Bayern

The second edition of LAtalk's Salongespräche on February 21, 2024 in Munich's interim use location and Mucbook clubhouse "Perle" focused on the necessary paradigm shift in street space and how public space should develop in the area of conflict between mobility and climate adaptation. An interim conclusion.

© Nicole M. Meier

The complexity of the topic was already reflected in the composition of the panel: Prof. Christine Hannemann (architectural and spatial sociology, University of Stuttgart), Christian Horn (1st Chairman of IGH e.V. - Interessengemeinschaft der Gewerbetreibenden Haidhausen), Felix Lüdicke (landscape architect, raumzeug - atelier für landschaftsarchitektur, Munich; research assistant at the Chair of Landscape Architecture and Public Space, Prof. Regine Keller, TU Munich), Mareike Schmidt (architect and research assistant in the research project "Car-reduced districts for a more liveable city" (MCube aqt) at the Chair of Urban Design, TU Munich), Mareike Schmidt (architect and research assistant in the research project "Car-reduced districts for a more liveable city" (MCube aqt) at the Chair of Urban Design, TU Munich). Regine Keller, TU Munich), Mareike Schmidt (architect and research assistant in the research project "Autoreduzierte Quartiere für eine lebenswertere Stadt" (MCube aqt) at the Chair of Urban Design, Prof. Dr. sc. ETH Ben Boucsein, TU Munich), Jörg Spengler (Chairman and Cycling Representative of the Au-Haidhausen District Committee) and Dr. Martin Schreiner (Head of Strategy Division, Mobility Department of the City of Munich) discussed the exciting and complex topic in a moderated discussion, before the large audience was also involved afterwards.

{gallery}

The brief introductory statements by the panel guests already indicated that it would be less about the question of whether a rethink is necessary, but rather about how the paradigm shift should take place in order to reach as many of those affected as possible. It's not just about the issue, but also about the tone, says Martin Schreiner firmly. Christian Horn, who expresses his anger that "a vision of a car-free city is being pushed through by city politicians without involving the business community", pleads for consistent cooperation. Felix Lüdicke argues in a similar vein, seeing the role of landscape architecture in initiating the process in a participatory and procedural manner without losing sight of the spatial and atmospheric quality. It is also essential that urban design focuses on people and not on cars. According to Jörg Spengler, this is the only way to bring about change. Mareike Schmidt and Christine Hannemann in particular focus on the social aspects and argue for a liveable and fair city that offers new opportunities for neighborly coexistence. So much consensus leads to the assumption that nothing stands in the way of a rethink. However, the discourse goes on to show that it is not quite so simple after all, as the criteria of mobility, quality of life, social justice, building culture and climate adaptation are examined in more detail.

Time and participatory communication appear to be key factors for a successful transformation

At the beginning, the focus is on Haidhausen, as Christian Horn voices his displeasure at the planned measures to extend the pedestrian zone there - an issue that has been a recurring theme since the 1970s. According to Horn, the tradespeople have been presented with a fait accompli and their fears have not been addressed. It had not been possible to get involved and help shape the project in advance and the question of accessibility to stores and surgeries was still unresolved. Jörg Spengler from the Haidhausen district committee met the criticism with understanding, but also emphasized that a good solution had to be found for all user groups. He could understand the concerns, but it was quite conceivable that the situation would also improve for the stores. After all, as examples from other European cities show, the desire to buy is usually greater among passers-by walking or strolling than among those driving past in a car. This is precisely why a test phase is to be implemented, allowing the planned redesign to be observed, evaluated and a dialog sought with those affected. Spengler sees the biggest barriers in the desired transformation process in a difficult legal situation and in our habits. It is not easy to change entrenched ways of thinking and acting that have been in place for decades. Time and transparent and participatory communication therefore appear to be key factors for successful implementation.

Real-world laboratories as places for the negotiation process

One such test phase was carried out in Kolumbusstraße last year. Mareike Schmidt from the local research team sees the findings of the real-world laboratory as an enrichment. