1989, were left deserted – accor-ding to new ‘Urban Regeneration East’ a part of them were scheduled for demolition. The government pursued to bring a more suburban look into mass housing neighbor-hood. However this renovation project has helped to increase the growth of inhab-itants, which now reached 1,8%.

Even though, the Government of Berlin and the administration of Marzahn-Hellers-dorf invested into over 150 housing revitalization projects and spent billions of Euros for them, the current situation leaves a doubt, whether those revitalization projects were worth the price. Berlin’s ‘Housing Market Report’ shows that in 2009 Mar-zahn-Hellersdorf was still in stagnation phase, when it comes to the rental quotes. Rents here and in Neuköln and Spandau decreased the most significantly in compari-son with the other districts of Berlin and have the lowest rent prices in the whole city. Despite that, Marzahn still occupies the first position, when it comes to an uninhabited flats. The situation looks better in ‘Housing Market Report’ of 2013, where the rent prices in Marzahn have increased and the interest in flats is slowly increasing as well, which according to experts is a sign that vacant lots are decreasing. However, rent prices here are still bellow Berlin’s average rent rate (Housing Market Report,2013).

Conclusions

These two mass housing revitalization cases are a great examples, which show that urban transformation does not erase the existing problems. Even though, these neighborhoods were renovated with different methods: Bijlmermeer had one revitali-zation plan and was reconstructed in one phase, while Marzahn needed several plans of revitalization; both of them had a purpose to get rid of the negative image of mass housing estates by actually erasing blocks of flats. However, the practice has shown, that the change of urban fabric does not make a high difference, while it is quite pricey method. The reputation of both districts was strongly affected by a specific compositi-on of the population in the area. Both cases show, that once the neighborhood creates an image of poor and neglecting neighborhood, it is difficult to change it. Even though, Bijlmermeer was upgraded according to the opinions of inhabitants and social mea-sures were taken into consideration in both revitalization cases, the findings of both show that those actions are not enough.

Therefore this shows the need for an alternative approach to solving these problems. An approach based on sustainability principles that uses both the transformation of urban form and other aspects such as social interaction, creation of working possibi-lites etc. is needed which is the focus of this thesis.

Before coming up with a a good proposal with high confidence, it is important to un-derstand the notion of good quality living environment. The next section there for in-troduses the values of a good living neighborhood from the perspectives of experts in the field.

32

Understanding the notion of comfortable living environment

While analyzing the birth and failure of mass housing estates or so called ‘internati-onal style’ it is important to understand the reasons why the concept was declined by the city dwellers in order to propose an appropriate reconversion solution. It is obvi-ous that the ideology of the international style do not profit people’s needs. It is cruci-al to understand human’s nature and the attitude concerning his/her living environ-ment. The traces of humans attitude towards living environment are found in Heideger’s ‘thinking’, Arend’s work’ and Illich ‘self worth’. These three components are the main factors which determine human’s well-being and when the balance bet-ween these tree elements is destructed, then one feels discomfort in his environment. A theoretical part will look deeper into these three values in order to understand what reasons caused people to neglect this type of living environment and what elements creates a comfortable environment.

Work

According to Arendt (2nd ed.1998), the work and the labor are two different matters. The work is the action based on creative skills, abilities and talents and, she names it ‘homo faber’, while the labor is an action which is accomplished mechanically, which do not require any special skills and which multiplies one thing many times, and it has a name of ‘animal laborans’.

Philosopher criticizes current society of its perverted attitude to work. Mechanized work in factories has made people slaves of machines and created a new type of work, which purpose to do one’s duty, not to achieve a result. While the real purpose of work is to achieve a result. By tracing the roots of work and rediscovering the work purpose of craftsmen she suggests to rediscover the meaning and purpose of work.

‘Animal laborant’ or the notion of mechanized work

Arendt (2nd ed.1998) criticizes modern world, by stating that most things are pro-duced ‘in the mode of labor’. The human being does not have possibilities to make things for himself, he has to work for the others, which makes his work a duty, so-mething he must do, but not something where he can express himself. He is just a small detail in the mass production mechanism. Mass consumption of things consist from the indication of production and the final result. The problem of mass consump-

tion is that the work of a worker never stops. The final product does not determine the work load of a person. Eventually the final product becomes an indicator again, which determines the annual salary and efficiency of a worker.

Arendt argues that the current mechanization of major part of human work and the people’s slavery to the machines are lying ‘in the factual situation of laboring’. This happens because the work of hands in the industrial age, where all processes are mechanized, loses its sense. The primary purpose of machines, which was to make the labor work easier, disappears as soon as laborer starts to use them. Philosopher raise the question about the real purpose of human life: is his main purpose in life to work, or work is just a tool to provide him with possessions, which helps him to survi-ve. The question extends considering the mechanized work: does a person serve for the technology, or do the technology serve a man. Arendt argues that the difference between hand work and mechanized work is that tools by no means are serving the persons hand but the case of a technology becomes sensitive because a person has to serve for a machine in order to fabricate the product.

Arendt criticizes the invention of technology, because it made the human being to move off the natural processes and instead creating its own. The current level of tech-nology, according to her, has gone so far that it irreversibly changed a work into a la-bor, because the tools of a hand work were designed according to natural processes of the nature. According to Arendt, the question is not whether the technology ‘serve the world and things’ but whether it started ‘to rule and even destroy the world and things’, (Arendt, 2nd ed. 1998).

Today’s world has become dependent on the technology. In order to make the techno-logy dependent on the world, Arendt states, that is better to design machines for the production of certain objects instead of designing objects with respect to the type of machine. She criticizes the world of technology, because it became a ‘substitute for the real world’ and the danger of technology is that people become dependent from the processes of technology:

‘In the continuous process of operation, this world of machines is even losing that in-dependent worldly character which the tools and implements and the early machi-nery of the modern age so eminently possessed.’ (Arendt, 2nd ed. 1998)

33

‘Homo faber’ or the notion of individual work

According to Arendt (2nd ed. 1998) the work of ‚homo faber‘ is the right way to pro-duce things, which means that a human being works for the purpose to achieve a re-sult, not for the purpose of one‘s duty. The work meaning of ‚homo faber‘ is that he is unable to distinguish the utility from meaningfulness,where utility stands for the words ‚in order to‘ and meaningfulness stands ‚for the sake of‘, but in order to be useful, which is an inherent factor for ‚a society of craftsmen‘, the core of the work becomes the meaning not the utility. Homo faber does things ‚for the sake of‘ not ‚in order to‘.(Arendt, 2nd ed. 1998)

Arendt argues that a working principle based on productiveness is not right because its working principle has a never ending process of ‚means‘ and ‚ends‘ and the final result is never achieved. The philosophy of productiveness is based on doing a work as a duty. Work becomes something necessesary, something which one must do, in order to be able to do the things one likes afterwards. Eventualy, the productiveness becomes a part of meaningfulness and in that way it loses its sence.

However, it is not possible to escape productiveness cardinally, because all processes create a chain, and it is not possible to end that chain: (...) There is no way to end the chain of means and ends and prevent all ends from eventually being used again as means, except to declare that one thing or another is ‚an end in itself‘.(Arendt, 2nd ed. 1998)

While the work of ‚homo faber‘ consists of the purpose to have a final result is an in-herent part of the process, the question arises, how the work of homo faber can fun-ction if it is not possible to achieve the final result? Arendt, states that then the work of ‚homo faber‘ becomes a part of never ending processes, and he has a freedom to choose its own methods in order to achieve his own final result.

In order to change the work of ‚animal laborans‘ into the work of ‚homo faber‘, the current notion of a person as a user has to change into the notion of a person as cre-ator. The person has to become the one who makes desicions (which breaks a never ending group of processes of methods and final results), only then the productiveness can become meaningful. However, after a human being is accepted as creator, the danger lies in becoming ignorant to the material world:

If man the useris the highest end, ‚the measure of all things‘, then not only nature, treated by homo faber as the almost ‚worthless material‘ upon which to work, but the ‚valuable‘ things themselves have become mere means, losing thereby their own intrinsic ‚value‘.(Arendt, 2nd ed. 1998).

Conclusions

Arendt argues that current society has a wrong perception of work. Nowadays there is a small amount of people who are creating things and they can be called ‚homo fa-ber‘, while the bigger amount of people are just simple workers – ‚animal laborans‘ who are in the process of multiplying the things which homo faber has created. The concequences of this structure is that human being becomes a laborer, he does work because of work, not because he wants to create a thing. He becomes connecting part of the mechanism of processes.

Considering Arendt‘s (Arendt, 2nd ed. 1998) thoughts about work and labour, the suggestion, to achieve healthy and sustainable society, is to shatter the big corpora-tions, which are based on mass production and the power of mechanical and unskilled labour and encouradge small organisations based on crafstmanship instead. This does not mean that a person has to go back to the middle ages and go back to the hand work, this means that every person should feel the satisfaction from its own work and every person has a right to improve his skills and creativity through work. A true perception of work is not duty, which must be done, in order to be able to survive, a work is a process which develops one‘s skills.

34

Dwelling

Heidegger (2001) describes the main values about dwelling. He argues about the pri-mary purpose of the dwelling and the building and explains the relation between dwelling and building.

The meaning of dwelling

The building (Heidegger, 2001) gets the meaning of a dwelling, when it is accepted as a shelter. However, it can also be understood if the building is built for residential purpose, then it automatically gets a notion of dwelling, which means a shelter. Al-though, if building and dwelling are two separate actions, then what are the factors which distinguishes them. What factors determines the differences between building and dwelling? According to Heidegger the true meanings of the word dwelling one should seek in the language. The old word bauen , means not only to build but it also means – to dwell. Also person itself understands a dwelling as a place where he lives, distinguishing it from the place he works. Eventually the working place has just a function of building because a person do not consider a work place as a shelter.

Why dwelling means shelter? This explanation can also be found in a language. The word ‘bauen’ also means ‘to cherish and protect, to preserve and care for’, (Heideg-ger, 2001). The purpose of a dwelling is to guard, while the building do not have such functions.

However, not the need to build makes people to dwell, but the purpose to dwell, ma-kes people to build buildings. This is because to dwell has also a meaning to stay in peace, and people are the seekers of a shelter, which has a meaning of safe and peaceful place. ‘To dwell, to be set at peace, means to remain at peace within the free, the preserve, the free sphere that safeguards each thing in its nature. The fundamental character of dwelling is this spring and preserving,’ (Heidegger, 2001).

Human being has to dwell in a way that he would not harm the environment because human being is just a part of the nature. As Heidegger states, there are four compo-

nents which creates a ‘fourfold’, which is ‘the earth, the sky, the divinities and the mortals’ (human beings), (Heidegger, 2001).

However, Heidegger, argues that one never considers those four components as one unit and whenever one speaks about the component of the other four, we exclude it from the other three. But in order to preserve the wholeness of the ‘fourfold’, one of the components should not be separated. If one look into the ‘fourfold’ from the per-spective of mortals (human beings), one can see that mortals holds the fourfold to-gether by dwelling. Dwelling plays a role of ‘preserving’ of the ‘fourfold’ by having a material shape, as Heidegger calls-‘staying with things’. However the material world do not serve as a fifth element, it is a part of a human beings nature. Human being and his material world creates the fourth element in the universe. That’s why dwelling has a preserving function to the human being, because it is an object of material world and it helps for human being to be a part of a universe.

The meaning of building

Since the building belongs to a material matter and dwelling – to a preserving matter of a ‘fourfold’, building becomes a physical element which holds the dwelling. The building serves a ‘gathering’ role of the ‘fourfold’. It means that building is a physical element which conducts nature powers. ‘The bridge gathers, as a passage that crosses, before the divinities – whether we explicitly think of, and visibly give thanks for, their presence, as in the figure of the saint of the bridge, or whether that divine presence is obstructed or even pushed wholly aside.’ (Heidegger, 2001).

In this case a bridge is a physical element which works as a space provider for a ‘four-fold’. A space of a bridge has an area and ways, which describes the purpose of the space.

The same happens for building with a purpose to dwell. The space to dwell is the room. The ancient meaning of the word room, which is raum, rum, means a space which is provided for a living and which was cleared in order to create a new area. However, the space do not determine the dwelling, because spaces are shaped accor-ding to their locations, which means that the dwelling depends of its physical measu-re, not of its ‘space’: ‘Accordingly, spaces receive their being from locations and not from ‘space’. (Heidegger, 2001).

According to Heidegger (2001), the purpose of a building is dwelling and a human being is capable to dwell only if he can build. However, it does not mean that people

35

now have to go back and start building houses with their own hands. It means that people have to accept a house as a part of nature, which complements the natural powers and creates a shelter for a human being.

Conclusions

The real meaning of dwelling do not lie in a sophisticated architecture or in a nice lo-cation of a house, in contrary building should serve as a shell for dwelling and as the part of a nature. Human beings should rediscover the purpose of dwelling by learning how to live with the respect to the nature: ‘The real dwelling plight lies in this, that mortals ever search anew for the nature of dwelling, that they must ever learn to dwell.’ (Heidegger, 2001).

Self – worth

Ivan Illich criticizes existing forms of society, such as capitalism, socialism, because they are created to be dependent and people are unavoidably shaped to be a part of existing system. When people lives are controlled by the system, they are forced to shape their lives in a particular way. Nowadays existing power systems are based on social inequality. Current world consists of the ones who have too little and the ones who have too much. As a contradiction to existing forms of society he proposes a con-vivial society, which is based on independence and balance in life. Life balance can be determined by a connection between human being and his means. It is a factor which preserves self – worth.

The current perception of technology

Illich (2001) proposes ‘conviviality’ as opposition to the technological age. He states that ‘conviviality’ produces freedom, which is achieved through independent collab-oration among each other and within their surroundings. Every person needs freedom in order to achieve happiness, while mass production and consumption these days’ enslaved people instead. Big corporations have created a never ending process of mass production and engaged people to be never satisfied consumers.

He claims that society based only on mass production and consumption cannot fully cover all needs of population. It is because people’s needs do not end in getting things. People are more complex than just consumers. A person can fully satisfy his needs only if he is capable to express himself through everyday things he uses and everyday activities he does. As an example prisoners of rich countries are provided with many goods of mass consumption but the type and amount of things they get every day is decided by other people, so one of consisting parts of their punishment is that they lose the right to choose. Exactly the right to choose and express one’s self Illich calls a ‘conviviality’ because without ‘conviviality’ a human being becomes just a basic consumer.

Another side of mass production creates a system where people with less possibili-ties in life have to work for people of a higher class and higher income. The world has now a two class system – the ones who produce things and the ones who use those things. This system generates the slaves and the users. While, Illich ‘convivial’ work should be based on three values: ’survival, justice, and self-defined work.’ This type of society would be based on people’s right to choose who they want to be and how they want to shape their lives. In convivial society one part of people do not serve for ano-ther part, of a higher class or higher spending freedom.

Somehow, along the way to the modern age (Illich, 2001) people had lost a right perception of technology. They accepted technology as a tool which changes human work into a machine work, unlike before humans were making everything by hands. However, this understanding about technology is not right, because eventually the technology do not change the work of a human being, it just modifies it. People of a lower class still serve to people of a higher class, as they did before the invention of technology. The only difference today is that all work is mechanized, and more goods can be produced than if they were made with human hands. The system of this type breaks the self-worth of those who have to work in order to provide better welfare for the others.

The right perception of technology

Illich (2001) proposes to change the perception of technology, which should be imple-mented as a tool of work, not as a tool changing human’s work. On the other hand, there should be a right balance between human beings involvement in work and tech-nology’s role, otherwise the human kind has a dangerous potential to fall into another extremity – ignorance of the technology, as a creation of evil.

36

Before the technology (Illich, 2001) a certain amount of people from a higher class of society had a requirement of lower class people service for them. Before the invention of technology the work made by a human was much slower. Somehow on a way to-wards invention of technology people got the wrong perception of it. They understood a technology as tool which changes human work and release human beings from sla-very. However it is not quite like that.

Convivial society does not claim that mass production is wrong and it does not deny the current system of distribution, which provides people with their everyday needs in their location. According to Illich it is not smart to minimize these actions to the basic survival level just because everybody would be equal players in the society. Instead he proposes more complex mechanism, which exists in our days as well, the difference, is that new mechanisms would be based on self-worth, which means that different balances between different systems should be kept.

Preservation of self-worth

However, there is still a thin line between balance and inequality. The question arises: what are the ways to preserve the balance?

Illich argues, that if a person do not seek a balance in life, very soon he can become a victim of his own creations and the enemy of the nature. In contrary from his expecta-tions this leads him to a lower level of life. Principles of conviviality cannot be accep-ted as certain rules and norms which are designed to have only two options – to break or to obey, but it should be provided as an opportunity of choices which leads to a greater development. In order to preserve a self-worth, People should not be accepted as machines of cer-tain mechanism, being ruled by other people who tend to have greater power. In oppo-site, they should be accepted as a unique and even organism which has a right to shape its life and were all parts have a right to choose and debate by collaborating with each other. Each individual should have a right to shape their life the way they want, not in the way the system forces them to shape it.

There is a thin line when a person controls mechanisms and when they control a per-son. The mechanisms created with a human hands can take the power over the human being. A person can become a slave of his own creations without even noticing that: ‘the plow makes man the lord of a garden but also the refugee from a dust bowl’. (Il-lich, 2001).

Illich explains that actually the harmony is the main catalyst which determines the peaceful society. The harmony of life depends on five dimensions, where each dimen-sion consists from certain tendencies, which, in order to maintain the harmony in hu-mans life, has to be preserved in peace. A human being can usefully operate with forces of nature unless his powers and tools of his creation do not harm the nature. The benefits of various systems comes only when those systems are maintained in harmony and the harmony comes only when people keep a ‘delicate balance’ between their own actions and actions of technology.

Illich argues that the model of peaceful and happy society consists from wide range of opportunities, where every person has a chance to get education, to advance their level without a major restrictions and where the modernization becomes valuable when it takes into account the tradition, when it has a deep meaning and high security level.

Conclusions

Considering thoughts of illich (2001), some factors, which preserve self-worth, could be distinguished. Self- worth can be preserved when there is a harmony between hu-man being and technology and when a human being has a right to choose. Without these possibilities a human being is just a small meaningless part in a great system of mechanisms.

There are two ways for a technology to develop (Illich, 2001): one way of development is when it helps a human being in his life and upgrades his quality of life, while the second way is when it does a work instead of a human being, which means that a tech-nology subtracts the work from a person and limits his freedoms by taking the power over him.

37

Evaluating the theoretical approach of qualitative living environment

The base for human‘s comfortable being is the right to choose. All analyzed thinkers claim that a human being in current civilization is employed into a whole net of me-chanisms. That is a main factor were mass housing estates failed. They do not support the general values of human being, instead they took away their individualism and their right to choose. Governments created a mechanism, where people engage in monotonic jobs based in factories in order to support mass consumption mechanism and live in mass housing estates, were they support communal mechanism. Unfortu-nately, the net of mechanisms does not create equity in society. It increases the gap between the rich and the poor instead.

The mechanism of mass living failed because people lacked individuality and the freedom to choose. As Heidegger (1971) states, that living environment is like shell, obviously mass housing estates does not support this function because everything which is produced for masses, does not leave room for self-expression. While self-ex-pression according to Illich (2001) is necessary for a human being to feel worthy. The concept of mass housing failed because it was designed to support only the basic people‘s needs, however this type of design did not work. In that case one will always choose a better living environment when the possibility appears.

In urban design all these values should be taken inot an account in order to avoid the failures, which happened to the concept of mass housing estates. For the implemen-tation of the proposal (p.58) the values of the living environment as mentioned above are used.

38

MICRORAYONS IN THE CITY’S CONTEXT

39

Age of microrayons

City center

1

2

34

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13




14

Riga city border

1950-1960

1960-1970

1978-1990

1965-1980

Figure 16. Microrayons according to the built period

1.Daugavgriva;2.Bolderaja;3.Ilguciems;4.Imanta;5.Zolitude;6. Agenskalns;

7. Sarkandaugava;8.Vecmilgravis;9.Jugla;10.Mezciems;11.Purvciems;12.Plavnieki;

13.Kengarags;14.Ziepniekalns.

Secondary source: I.Manara and S.Treja (2002)„Large Panel Housing Estates in Riga: A. Challenging Space“ and www.apkaimes.lv

The first microrayon: Agenskalns The last microrayon: Ziepniekalns

Name of a district

AgenskalnsDaugavgriva

SarkandaugavaJugla

KengaragsImanta

PurvciemsBolderajaIlguciems

VecmilgravisMežciemsPlavniekiZolitude

Ziepniekalns

Year of construction

1958 - 19621960s

1960 - 19751961 - 19701961 - 19711965 - 19751965 - 19751965 - 19751965 - 19701968 - 19801977 - 19851985 - 19901985 - 1990

1990 -

Number of inhabitants

25 00010 00022 00035 00060 00060 00065 00015 00037 00039 00020 00060 00025 00022 000

Population density(inhab/ha)

10910

174160213157201116157176220200109125

Primary source: Riga city official plan 1995 - 2005, Riga 1996

1 2

40

1

2

34

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13




14

Forest

Green spaces

Microrayon

Post-soviet microrayons:The bridge

Water

City center

Riga city border

Figure 17. Landscape of Riga city

Landscape

Riga is a relatively small city. It is 304, 05 Sq.km big (Municipal portal of Riga,2011) with a population of 706.413 people. Nature occupies even 43, 7% of the total Riga area: water obtains 15, 7% and green areas - 28%, (Munici-pal portal of Riga,2011) which means that Riga is a very green city.

The positive fact is that many microrayons are surrounded with nature. Al-most all microrayons are built near the forest. According to Zvirgzdinis’s per-sonal experience, the microrayons in Riga are richer in nature than the ones built in St.Petersburg or Moscow. The landscape map of Riga (fig.17) and the material of site visits show that the areas with very poor greenery are rather rare in the context of Riga’s microrayons. Sarkandaugava, Imanta or Jugla has at least one side which borders with nature, while Mezciems is surroun-ded with two forests.

The water in Riga is quite important element as well. It has a river Daugava, which goes along the whole city and splits it into two parts. Kengarags is the only microrayon, which is built near the river. It has a nice promenade built along the river of Daugava, which was renovated few years ago. As Zvirgzdins (2013) states it is the one of successful examples, showing the solution of problems, which brings social segregation. The promenade consists of byci-cle path and pedestrian road. One side borders with the river, while the other side of promenade is equipped with benches, sports equipment and leisure facilities on the other. Zvirgzdins have noticed that after the reconstruction of the promenade, it became very popular among people, especially in the sum-mer time. In his opinion it is wise to develop the area gradually, then inhab-itants slowly get used to the changes, which prevents them from the local vandalism, (Zvirgzdins, 2013). Part of Daugavgriva microrayon is located near the river too but the riverfront is not developed.

Other types of water ponds are located in such areas like Mežciems and Jugla. Water pond in Jugla is well maintained and has a pleasant atmosphe-re. There are few benches built along the water and it is surrounded with newly built pedestrian road. On the day of site visit the water pond was occu-pied by several visitors, enjoying the water and the evening sun. Contrariwi-se, the lake of Mežciems feels neglected. The surroundings are planted with bushes, which creates difficulties to reach the lake. There are visible foot-prints of unfinished infrastructure of the water pond: deteriorated staircase with unfinished path and old concrete structure facing the water. Moreover, the water pond is separated from the residential district by two wide streets.




41

Location of microrayons

Distance from the city centre:

200m - 1km : Purvciems;

1,5km - 2km: Sarkandaugava;

2,5km - 3km: Agenskalns;

3,5km - 4km: Kengarags, Plavnieki, Ilguciems;

4,5km - 5km: Mežciems, Jugla, Zolitude, Imanta;

5,5km - 6km: Ziepniekalns;

6,5km - 7km: Vecmilgravis;

7,5km - 8km: Bolderaja;

8,5km - 10km: Daugavgriva.

200 m

1 km

5 km

10 km

City center

Riga city

Microrayon

Figure 18. Microrayons position in the city according to the distance from the city centre

Microrayons are quite spread out and is in approximately 2-3km distance from each other. The closest microrayons to the city center are Purvciems and Sarkandaugava, the furthest – Vecmilgravis, Bolderaja and Daugavgri-va. The microrayon Daugavgriva is even 9,5 km away from the city ring, (fig.18) The position were microrayons are situated, creates difficulties to reach the city center in an adequate amount of time. Gladly the city of Riga has a well-developed road system (fig.14).

42

Connectivity

Motor roads:

Each microrayon is well connected with the city by motor roads, which gives the freedom of mobility to the residents. This type of road layout can be con-sidered as the heritage of Soviet city planning system, since all microrayons had a requirement to be surrounded with motor roads. However this way of road planning design is not always advantageous. On one hand, it creates an easy connection to microrayons, on the other hand, the high dominance of motor roads in the neighborhoods prioritize car movement and builds boundaries between neighborhoods. Another negative aspect is that there is no clear division between the roads in Riga city, in consequence it creates a conflict between the design and usa-ge of streets. The ring structure within Riga is also not complete, in conse-quence the city center has no clear separation from high traffic flows. (Mi-nistry of Transport Republic of Latvia,2009). However the map was made from the analysis of Riga’s road map and google maps, to show the primary or fast lane roads, which were preliminary selected according to the width and speed limit in the street. The inner city ring is precisely selected as well. The highway system is developed only on the southern part of the city, (fig.19) and they are not connected to the main parts of it. Even more, they are not well connected with each other. Nevertheless, there are five highway lines in total, which connects the city of Riga with other parts of Latvia and neigh-boring countries.

Bridges:

The river Daugava goes along the whole territory of Riga and it splits the city in two parts. However there are only three bridges, which connects the two river banks. Moreover, they are located only in one, central area. In conce-quence, the connection to such microrayons as Bolderaja, Daugavgriva or Ziepniekalns becomes complicated and the distance between microrayons becomes larger, (fig.19).

1

2

34

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13


6. Agenskalns;7. Sarkandaugava;8. Vecmilgravis;9. Jugla;10. Mezciems;


14

Major roads; highways

Traffic intensive roads

Other car roads of a high importance

A 10E 22

A 8

A 7

E 22

A 6

City center

Figure 19. Motor roads




43

Bicycle routes and pedestrian network:

Cycling has already become a classical transportation system which will never bec-ome outdated. In such countries like Copenhagen this source of transportation is now experiencing a renaissance. It is unquestionably a sustainable mean of transportation. Cycling by professionals from various fields is evaluated as ‘energy efficient and non-polluting transport mode’ (Pucher, Komanoff and Shimek (1999) also it save space and prevents traffic jams. Other advantages are that it is cheap and healthy, (Pucher, Komanoff and Shimek (1999) in Wheeler and Beatley, 2009).

Therefore, cycling in Riga is not as popular as it is Copenhagen or Amsterdam, despite the fact that Riga is a compact city, where distances are relatively short. There are few factors which cause the average popularity of cycling in Riga. Main factor is that cycling grid in Riga is not well developed (fig.20), what creates an image of a car oriented city. Currently there are only five official cycling routes, which are not enough for the city of such size. In many cases cyclists use pedestrian sidewalks, (Ministry of Transport, Re-public of Latvia,2009). The developed bicycle paths are separated from the car roads and are user friendly but where the bicycle roads are not developed, cyclists have to use the same roads as cars and that increase the number of accidents.

Still, the positive aspect is that some microrayons, such as Imanta, Mežciems and Jugla are connected with the city center by cycling paths. Also there are three more routes in development process at the moment, which will build-up the connection to the city center from Kengarags and Ziepniekalns. The third route will create a connec-tion from Vecmilgravis microrayon to the seaside. Nevertheless, there are still nine microrayons left, where cycling paths do not exist. On the other hand, Riga’s develop-ment plan of 2006 – 2018 looks promising. The whole network of bicycle paths is planned to be built until 2018, (fig.20). However, if considering Mežciems, even de-velopment plan do not provide shorter and nicer bicycle track from the city center to Mežciems.

The pedestrian network is quite well developed. Pedestrian roads are mostly designed to lie along the motor roads and many places are easily accessible. Still the quality of walkways depends on the area in the city, (Ministry of Transport, Republic of Lat-via,2009).

Figure 20. Bicycle routes

44

Transit services:

There are five types of transit service (Cervero (1998) in Wheeler and Beatley, 2009) in Riga: trams, trolleybuses, bus transit and paratransit. The figure nr.21 shows that all microrayons are connected with transit services, which goes quite frequently as well. However, microrayons located in the northern part of the city are planned with routes of a quite low frequency. The figure nr.22 describes that transit service stops are quite densely planned in the city. This type of layout creates a high accessibility to the public transport. Only 5 – 7% Riga’s inhabitants and 3-5 % of employees need more than 5 minutes to reach the bus stop. On the other hand, this high coverage of bus stops prevents fast accessibility to the city by means of public transportation, (Ministry of Transport, Republic of Latvia,2009). However, the transportation system looks well developed only on the paper and the high increacement of private vehicles every year, shows that people give priority to a private car.

Paratransit could work as a system to reduce car traffic in the city and as an alterna-tive for busses which usually are slower than a car. Currently the paratransit system in Riga exists in the form of minivans and minibuses, however they are not so good in quality as other transit services (bus transit, trams, trolleybuses), with a poor paying system (usually you have to give cash to a car driver without a guarantee to get a ti-cket back), a bus driver stops only if the passenger express his wish to get off verbal-ly - these factors are usually a quite strong to demotivate car owners to exchange their vehicles into paratransit.

Figure 22. The density of bus stops

Figure 21. Day frequency of public transportation

45

The scale:

The „Rules and Norms of Planning and Building Cities” (Pravila I normy planirovki i zastroiki gorodov) had set a fixed number of inha-bitants in one microrayon. Usually one microrayon should fit 10 000 to 12 000 inhabitants and it should not exceed the size of 250 ha, (Grava, 1993). While the map of Riga shows that the largest micorayon Purvciems has a size of 430 ha. However, looking closer at each microrayon of larger size than 250 ha it is visible that it is several microrayons built close to each other. In such a way they are many independent units combined into one large whole. For example, Imanta is one big unit of 268 ha, which is divided into five smaller neighbourhood units, (fig.23). As it is seen from the scheme, car ro-ads create a clear division between neighborhoods(fig.19). Each neighbourhood also has schools and kindergartens planned inside. Since there were strict norms on the neighborhood size, it is easy to distinguish which neighborhood is complex and which is just one single unit. Such microrayons like Agenskalns, Ziepniekalns, Bolde-raja, Zolitude, Vecmilgravis, Jugla and Mežciems are created from one unit and do not exceed the size of 250ha.

1

2

34

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13




14

City center

Figure 23. The size of microrayons

1.Purvciems - 430 ha

2.Kengarags - 318 ha

3.Imanta - 268ha

4.Plavnieki - 239 ha

5.Jugla - 180 ha

6.Ilguciems - 166ha

7.Sarkandaugava - 159 ha

8.Mezciems - 112 ha

9.Vecmilgravis- 106 ha

10.Zolitude - 81ha

11.Ziepniekalns - 74 ha

12.Bolderaja - 61ha

13.Daugavgriva - 56ha

14. Agenskalns - 19ha

Size of microrayons:




46

MICRORAYONS IN DETAILS

47

PurvciemsIlguciems

Mežciems Imanta Kengarags

Self Infill

Purvciems

48

Most microrayons in Riga have a mixed charcter. Such microrayons as Imanta, Il-guciems, Sarkandaugava, Kengarags, Jugla, Purvciems, Daugavgriva and Vecmilgra-vis has a mixture of buildings. The ones which show quite clear planning layout and building character, such like Agenskalns, Bolderaja, Zolitude, Ziepniekalns, Mez-ciems and Purvciems were built on a vacant land, so they have a more ‚clean‘ struc-ture.

The biggest part of built Riga’s microrayons were simply in filled into already existing built area. However the change of political situation in the country has modified the appearance of all socialistic housing estates in Riga. The current situation of built environment shows that all buildings: the panel blocks, the ones built before them and the ones built after them, do not correlate with each other. Especially problematic situation is with buildings built after the independence. The site investigation has shown that most of the times those buildings are not adapted to the environment but plays as an individual projects. Instead of connecting with existing public places they occupies them from inhabitants of panel housing blocks.

The chaotic built environment in Riga‘s microrayons has evolved from the overlapping ownership, which was implemented right after the independence in 1991. Before the independence the land and the real estate were the national property, which meant that everything was collective. The fall of Soviet Union had brought a change and the socialistic environment turned into a capitalistic one. The nationalized land (Plaut and Uzulena, 2006) was returned to the original owners, who possessed the land before the occupation of 1940, or to their relatives. Whilst the flats (Lejnieks, 2013) were privatized with vouchers, which were given considering the personal achievements in life (age, profession and etc.). The collective ownership turned into private one. In consequence the privatization process have caused an overlapping ownership not

only in microrayons but in the whole city of Riga. The diagrams A,B and C describes the cahnge of property ownership. The overlapping ownership (Lejnieks, 2013) made the current condition of microrayons quite complicated: a house with private flat owners turned out to stand on the private land, which means that the flat owners must pay rents for the land owners. While the land owners turned out to be irresponsible for the condition of the house and are be-nefitting the flat owners.

The ones who meant to owe a vacant land in microrayon are interested to maintain the land only according to their private needs, (Lejnieks, 2013). The current situation shows how once used as public, those spaces are now treated as private property. They either become filled with new buildings, private parking lots or the opposite – totally unmaintained spaces, which is seen from tacky equipment and outdated pa-ving.

The onsite investigation has shown that there is a chaos in microrayons. New buil-dings are not adapted to the existing built character and very often there is a feeling of self-made architecture or new buildings tend to expose a very ‘personal’ taste.(p.23) The built environment gains a negative aspect of eclecticism. In general eclectic built environment is a plus to the neighborhood. The architecture of panel houses has a tendency to be quite monotonous and brutal, while new housing projects inside the microrayons breaks the monotony of these mass housing estates. However, currently built new houses do not rise the quality of microrayon because the panel blocks tend to be left in the same condition since they were built. Moreover, new buildings are usually fenced and are not willing to share their public space with inhabitants of neighbouring houses. As Zvirgzdins (2013) notes, those new houses supposed to up-grade the public space, unfortunately it is just an illusion. They tend tu steal that pu-blic space instead.

Self infill - The overlapping ownership and problems comming out of it

A.Before 1990 - The collective property B.After 1990 - The land was given back to its original owners C.The privatisation system has resulted self infill projects

49

Local business

1a.

2a.

3a.

4a. 5a. 6a.PurvciemsMežciems

Bolderaja

Daugavgriva

Zolitude

Imanta

50

The privatization process not only influenced the construction of new buildings inside microrayons but also the minor transformation of industrially produced panel houses themselves. The most common transformation is the transformation of the flat into the commercial space. Usually the flats in the first floor are being transformed, which can seem logical because it is a convenient way for the clients to reach the commerci-al spaces.

The form of flat transformation varies but the most typical and the simplest transfor-mation is done by reconstructing a window space into the door space and adding stairs to it. The sign of the name and facilities are usually located above the entrance. After that follows different variations of decoration according the owners style and fantasy. Usually the plot of the façade which belongs to that space is repainted (pict.1a,3a) or ‘upgraded’ with plastic tiles (pict.4a,5a) and etc. Some commercial spaces are trans-formed in a ‘smarter’ way by building extra space in the front (pict.4a,5a).

The self-transformation of flats not only have a negative building on the house struc-ture but also forms a degraded aesthetical appearance. Even though the transformed spaces brake the monotonous building’s façades, they do not give a positive aestheti-cal effect to the building. They instead increase an uneven style and a shabby image to the district.

The independence from Soviet Union has modified people’s lifestyle. The capitalistic market (Golhoorn and Sverdlof, 2009), which proposed a great variety of goods, affec-ted the ascetical life, used to be so common in former USSR. Suddenly, very rare goods or the ones which were difficult to get, became easily available. The increased demand of ‘new’ and ‘unseen’ products from the West resulted the establishment of private shops or service facilities, which happened to be established in privatized flats of mass housing blocks. Even though, the currently expanded network of supermar-kets in the city, which could be found in every microrayon(fig.24), have suppressed these small commercial places, which made them to become more specific in order to survive (Lejnieks, 2013), their existence proofs that the demand of such places is still vivid these days.

In conclusion, the abolishment of self-reconverted spaces would be disadvantageous, because there is still a need for them. A positive step would be to keep and encourage the local business, while the self-guided reconstruction and decoration projects should be limited or even prevented. The further development of spaces for local bu-siness and the upgrade of the existing ones should be done under the guidance of an

architect, who has an understanding that the commercial space is not an individual project but the important detail of the whole façade. Furthermore the wider range of facilities should be introduced. Public services like dentist office, gym, hair salon, book stores and etc. could be implemented in microrayon according to the needs of inhabitants. In such way the mono-functional neighborhood would upgrade into the mixed one.

Local business - Self-transformation of flats:

Figure 24. Supermarkets is a big danger to the local business.

51

Public spaces: challenges

1b.

2b.

3b.

4b. 5b. 6b.Ilguciems

Mežciems

Plavnieki Agenskalns

Zolitude

Purvciems

52

Current situation of the public spaces:

One of the major problems in microrayons is the neglecting public space. The const-ruction of mass housing estates may have solved the severe housing shortage in the past, therefore the current condition do not meet the requirements of present people needs. As Kokins, interviewed by Iltnere (2013), states that the main problems, lying in those districts, are actually not about the buildings themselves but more about the spaces they are surrounded with. Nowadays those places have lost their original function as a public space and are more likely accepted as an unsafe and uncomfor-table transit zones, which are, in some cases, converted into unsecure parking lots where the potential of vehicles getting robed is rather high, (Iltnere, 2013).

The factors which cause the decline of public space are numerous. One of the major problems can arise from the fact, that those mass housing estates were not finished. According to that, the public spaces were never clearly defined and that is why it is even more difficult to define them now. Moreover, many public spaces in microrayons are just a vast land, which is usually to wide and is not adapted to the human scale. (pict.1b,5b) Person feels uncomfortable in the environment which is overscaled. The outdated equipment and deteriorated pavement is also a great factor of reduced po-pularity. The children playgrounds have not changed since they were build. There can be seen a slight update of old iron structures by repainting them but that is all. Sand boxes and steel climbing structures looks dangerous and unnatractive. Sitting places in many microrayons are horribly run down (pict.2). Some of them are in ruins. Howe-ver, there are some places in every microrayon where the envornment is updated, even though mostly at a minimum level (pict.3b,6b). Lejnieks (2013) notes, that these updates are seen now, because of some successful and active collaborations made between the land owners and inhabitants of panel houses, which implements these updates. It means that the collaboration between parties is possible it just needs to be more encouraged.

Another factor, which could cause such situation now, is, again, the change of econo-mic and political situation. The parking lots are too small for the current load of cars, which number has risen tremendously after the independence of Latvia. In conse-quence, the cars are parked on every vast space of the land found. Especially the oc-cupation of pedestrian roads is very common,(pict.4b). Cars have concurred the pe-destrians.

A survey made by Treija and Suvorovs (2010), which took place in microrayon Pur-vciems showed that out of 246 (100%) people interviewed even 67% of respondents answered negatively about the quality of the environment. The reasons of frustrating

environment were “unattended courtyards and plantations, destroyed and neglected landscape elements, lack of benches and playgrounds”, (Treija and Suvorovs, 2010).Survy also showed that 34% of respondents used courtyards only for parking, while 26% - did not use the courtyard at all. The communication between inhabitants is also very poor – 78% of respondents do not know their neighbors, (Treija and Suvorovs, 2010).

Gehl (1980, in Weeler an Beatley, 2009) has divided public spaces into two categories and determines their quality with the amount of activities happening in the space. He analyzed what activities takes the biggest part in poor physical environment and in the good one. (fig.25). His analysis has shown that places of a poor physical environment supports only those activities which are necessary for people’s daily life, which are going to school, to work or shopping, waiting for a bus or the movement of service people in the neigh-borhood. While the places of a good physical environment are rich of all sorts of ac-tivities. They support social activities not only on the necessary level of movement but also the ones which are optional, such like – going for a walk or simply sitting on the bench and observing the environment. The activities which are not necessary to do but are pleasant to practice. Gehl (1980,in Weeler an Beatley, 2009) de-scribes that people feel encouraged to engage in optional activities only if the environment is pleasant. Pleasant en-vironment is the one which has an in-viting public space and good appea-rance of facades. The resultant activities, which involves people’s so-ciability with each other and are the outcome of the necessary and optional activities, tend to have a higher level in well-designed public spaces, (Gehl, 1980 in in Weeler an Beatley, 2009). In order to increase people’s activities and sociability in microrayons the upgrade of the public spaces is cruci-al.

Neglected public spaces:

Figure 25. Gehl‘s graphic description of the amount of activities in public space accor-ding to it‘s quality.

53

108m

178m

97m

37m

37m

213m

75m

26m

26m

165m

152m

0. Ground Floor 1:5000

Agenskalns68

m

67m

70m

238m

75m

77m

62m

106m


Bolderaja

79m

196m

61m

97m

226m

176m

59m

59m

123m

54m


Mezciems

117m

43m

64m

69m

38m

37m

87m


Plavnieki

245m

135m

45m

107m67m

200m

117m135m


Ziepniekalns

14671m227m

95m

53m

81m 73m

76m

93m


Zolitude

The scale in microrayons:

54

An over scaled public spaces in microrayons is another factor which makes them unpopular. Already in late 1970s, according to the survey done by that time, it was obvious that inner courtyards of industrially produced blocks of flats were not po-pular. Around 88% of inhabitants responded that they would like to use the courtyards located outside their flats, while only 37% of inhabitants were actually using them, (Treija and Suvorovs, 2010). Looks like the public spaces of microrayons were unpo-pular since they were built.

For a deeper look into public spaces of microrayons, six microrayons of the ‘pure’ planning system were chosen because they were built without considering the alrea-dy existing environment, which could influence the original planning rules of that time, (fig.5,p.13).

Gehl (2010) and Polyzoides (2012) criticizes mass housing estates as being unsocia-ble just because they are over-scaled. Gehl (2010) gives an ironical remark about mo-dernist housing estates, stating, that the best solution to reduce sociability in the city is to build a district according to the “modernistic planning principles”, (Gehl, 2010). While Polyzoides (2012) criticizes their scale by comparing them with the structure of a traditional city. He states that builders of modernistic blocks looked into the housing as an industrial form, where standardization and efficiency are the most important elements, which totally ignored the organic pattern of a traditional city, (Polyzoides, 2012).

Gehl (2010) describes that the human’s connection with the environment comes th-rough one’s senses and the key for qualitative public spaces is shaping them accor-ding to the human dimension. He gives a clear image on how a certain distance can have an impact on people’s communication. There are two measures, which are very important in urban design – 100meters and 25meters. The distance of 100 meters is the limit when one can recognize another and 25 meters is the starting point of com-munication. However, the distance from 25 meters to 100 meters is more for watching and observing than for communicating. The chance of communication becomes very high only at a distance of 25 meters and intensifies with every meter reduced.

According to the theory of these measures it becomes clear why the interest level in public spaces of microrayons is so low. The average distance in courtyards of microrayons, which is 70 meters long and 50 meters wide, is higher than the average communication distance. The current condition shows that in order to make the com-munication possible in microrayons, an extra effort of inhabitants has to be made.(p.37). While the social interaction is very possible in the courtyards and squares of

Riga’s central district, because of the small scale, (fig…). Surprisingly, the average size of typical courtyard in microrayon is the same as an average size of the square in central district of Riga.

Another measure which is important indicator of a lively space is the time which needs to be taken to cross the space. Gehl (2010) distinguishes architecture in two types: 5km/h and 60km/h. 5km/h is the average walking phase, while 60km/h is the average car riding phase in the city. The speed difference of these two types of mo-vement is very high, the same difference is with the space. The old cities are found to be designed in a 5km/h distance because they were built at the time when the motor vehicles were not invented and much attention was given to on foot transportation, (Gehl, 2010). Riga’s old town – Vecmilgravis is not an exception. One can feel the pleasure walking in Vecmilgravis and enjoying the facades of old buildings. This fee-ling appears because the facades of houses are changing in every two meters and they are different in color and shape. Supposedly, Riga’s old town is popular among tou-rists not only because of its historical buildings but also because of the invisible plan-ning layout, where the feeling of long streets melts down because of their curved shapes and the division of one long façade into small different sections.

While (Gehl, 2010), the urban space for cars is designed in a way that the objects would be visible at a speed of 60km/h. The big signs and monotonic facades dominate in such type of architecture, so that they would be visible from the moving car, (Gehl, 2010). The architectural layout of microrayons create an impression of 60km/h ar-chitecture, even though during the soviet times the production of cars was very limi-ted and the primary idea was not to adapt the environment for cars. However, the environment of microrayons contrasts with the compact old town of Riga. A 10 minute walk in one of microrayons becomes exhausting because of its monotonic environ-ment. Knowing these factors, the recipe to encourage people to walk more than to use a vehicle is actually very simple: the architecture should be adapted for pedestrians instead of cars.

Of course these findings do not claim that the architects and urban planners should ignore importance of cars and start to build medieval cities again, when the humanity is facing the century of technology. The purpose of these observations is to have a critical overview of the past designing principles and in order to make a successful renovation of Riga’s microrayons the good principles should be applied and the bad ones erased, according to the conditions and needs of the people living in the XXI cen-tury.

The dilemma of the size and the distance:

55

Public spaces: potentials

1c.

2c.

3c.

4c. 5c. 6c.Ilguciems

Sarkandaugava

Imanta Bolderaja

Purvciems

Agenskalns

56

The research has shown that public spaces in microrayons face many challenges. However they also have promising potentials. On site investigation has shown that even though the spaces are unorganized and badly maintained, people still try to make them useful. The most common actions spotted in public spaces were: laundry drying and gardening on vacant land plots.

Every microrayon has rack constructions specially designed for line drying laundry, most of them are in critical condition but still in use, (pict.2c) In some places, if exis-ting racks are not found, people create them by attaching the rope to the trees or pil-lars (1c,3c). Since, cars have occupied the public space, most of outdoor laundry drying equipment nowadays can be found just besides the parking spot (pict.2c). This phenomenon is not only unsound but also unhealthy, since clothes get gas emissions from cars. Freshly washed clothes, which are left to dry outside, is a clear evidence that there is a vivid demand for such places, but the equipment is outdated and spaces are unorganized.

To reorganize laundry spots and to replace old drying equipment with the new one sounds like the most beneficial solution, because there is a high chance that outdoor drying racks will be in use after renovation.

Drying clothes outside is a simple and cheap step towards environment preservation, as there are numerous benefits to encourage drying clothes outside: it helps to save money on electricity bills, because there is no need to use electrical laundry dryer; it is a good tool to save energy and reduce the emission of fossil fuels; clothes get natu-ral freshness and there is no need to use artificial fresheners; on the contrary to tum-ble drying, line drying has very low risk to damage clothes; sun works as a natural dryer and bleacher; It prevents from extra humidity in winter, which usually happens when drying clothes inside; statistically the chance to experience fire from an electri-cal laundry dryer is very high, while drying clothes outside the chance to have fire at home is equal to zero, (Leverette, 2013).

Urban gardening is getting very popular all over the world just because of numerous positive factors it brings. As urban areas are becoming more and more remote from food system, urban agriculture is a great opportunity for city inhabitants to be a part of food system chain, since the food prices are raising every year, (Urban Design Lab, 2012).

Latvia is not an exception. The research results made in 2013 by Institute for Private Finances of Swedbank has shown that Latvians spend almost one third of their salary on food, which is much more than other EU countries and it is the highest expenditure rate in the Baltic States. A four person family in Latvia spends even 32% of their monthly income on food. For vegetables average Latvian family spends 12% and 13% for fruits of food basket, (Swedbank, 2013).

Urban gardening could be a great alternative for people to reduce these numbers. Moreover Riga’s microrayons have a strong potential for urban agriculture. Every post-war district in Riga has signs of gardening, most of which are decorative garde-ning, which consists of various types of flowers, (pict.4c,5c,6c). Even though the vege-table gardening was not spotted as a common factor in mass housing estates, the preservation and encouragement of such practices can be quite convenient for its in-habitants because the purpose of this approach is not to change their environment but to encourage their hobbies, while involving more people.

Moreover, the role of urban gardening is not only to provide food for the city inhab-itants or to decorate the environment but it also brings them to collaborate together and exchange their ideas. It decreases inequality in neighborhood and it serves as a good teaching tool for urban children about crops. Moreover, it is a good tool for healthy free time, (Urban Design Lab, 2012).

Potentials of Riga‘s microrayons public spaces:

Line drying loundry:

Urban gardening:

57

Conclusions of the analysis:

According to the analisys of microrayons in Riga, a list of problems and potentials was made. Naming the weak and strong points of microrayons will help to find a starting point for the urban transformation. The proposed transformation is thus based on these findings which include the challenges and potentials of the analysed micro-rayons.

Challenges:

• River divides the city into two parts, the current amount of bridges is not enough to create a strong connection between both sides. Since the city center is located on the right bank of the river, microrayons which are located on the left bank be-come quite remote from it.

• More than a half of city’s population lives in mass housing dwellings;

• Car dependent city;

• The lack of bicycle routes in the city;

• Newly built buildings in microrayons do not fit the current environment, steals a public space and reduce the quality of mass housing blocks even more;

• Private shops and commercial activities, which are located in newly built buildings and in transformed flats, ignore aesthetical appearance and follows ‘individual’ taste of an owner;

• A domination of supermarkets in microrayons prevents the development of entre-preneurship.

• Over scaled public spaces with unclear functions;

• Outdated equipment (old benches, old children playgrounds, which became very unsafe for children use)

• Unorganized parking spaces, current parking lots are not adapted for the current loads of cars;

• Monotonic and dull architecture of buildings.

Potentials:

• Riga is a compact city, where the distances are relatively short;

• Riga has a nice nature of which, 28% is forests and 15,7% is water;

• All inhabitants of microrayons have easy access to a public transportation;

• Dense arrangement of public transportation stops;

• All microrayons are connected with car roads;

• Every microrayon has ingredients of entrepreneurship;

• Urban gardening – in every microrayon it is possible to see occupied plots for gar-dening, usually people grow flowers. The cultivation of vegetables was not found in any of the areas.

• Drying clothes outside is a very common activity in microrayons.

58

Study area: Mežciems 1977-1985

Photo source: Latvian Museum of Architecture

Project model of Mezciems

URBAN RENOVATION STRATEGIES FOR RIGA’S MICRORAYONS

59

Forest

Green spaces

Mezciems Microrayon

200 m

1 km

5 km

10 km

Water

A 10E 22

A 8

A 7

E 22

A 6




City center

Riga city border

Mežciems in Riga’s context

Built year: 1977 - 1985

Size: 112 ha

Architects: M.Medinskis, E. Fogelis, I.Mille-ris, A. Vitols, J.Paegle, O.Krauklis, A.Kron-bergs, M. Gelzis.

Distance from the city centre: 4,5km - 5km

Time spent to reach city centre:

With a car: 5-6min (60km/h, non peak hours)

With a bicycle: 20 - 25min (15km/h)

On foot: 1h - 1h15min (5km/h)

The frequency of buses to the area: 1152 times /dayFigure 26. Mezciems in Riga

Mežciems problems are, but not limited to the ones mentioned in the precedings sections thus more specific problems are introduced in this section. Based on these and the problems mentioned before the design proposal is made.

60

Mežciems in Riga’s context

Mežciems is one of the 14 microrayons in the city of Riga. It is also called a sleeping district (Leijnieks). It is located 5km outside the inner city ring, on the eastern part of the city. It is quite remote district from the city centre, however it has a well developed road connection from the city center and quite good public transportation. Therefore there are no clearly defined bicycle roads and the area is more focused on car trans-portation. Mežciems is located in a green area, surrounded with forests, yet the forest on the west side of Mežciems separates it from the city center.

The district (Berglund, 2001) was built on a vast land near the former village Mež-ciems and it got the same name as that village. Mežciems in Latvian means forest village. The microrayon was built 1977 until 1985. Mežciems was only partly in the composition of Riga city and by that time was considered as located quite far from the city but the great demand of housing had caused a greater development of micro-rayons. Firstly there were a development of blocks of flats around the village and it was named ‘Old Mežciems’, however the demand of new housing was still high and the ‘New Mežciems’ was designed in the vast area nearby, (Berglund, 2001).

Mežciems was built with a typical structure of microdistrict: with kindergartens, schools and public buildings. However it has more sophisticated layout than other microrayons. One of the architects – Andris Kronbergs, who was a part in the project team of Mežciems is a well-known and influential architect today. Kronbergs’s notes that the project area is surrounded with forests which prevents from planning a large scale housing, on the other hand the size of the area gave a possibility to create confi-ned neighborhood with its own center. The groups of buildings were formed to create a special environment with the main core of the district, which was implemented for the first time in Riga, – walking avenue in the middle of the district (film,..). Unfortu-nately, the project in reality was not finished. Two big shopping center’s designed in the south were not finished (was built only one of them) and the same happened with the pedestrian avenue in the middle.

Location:

History:

Figure 27. Original scheme of Mezciems project, 1970s

61

Vast area

Hospital

ForestForest Elderly home

New housing

Supermarket

Lake

Car racing track

Museum

Industrial/Logistics

Other living area

Surroundings:

Car museum source: wikipedia.com The lake source: authors photo The hospital source: authors photo

Despite the fact that Mežciems microrayon is located further from the city center it has numerous benefits:

1. It is surrounded with forests from both sides;

2. The northern part of study area neighbours with the lake;

3. The car museum, which attracts tourists is located very close to the area;

4. Car racing track, which is located on the western part of the area, is a potential attraction point for entertainment/events;

5. A healthcare center is located just across the street on the eastern part of the area.

All these benefits create a great potential for urban renovation of Mežciems. Its re-mote location and rich natural environment can attract people who seek a more pri-vate space.

However, Mežciems is surrounded with high speed car roads, which is a strong bar-rier between microrayon and its surroundings.

62

Mežciems built character:

Pedestrian avenue

Self infill building Pdestrian road divided from car roads 9 storey blocks of flats

Parking problem

Children playground

1d.

2d.

3d.

4d. 5d. 6d.

63

Original buildings built in 1977 - 1985Self infill buildings built after the independence

Car driveway/Parking areaUndefined green space

Despite the fact that the area was designed by team of architects of a high profile there were many conditions and rules they had to stick to while planning a microray-on and the frames of microrayon concept are very visible in Mežciems. Another pro-blem is that architects did not really considered the human scale, the plan was made ‘from above’, even though the whole area is designed for pedestrians. Nowadays the problems which arises in public spaces are even greater because nice ideas of archi-tects were not implemented and now the equipment is even outdated.

The study area mainly consists of undefined vast green lots and unstructured par-king lots. The lack of parking lots is a great problem in Riga’s microrayons and Mež-ciems is not an exception. The onsite investigation gave the impression that cars are parked everywhere, were the free plot of asphalt is found.(pict) This is also because originally designed parking lots are too small for current people’s consumption of cars.

Another problem is large vast spaces with no particular use. Some courtyards have playgrounds but in general public spaces are in a very poor condition. The supposed to be a core of the area – Pedestrian Avenue in the middle of the neighborhood is now just a large unfinished space with already outdated pavement and undefined green plots.

General situation of public spaces:

64

Built height

16 storey buildings

1 - 2 storey buildings

1 - 2 storey buildings

9 storey buildings

Nine and sixteen storey blocks of flats define the main built character of Mežciems. They are built from industrially mass produced panel blocks and have a typical rectangular shape of a block. The height and the monotonic architecture of these blocks creates cold and aggressive atmosphere.( pict) Their height are also a cause of large spaces between them, in order all flats would have enough sunlight. Public buildings are, in contrary, very low – mostly one – two story height. There are quite few self-built buildings, most of them are built for the commercial use.

65

Built type

Blocks of flats

Shopping facilities

Kindergarten building

School building

commercial building

Mežciems is a typical sleeping district which consists mostly from blocks of flats. There are two kindergartens and one school in the area. Three public buil-dings with some shopping and service facilities. In contrast from blocks of flats kindergartens and school are renovated and well preserved and the school buil-ding has an extended part. However, the stadium situated near the school is in a critical condition. Four buildings of commercial use are located in the southern edge of the microrayon and the other two – on the northern edge. A few private businesses are also located in the bottom floor of blocks of flats. The majority of transformed flats are concentrated in the area near the stadium.

66

RENOVATION STRATEGIES FOR THE STUDY AREA: MEŽCIEMS

67

Vision for a compact neighborhood with the good connection to the city center

From the previous sections it is shown that the problems plaguing the microrayons (Mežciems in particular) are complex though at the same time they show a great potential for a more value orien-ted neighborhood. These problems span from individual problems within the microrayons to the global perspective of Riga. This implies that though the design proposal is based on Mežciems, all microrayons need to be revitalised in order for Riga to have a complete face transformation. Based on the principles of sustainable urban design as mentioned in the proceeding sections the proposed design seeks to solve the problems identified from the global perspective of Riga to the local per-spective of each microrayon while at the same time making use of the potentials in Mežciems.

In order to create a lively neighbourhood, it should be diverse in functions, with interesting points of focus, objects designed within the walking distance. However the functions existing in neighborhood should not conquer with the functions existing in the city centre in case to avoid a satellite town ef-fect. The connection with the city center should be quite strong instead.

68

Strategy Nr. 1: Better connection with the city center

According to the analysis on Riga’s traffic system, it is quite well connected by public transport and easy to reach with the car. However the car roads which are located in Mežciems separates the neighborhood from its surroundings, because all Mežciems is enclosed with high speed streets. This type of infrastructure decreases the mo-vement of cyclists and pedestrians. Considering cycling paths – currently there is no existing path which would lead to the city center, and the ones which are designed to build in the future are made along the car roads, which are designed in a longer dis-tance. Even though the connection to the city center with public transport is not bad, the improvement of it could reduce the need to have a car. In order to improve the connection of Mežciems with the city center some policies are suggested:

1. Improving paratransit system of public transportation: In order to reduce the car use among Riga’s citizens, the reasonable solutions could be the improvement of the paratransit network and quality. This could be solved by making it to become a higher level than a bus considering such factors as: vehicle quality, faster connection, person oriented service, comfortable paying system but yet cheaper than a taxi. Paratransit system is a real alternative for cycling during the cold season (late autumn, winter, early spring), when going by bike becomes too hard and demotivating.

2. To create the cycling link between the city center and Mežciems: The solution for poor cycling infrastructure is the improvement of it by creating more bike lanes which are separate from car roads with good parking facilities. To reduce the danger in cy-cling is by no means separate bike lanes also apply. Bicycle tracks should be integra-ted in nice landscapes and adjusted to unexperienced cyclists.

3. Traffic calming strategy in order to strengthen walking and cycling links from the city center to Mezciems: To slow down the speed of vehicles in the streets which sur-rounds Mezciems and to reduce the existing barrier between Mežciems and its sur-roundings (forests, car museum, hospital).

1

2

34

5 6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13


6. Agenskalns;7. Sarkandaugava;8. Vecmilgravis;9. Jugla;10. Mezciems;


14




A 10E 22

A 8

A 7

E 22

A 6

City center

Mezciems

69

Strategy Nr. 2: Mixed use infill:

Infill development (Wheeler, 2002) could be one of the best answers for resolving the aforementioned problems such as urban sprawl, complicated land ownership situa-tion, self- built architecture objects in the area, and a dissonant arrangement of an existing environment between the buildings. As Wheeler (2002) states the Infill de-velopment is focused on the building of new houses within the existing urban pattern, contrary to urban sprawl which is focused on the creation of new areas around the city. Infill development might be more expensive than urban sprawl in terms of buil-dings, but solves more complex problems which might arise in the future. The infill development takes advantage of existing infrastructure, reduces government costs, provides new buildings, which increases the functions needed for the city and pre-vents the increase of car usage, (Wheeler, 2002).

The infill development in mass housing districts can be a tool for the municipality to gather all owners of the district and to create a united reconstruction project, from which all parties could benefit. This approach is complex, involving architects, inhab-itants, land owners and the municipality to work as a team. In this case participants could benefit from rents or sales of new houses, while the existing inhabitants will be able to enjoy new public places and renovated post war – blocks.

The mixed use infill in Mezciems can be implemented in two steps:

1. Renovation of mass housing blocks of flats by extending their size; 2. New residential buildings of different types and new public buildings of different functions;

Existing BlockUpgrade of existing buildings by expanding their space

New buildings brings variety to the area and mixed functions

70

Strategy Nr. 3: To create new and encourage existing forms of entrepreneurship

Lively public spaces and infill development cannot function properly without entre-preneurship. In order, to have a lively neighborhood a certain amount of public ser-vices which support local people needs should be provided in the area. Also some commercial areas could be provided to rise the local income for Mežciems. With the provision and encouredgement of local enterpreneuship Mežciems can become a self - sustained neighbourhood, without a high dependence from the state.

This aspect can be implemented in two steps:

1. To encourage small businesses, which could be run by one or few people, and self employement by creating commercial spaces, which could be rented for a low price for self imployed people.

2. To create mixed use objects with infill development, where certain amount of spaces for offices would be introduced for rents or local business development, (Wheeler and Beatley, 2009)

Bakery

Sun Studio

shoe repair

Keys

book store

Dental care

VegetablesBike repair

Handmade Sweaters

juice bar

71

Strategy Nr. 4: Lively public spaces:

Human scale is the main factor of public space quality, which can be described accor-ding to the activities happening in public spaces, (Wheeler and Beatley, 2009). That is why the transformation of spaces between the buildings has a potential to increase the level of sociability in mass housing estates. Gehl (eds. Wheeler and Beatley, 2009, p.102) describes a sociable city as one which has relatively small spaces between buildings, is equipped with pedestrian lanes, has outdoor areas directly connected with dwellings and enough public buildings and places to work. The quality of public space is proportionally dependent on the number of activities. Usually, simple adjust-ment in the physical spaces are enough to see an increased in the usage of public space. This kind of city is filled with people just because it is equipped with comforta-ble public spaces, which are easy to access and to use, (Gehl, eds. Wheeler and Beat-ley, 2009).

Huge public spaces should be minimised into the comfortable size for pedestrians,there should be a room for communication and interaction. Domestic activities such as urban gardening and inline drying should be encouraged amongst inhabitants and planned in a way that would not mix with public spaces, in order to keep the privacy of inhabitants.

Parking lots should be organised and should have a clear distinction with public spaces, so that cars would not occupy the spaces which belong to pedestrians.

86 m

OVERSCALED AND UNORGANISED PUBLIC SPACE

Distance: 10 m

Distance: 9 mCourtyard size: 18 - 22 m

PARKING PEDESTRIANPATH GARDENING COURTYARD PEDESTRIAN

PATH

After the implementation of human scale principlesThe existing situation of public spaces

72

Strategy Nr. 5: The mix of functions within a walking distance

In order to encourage people to use public spaces in Mežciems only to make them smaller in size is not enough. They should also be divided into small areas which are of a wide range of functions within a walking distance (Gehl, 2010). The aim of a strategy is to propose the variety of functions spread out in different spots of Mežciems, which are not further from each other than a 5 min. walking distance (human dimention). Different public spaces and public buildings create a variety of functions and they should be placed in transit places, in order to cre-ate interesting views, which visually shortens the distances and encourage peo-ple to stop. The functions which could be implemented in Mežciems are: public services of a local importance – gym, dentist office, printing office and etc., public spaces of various activities – sports, games and resting places.

73

DESIGN PROPOSAL FOR MEŽCIEMS

74

GOALS FOR THE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT:

1. Higher density;

2. More mixed environment;

3. Better connection with the surroundings;

3. Better connection between the living area and the lake;

4. Enclosed courtyards;

5. Open space - for everybodys needs;

EXPECTED RESULT:

Mixed neighbourhood with functions spread withing a walking distance. The renovation proposal for the area should fix such problems like overscaled and empty public spaces, dull and monothonic architecture, outdated equipment, lack of public services and facilities and the lack of outdoor activities.

75

City center

1

1

2

2

The route from City center to Mezciemsplanned by municipality

Proposed route Nr. 1

Proposed route Nr. 2

Distance - 5km 500m

Distance - 4km 950m

Distance - 5km

IDEA: To improve bicycle links from the city centre to Mežciems

City center

Existing bicycle traks

Planned to build bicycle tracks until 2018

Proposed new bicycle tracks to improve the bycyle network

Mezciems

Other microrayons

Strategy Nr. 1: Good connection with the city center:

CA

R R

OA

D12

m

BIC

YCLE

RO

AD

3m

PED

ESTR

IAN

3m

GR

EEN

BA

RIE

R3m

FOR

EST

OR

LIVI

NG

AR

EA

FOR

EST

OR

LIVI

NG

AR

EA

Firstly in order to improve the connection between the neighbourhood Mež-ciems and city center, new bicycle tracks should be privided. The new connec-tion links provides two starting points in the neighbourhood. Bicycle traks con-nects with the track planned by municipality. The distance of new tracks might not look much shorter at a first glance but it provides more starting points and higher flexibility.

The bicycle tracks should be strictly divided from car roads, in order to provide high security for cyclists of all ages. This can be done with building green edges (trees, bushes) between them. The landscape around sycling tracs should be pleasant in order to increase the cycling. The high distance, planted with gree-nery, between cars and bicycle tracks can highly improve the quality of bicycle tracks.

Cycling and pedestrian tracks should be divieded from car roads

New cycling paths improves the connection to the city center

76

IDEA: Removal of Gailezera iela and creation of extra speed redusement barriers in Sergeja Eizensteina iela and in Hipokrata iela

7m

1,50m 1,50m3,50m

12m15m

2,70m

0 10 20 30 40 50

Gailezera iela

Sergeja Eizensteina iela

BEFORE

BEFORE

0 10 20 30 40 50

AFTER

AFTER

Currently the road is a problem in the area because it disconnects the lake from the living area, in concecuence the lake is not in use by its inhabitants. Another fact is that the traffic on the road is not intensive but the width of the road is very high. The complete removement of the road was chosen because the neighbourhood has high speed roads on both sides already. The purpose of Gailezera street is to con-nect these two high speed roads, however the road is just promoting a car use, while the design proposal suggest to promote pedestrian use of the area. The re-moval of the street can bring new features, connecting the neighbourhood and the lake, to the area and improve the safety of pedestrians.

Another solution to improve pedestrian and cyclists use of the area is to integrate Traffic calming strategy in the area by:

a) building new bariers on the streets to force the speed reducement of cars;

b) build more traffic lights in the area;

c) reduce the width of the street;

d) to create more room for pedestrians and cyclists;

e) to build and plant the area near the street in order to provide interesting scenery.

77

IDEA: Renovation of houses by extendengin their size

0 1020304050Existing buildings Extended area

+1,50m +3m

For the upgrade of blocks of flats, renovation of facades would not be genuine. The upgrade of houses with the extention of their area is even smarter. This type of renovation is already in practice and there are real examples of it (ps. 54). It gives more opportunities in creating new facades and changes the character of the buil-ding. The renovation proposal also suggests to fill the gaps between buildings but leaving fisrts floor for pedestrian passway. The design of facades is suggested to be diverse in order to get rid of monothonic character of buildings and visually reduce great size of buildings.

Strategy Nr. 2: Mixed Use Infill:

78

References of housing renovation

1. Renovation of 709 housing units in Genicart district, Larmont, France.Housing units are transformed by adding extra space to the facades. This way the flats gain extra space and facade gets completely different look.Year of renovation: 2009.Office: LANhttp://www.lan-paris.com

Before

After

2. Transformation of the housing block No.17, Paris.Self supporting structures were added to the edges of the existing building, this way the size of a block was extended by 3560 sq.m.Year of renovation: 2011Office: Lacaton & Vasaalhttp://www.lacatonvassal.com

3. Housing transformation by the same prin-ciple in Saint - Nazaire, France.Year of renovation: 2013 (still in process);Office: Lacaton & Vasaalhttp://www.lacatonvassal.com

Before

Before

After

After

1.

2.

3.

79

IDEA: Designing new buildings in the area:

0 10 20 30 40 50

Gailezera iela


0 102030405060708090100

5 - 6 storey residential house

3 storey duplexes

5 storey mixed use building

5 storey mixed use building

Single family housesChanging facades every 10 - 15m

Different functions10m 14m 16m 13m 13m

CommercialOffices

Residential

10m 14m 16m 13m 13m

New buildings in the study area are proposed using the mixed - use infill strategy. The delimitation of infill strategy is that existing blocks of flats are quite high, consisting from 9 and 16 floors. Because of this factor not many buildings can be built, otherwise the new buil-dings will reduce the amount of sunlight the existing buildings get. The goal is to design various buildings in the area, so that the area would escape the mono character of residential district.

The infill consists from 4 types of buildings:

1. 5-6 storey residential houses for new inhabitants- the house is divided with flats;

2. 3 storay duplexes - flats are planned for families . Each family has a flat planned within three floors with the private garden;

3. 5 storey mixed use buildings with commercial spaces on the first floor, offices on the 2nd and residential use on the rest floors.

80

IDEA: More enterpreneural activities in the area

0 10 20 30 40 50

Gailezera iela


0 102030405060708090100

Food market

Shops on the bottom floor of housing blocks

Community center, indoors swimming pool

Spaces for rent and commercial use on 1st and 2nd floors

Since the area already has two buildings of a public use, it is sugested to redesign them into more attrac-tive commercial buildings. The existing building in the north could serve as a good space for market, where individuals can sell domestic goods, such as vege-tables, meet, fruits and other foods. The public buil-ding in the north is sugested to be a community center, where locals could organise meetings. Swimming pool for inhabitants could also be located in that buildings.

It is strongly proposed to open shops and other com-mercial spaces on a groundfloor of housing blocks, which are located along the walking alley.

New buildings should have a variety of functions, in order to avoid empty or alien spaces during certain time of the day/night. New buildings are designed to provide office spaces for rents on the 2nd floor and commercial spaces on the groundfloor.

Strategy Nr. 3: To create new and encourage existing forms of entrepreneurship

81

IDEA: Enclosed courtyards divided with small pockets of spaces:

0 10 20 30 40 50

2m 2m 4m 2m 24m

2m 8m 2m 8m 3m 2m 13m

2m 24m

2m 30m

2m 21m

2m 23m

2m 4m

ChildrenplaygroundPa

thw

ay

Path

way

Gre

enPa

thw

ay

Path

way

Gar

dens

Gre

en

Path

way

Path

way

Path

way

Path

way

Path

way

Path

way

Gre

en

Gre

en

Inline loundry Basketball field GardeningResidential Residential Residential

Gre

en

Gre

en

In order to create calm atmosphere in the courtyards, the parking lots are moved outside them and the space for courtyards is particularly designed for outdoor activities. Spaces in courtyards are divided into small pockets of spaces of 10m - 25m width. Each pocket has a different function. Func-tions provided in courtyards are:

1. Children playgound;2. Inline laundry drying;3. Urban gardening;4. Games area for adults and elderly;5. Bascketball field in bigger courtyards;

All pockets of spaces are located in a landscape planted with trees, whe-re the seating places are provided.

Strategy Nr. 4: Lively public spaces:

82

IDEA:Open public space with the variety of functions:

Boats

Sauna

Beach

urban gardening

winter activities

stadium

fountains

Resting zones for elderly Park

The idea is to create an open public space where people of all ages could find interesting activities. The purpose of the public space is not create a sophi-sticated or expensive design but to use the potentials of existing space, which can be used for purposeful free time.

Since the lake is one of the greatest potentials in the area,the design proposes to revive the lake area by implementing water activities there.

Also the establishement of winter activities, such as sliding from the hill, are proposed.

An importancy for public areas for elderly is also gi-ven, who very often lack outdoor activities in public spaces and yet too often forgotten.

Stadium already exists in the area, so the design proposal sugests to renovate it and implement more activities for active people around it.

All in all, the purpose of the space to create a di-verse and interesting environment for the inhab-itants of microrayon. It is designed respecting the primary layout, created by architects almost 40 years ago, but it integrates more functions in the area.

83

Strategy Nr. 5: The mix of functions within a walking distance

BEACH

WATER ACTIVITIES

GAR

DENI

NG

MARKET

SKAT

ING

SQ

UARE

ARTI

FICI

ALHI

LLS

STA

DIU

M

ARTI

FICI

ALW

ATER

ELD

ERLY

ZO

NE

PARK

ELD

ERLY

ZO

NE

IND

OO

RS

SWIM

MIN

GPO

OL

IDEA: Bus stops are located in that way so it would take 3 minutes to reach the destination

150,022

Gailezera iela


116,

289

235m

220m

254m21

0m20

7m26

0m

218m

234m

270m

BEACH

WATER ACTIVITIES

GAR

DENI

NG

MARKET

SKAT

ING

SQ

UARE

ARTI

FICI

AL H

ILLS

STA

DIU

M

ARTI

FICI

AL W

ATER

ELD

ERLY

ZO

NE

PARK

ELD

ERLY

ZO

NE

IND

OO

RS

SWIM

MIN

G P

OO

L

RU

NN

ING

TRA

CK

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

~200m

New bus stops

Already existing bus stops

A shape of a neighbourhood is dictates the a certain cha-racter of a oblong space, because of that there is a diffi-culty to create a 3 min. neighbourhood as a whole. Howe-ver the public space is designed in a way so that a changing and interesting scenery along the way would visually reduce the distance, in case the destination re-quires to cross the neighbourhood from South to North.

From East to West is easy to create a 200 meters net-work, which means that most of the objects and func-tions can be reached in three minutes.

New density of buses is proposed, which creates a good walking distance in the neighbourhood and all facilities could be reached within a 3 min. from a bus stop.

The canging scenery visually shortens the distance

0 200m

3 minutes

84

EVALUATION OF THE DESIGN PROPOSAL

85

12.3 Ha

3.9 Ha

7.0 Ha

7.5 Ha

1.4Ha

Public promenade with various functions

Parking

Private housing

Public space for the school and kinder-

garden

Courtyards

1.4Ha

0.8Ha

0.3Ha

1.3Ha

0.4Ha

0.2Ha

0.1Ha

0.3Ha

0.16Ha

0.32Ha

0.7Ha

0.7Ha

0.8Ha

2.4Ha

2.0Ha

0.6Ha

0.2Ha

0.2Ha

0.7Ha

0.3Ha

0.4Ha

0.9Ha

0.6Ha

0.2Ha

0.3Ha

0.3Ha

0.1Ha

0.5Ha

1.2Ha

0.4Ha

1.0Ha

4.2 ha

3.3Ha

1.5Ha

5.2Ha

5.2Ha

7.5 Ha

6.7 Ha

6.5 Ha

10.8 Ha

4.2 Ha

1.9Ha

1.1Ha

0.3Ha

0.6Ha

0.5Ha

0.3Ha

0.4Ha

0.4Ha

0.3Ha

0.3Ha

0.4Ha

Courtyards

Undefined public space

Parking

Fenced territory

Vast space

1. Land use

Revitalization project promises a more organized master plan layout. The existing vast land in the South which occupies even 7,5 hectares is eli-minated by creating a mixed living pat-tern. The area is filled with single fa-mily homes, which occupies 1,4 hectares; extended housing facilities, entrepreneurship section and recreati-on area. Parking lots now occupy less space than before but have a well-or-ganized pattern, where more cars can be parked. Parking area is designed on the edges of the neighborhood, in or-der to generate enclosed courtyards just for the inhabitants. This type of area organization gives more space to inhabitants by 0,5 hectare. The area in the middle is designed to be a recreati-on space for inhabitants and its visi-tors, which is divided into smaller sec-tions, in order to suit everybody’s needs. The total size of the park is 12,3 hectares. Fenced areas of schools and kindergartens, located in the eastern part of the area are transformed into public zones. The safety from the street still stays high, because of the mi-xed-use buildings designed along the street.

The above analysis which is deduced from the design shows that the local problems of Mežciems,such as unorga-nised parking spaces, unused areas etc. (mentioned in p.61 - 65) are sol-ved.

86

2. Increase of living space

0 10 20 30 40 50

Gailezera iela


0 102030405060708090100

215

168

310

20

20

45

100

36

9

12

25

+960 new flats

+225 new commercial

type spaces

+520 work places

The proposed revitalization project would create even 960 new living spa-ces, 9 of them are private single family houses and 5 terraced houses con-sisting of 25 flats. New flats can be used for various purposes – for rents, as affordable accommodation for students, accommodation for young families and etc. The implementation of new housing in the area also reduces urban sprawl and increases the density in the area, which creates a cozy atmo-sphere.

As mentioned above in design proposal, the introduction of new flats at-tracts new inhabitants, businesses and creates a diverse living environ-ment.

87

3. Wider possibilites for Entrepreneurship

0 10 20 30 40 50

Gailezera iela


0 102030405060708090100

+50 work places

+40

+25

+40

+25 +25

+5 +5

+10

+20 +30 + 20

work places

Local vegateble market;

Spaces for commercial or private use;

Shop/Public facilities;

Community center

+960 new flats

+225 new commercial

type spaces

+520 work places

The proposed design project concentrates on mixed use revitalization plan. According to that plan there should be 225 commercial plots in total, which create approximately 520 work places ( calculated according to the formula: 1commercial plot * 2 workers + 50 places in local veg. market + 20 places in community center). It means that unemployed inhabitants have possibilities to create working space for themselves. In order to make these areas affordable for this specific class of people - special subsidies and discounts should be implemented. In case the demand is smaller than supply, there is a possibility to convert those spaces into living areas or to use them for community purpo-ses. Not only does the introduction of new businesses sustain the present in-habitants but also for future inhabitants due to long term investments, an im-portant principle in sustainable development.

88

CONCLUSIONS:

Though Riga is rich with Art Noveaux architecture (included in the UNESCO world heritage list), the above project has shown that the city is mostly covered with mass housing estates. These estates portray monotonic and dull architecture, over scaled public spaces etc. as discovered during the analysis (Microrayons in the city’s context), which is far from an attractive and comfortable environment.

Riga has also got many potentials some of which are mentioned in this project but the problems which come with mass housing, overshadow them. These problems are peculiar in Riga’s microrayons. Thus the focus of this project has been to revitalize these potentials by proposing some strategies to solve these problems (Urban Reno-vation Strategies for Riga’s Microrayons).

The main focus has been to use the most economic and efficient way to give Riga the face it deserves. The aim of the strategies mentioned above was to preserve the buil-dings, while at the same time uplifting the potentials of microrayons. For this many strategies were used, some of which were to increase the sociability level in public spaces, to upgrade the current appearance of mass housing estates, to encourage entrepreneurship, to create better connections to the city center and within micro-rayons.

Some of the problems solved by these strategies include monotonic architecture, over scaled public spaces, unorganized parking etc.

Using the strategies mentioned above Mežciems is used in this project as a case stu-dy to demonstrate a possible transformation of mass housing estates in Riga.

The proposed design for the transformation of Mežciems solves most of these prob-lems, with main focus on the economic aspects.This included introduction of new buil-dings, creation of new bicycle tracks, implementation of traffic calming system in high speed roads, reorganization of public spaces etc.

A further recommendation would be to implement these strategies on other micro-rayons of Riga in order to give a complete face transformation.

89

Books and articles:

ALTROCK, UWE et.al. (eds.) (2006) Spatial Planning and Urban Development in the New EU Member States. From Adjustment to Reinvention. Hampshire: Ashgate Pub-lishing Limited.

ARENDT, HANNAH (1998) The human condition. London: The University of Chicago Press,Ltd.

CIAFFI, DANIELA (ed.) (2005) Neighborhood housing debate. Milano: F.Angeli.

CONTAL, MARIE-HELENE and REVEDIN, JANA (2009) Sustainable Design: Towards a new ethic in Architecture and town planning. Actes Sud, France;

D.ANDRUSZ, GREGORY (1985) Housing and urban development in the USSR. State University of New York Press, Albany;

FRAMPTON, KENNETH (2007) The Evolution of 20th Century Architecture. Sprin-ger-Verlag/Wien and China Architecture and Building Press, Beijing, China;

GEHL, JAN (2010) Cities for People. Washington: Island Press.

GOLDHOOM, BART and SVERDLOV, ALEXANDER (2009) Microrayon: Transformations of the Soviet City under Capitalism. Volume 21, p. 14-18;

GRAVA, SIGURD (1993) The Urban Heritage of the Soviet Regime The Case of Riga, Latvia. Journal of the American Planning Association, 59:1, p. 9-30;

HEIDEGGER, MARTIN (2001) Poetry, Language, Thought. Chapter 4: Building Dwelling Thinking. New York: Perennial Classics, Harper Collins Publishers.

ILLICH, IVAN (2001) Tools for conviviality. London: Marion Boyars.

KNORR – SIEDOW, THOMAS and DROSTE, CHRISTIANE (2003) Large Housing Estates in Germany. Utrecht: Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University.

MUMFORD, ERIC (2000) The CIAM Discourse on Urbanism. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

OSBORN, ROBERT J. (1966) How the Russians Plan Their Cities. Society, Volume 3, Nr. 6, p. 25-30;

PALMER, ALLISON LEE (2008) Historical Dictionary of Architecture. USA: Scarecrow Press Inc.

POLYZOIDES, STEFANOS (2012, p.51) Housing Fabric as Urban Form: A New Urbanist Argument against Three Generations of Anti-Urban Modernist Housing in HAAS, TIGRAN (ed.) (2012) Sustainable urbanism and beyond. Rizzoli International Publica-tions, Inc.

REVEDIN, JANA (2013) The radicant city: why sustainable living space grows like ivy. Kalmar: Cumulus Kalmar Linnaeus University.

REVEDIN, JANA (1991) The Concept of Open Space in the Social Architecture of the German Avant-Garde. Rome/Milan: National Library/Milan Polytechnic.

REVEDIN, JANA (2012) Architecture in the Making. Paris: Cité/Editions Alternatives.

REVEDIN, JANA (2011) Rethinking the Human in Technology driven Architecture. In-ternational ENSHA Chania Conference.

VYRIAUSIOJI ENCIKLOPEDIJU REDAKCIJA (Eng. Main Editorial Office of Encyclope-dia) (1981) Lietuviskoji Tarybine Enciklopedija (Eng. Lithuanian Soviet encyclopedia). Volume 7, Mokslas;

Internet sources:

BERGLUND, ULLA (2002) Privatisation, Segregation and Local Engagement: A Latvi-an Case Study. [Online] Available from: http://cibworld.xs4all.nl/dl/publications/Pu-b281/04Chapter-2.pdf [Accessed 23/07/13]

BIJLMERMEER RENOVATION PLANNING OFFICE (PROJECTBUREAU VERNIEUWING BIJLMERMEER) (2008) The Bijlmermeer Renovation Facts and Figures. [Online] Available from: http://www.vernieuwdebijlmer.nl/bijlmer11/index.php/component/docman/doc_download/86-the-renewal-of-the-bijlmermeer-facts-a-figures. [Ac-cessed 02/05/13]

BUCHLI, VICTOR (1997) Khrushchev, Modernism, and the Fight against „Petit-bour-geois“ Consciousness in the Soviet Home. Journal of Design History, Vol. 10, No. 2, Design, Stalin and the Thaw, pp. 161 – 176. [Online] Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1316130 [Accessed 27/09/13].

APPENDIX 1: BIBLIOGRAPHY

90

HELLEMAN, GERBEN and WASSENBERG, FRANK (2003) The renewal of what was tommorow’s idealistic city. Amsterdam’s Bijlmermeer high-rise. Cities, Vol. 21, No. 1, p. 3–17, 2004 [Online] Available from: www.elsevier.com/locate/cities [Accessed 23/03/13]

FELTINS, ALEKSANDRS (2012) Research on how diversify microrayon using design. A pattern language for user-control facilitating urban design in large post war esta-tes. The case of Plavnieki, Riga.[Online] Available from: http://issuu.com/feltins/docs/feltins-p4-final-report-reduced/1. [Accessed 29/05/13]

GSW/CBRE (2013) Housing market report. 9th Edition. Berlin: GSW Immobilien AG. [Online] Available from: https://www.gsw.de/files/7913/5877/5420/WMR_2013_EN_WWW_A.pdf. [Accessed 02/10/13]

GSW/JLL (2009) Housing market report. 5th Edition. [Online] Available from: https://www.gsw.de/files/4813/5048/9644/5_4_WMR_2009_engl_www.pdf. [Accessed 12/10/13]

ILTNERE, ANNA (2013) Post Soviet Amnesis: Soviet-era Architecture, Design and Art, as Seen Today. [Online] Available from: www.artterritory.com [Accessed 18/02/13]

INSTITUTE OF PRIVATE FINANCES, SWEDBANK (2013) Food Basket Study in Baltic Countries. [Online] Available from: http://newsroom.swedbank.com/Global/news/Food%20basket%20study%20in%20Baltic%20countries.pdf [Accessed 15/07/13]

JANSONS, ILGVARS (2011) Suburban Sprawl in Riga Region: the Rise and Fall of “American Dream”. Scientific Journal of Riga Technical University [Online] Vol.3, p.46 – 52 Available from: https://ortus.rtu.lv/science/en/publications/12597-Subur-ban+Sprawl+in+Riga+Region%3A+the+Rise+and+Fall+of+%E2%80%9CAmeri-can+Dream%E2%80%9D [Accessed 15/05/13]

LEVERETTE, MARY MARLOWE (2013) 10 Reasons to Line Dry Laundry. [Online] Avai-lable from: http://laundry.about.com/od/ecofriendlylaundry/tp/10reasonstoline-drylaundry.htm [Accessed 10/07/13]

LOERAKKER, JAN (2013) Revisioning Amsterdam Bijlmermeer. [Online] Available from: http://failedarchitecture.com/2013/04/the-story-behind-the-failure-revisio-ning-amsterdam-bijlmermeer/. [Accessed 02/10/13]

MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT REPUBLIC OF LATVIA (2009) Development of Mobility plan and action programme for Riga and Pieriga. First Interim Report: Analysis Current Situation. SM 2009/07/FM-KF-TP/01/02-01. Riga, Tornu iela 4, III C, office no. 203;

MORTON, HENRY W. (1980) Who Gets What, When and How? Housing in the Soviet Union. Soviet Studies, Vol. 32, No. 2, pp.235-259. [Online] Available from: http://www.jstor.org/stable/151234 [Accessed 27/09/13]

PLAUT, STEVEN and UZULENA, EGITA (2006) Architectural Design and Value of Housing in Riga, Latvia. Volume 9, Nr.1, p. 112 – 131;

STERK, BOUDEWIJN and ZAHIROVIC, SELMA (2007) The Bijlmer: A Dutch Approach to Multiculturalism. [Online] Available from: http://www.humanityinaction.org/knowledgebase/153-the-bijlmer-a-dutch-approach-to-multiculturalism. [Accessed 27/09/13]

TREIJA, SANDRA and SUVOROVS, EDGARS (2010) Restructuring Large Scale Housing Estates: Case of Riga. [Online] Available from: http://www.enhr2011.com/sites/de-fault/files/Paper-EdgarsSuvorovs-WS05.pdf [Accessed 31/05/13].

URBAN DESIGN LAB at THE EARTH INSTITUTE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY prepared by: ACKERMAN; KUBI (2012) The Potential for Urban Agriculture in New York City. [Online] Available from: http://www.urbandesignlab.columbia.edu/sitefiles/file/ur-ban_agriculture_nyc.pdf [Accessed 20/06/13]

WORLD HERITAGE LIST (1997) Citing electronic sources of information [WWW] Unesco. Available from: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/852 [Accessed 20/03/13]

Interviews:

LEJNIEKS, JĀNIS. Economic Development Manager in Estate Property Division of Riga City Council (Personal communication, 3rd May, 2013).

ZVIRGZDIŅŠ, ARTIS. Chief Editor of The Website Portal: www.a4d.lv (Personal com-munication, 2nd May, 2013)

Films:

Kino und Architekūra, 6 lekcija, VARA UND PILSĒTA: Pēckara Rīga kinohronikās, Lat-via (unknown year).

91

COVER PICTURE: made by Manten Devriendt;

COVER PAGE 7: Author: Jomante Valiulyte;

PAGE 10: Figure 1: Author: Jomante Valiulyte;

PAGE 11: 1. http://blog.worldaffairs.org/2012/09/what-does-unesco-do/2.http://www.citiesinworld.com/2011/12/riga-latvia.html; 3.www.urbancentre.net;4. http://www.nomadicpinoy.com/2010/08/riga-art-noveau.html;5. http://bluelinerhockey.com/travel/latvia/riga/

PAGE 12:1. http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=41056996;2.Author: Jomante Valiulyte;3. Author: Jomante Valiulyte;4. Author: Jomante Valiulyte;5. Author: Jomante Valiulyte;


PAGE 14:Figure 2.www.apkaimes.lv;Figure 3. http://www.rdpad.lv/apkaimes/.

PAGE 15:Figure 4. Author: Jomante Valiulyte;Figure 5. Author: Jomante Valiulyte;

PAGE 16:Figure 6. Author: Jomante Valiulyte;Figure 7. http://www.primavera.bpg.lv/

PAGE 17:

Figure 8. Magazine Latvijas Architectura, vol. 93, 2011, article by Janis Lejnieks „Pieriga 20. un 21.gs.“Figure 9. Magazine Latvijas Architectura, vol. 93, 2011, article by Janis Lejnieks „Pieriga 20. un 21.gs.“

PAGE 18:All photos made by Jomante Valiulyte.

PAGE 19: Figure 10: Author: Jomante Valiulyte;

COVER PAGE 20: Author: Jomante Valiulyte;PAGE 21: Author: Jomante Valiulyte;

PAGE 25: Figure 11: illustration SVESMI in magazine VOLUME 21

PAGE 28: Figure.12: www.failedarchitecture.com. Images by Archined, 1999.

PAGE 29: Figure 13: www.failedarchitecture.com Images by Projectbureau Vernieuwing Bijl-mermeer, 2008

PAGE 30: Figure.14: http://www.arch-i-lab.polimi.it/SocialHousing/Germany_I%20-%20Flecken.pdf


PAGE 39: Figure 12: Author: Jomante Valiulyte;1. Author: Jomante Valiulyte;2. http://riga.in/search/label/ziepniekkalns.

APPENDIX 2: PICTURES

92

PAGE 40:Figure 17: Author: Jomante Valiulyte;



PAGE 43:Figure 20: http://www.rdsd.lv/box/images/velocelini11small_0.jpg;

PAGE 44:Figure 21:www.apkaimes.lv;Figure 22: http://saraksti.rigassatiksme.lv/index.html#riga/map,page/en



PAGE 47:All pictures made by Jomante Valiulyte;

PAGE 48:All pictures: http://microrayon.wikispaces.com/Ownership+of+microrayon+in+Riga




PAGE 52:Figure 25: Wheeler and Beatley (2009), Sustainable urban development. Page: 100;

PAGE 53:All pictures: google.maps modified by Jomante Valiulyte;


COVER PAGE 58:Picture: Latvian Museum of Architecture;


PAGE 60:Figure 27. Janis Rubins (2003) Rigas Dzivojamais Fonds 20. Gadsimta. Page: 80;



PAGES 63 - 65:All pictures made by Jomante Valiulyte;

COVER PAGE 66:Author: Jomante Valiulyte;




PAGE 78:1.http://www.lan-paris.com;2. http://www.lacatonvassal.com.


93

PAGE 82:Diagrams made by the author;Photos:

Sauna:https://encrypted-tbn1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR2b0xlOXzSz-nDD-_LQzAWz_rdZK0qwYQEi1zzZbcEKZ3J2-Enw

Boats: http://cdn.londonandpartners.com/assets/attractions/out-doors/1446-640x360-boat_hydepark_640.jpg

Beach: http://www.essen-und-trinken.de/beachclubs/die-schoensten-beach-clubs-1005546.html?image=7

Urban Gardening: http://blog.eatwithme.net/post/1043963224/mobile-gar-den-roots-itself-in-berlin

Skating: http://www.ci.sammamish.wa.us/files/picture/3321.jpg

Winter activities: http://www.kurjeris.lt/layout/set/print/Aktualijos/Numerio-tema/Ziemos-pramogoms-kalnus-supila-darbscios-rankos

Stadium: http://www.poziuris.lt/id-167.html

Fountains: www.themeparkreview.com

Resting zones for elderly: www.worldofstock.com

Park: www.wikimedia.org





PAGE 87:All pictures made by Jomante Valiulyte.

94

URBAN TRANSFORMATION OF RIGA‘S MICRORAYONS: FROM A SUSTAINABLE URBAN DESIGN PERSPECTIVE:CASE STUDY: MEŽCIEMS

Master Thesis, 30ects, Spring Semester 2013

Spatial Planning with an emphasis on Urban Design in China and EuropeBlekinge Institute of Technology (BTH)Karlskrona, Sweden

Institute for Sustainable Urbanism (ISU), TU Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany

Tutors:Prof.Jana Revedin (BTH);Prof.Dr. Vanessa Miriam Carlow (ISU).

Pictures, maps and drawings are made by the author, the ones which are used from other sources are explained in APPENDIX 2 of this thesis.Copyright©Jomante Valiulyte ([email protected])

CAD drawings were provided by ISU.

Documents

Urban Transfromation of Riga's Microrayons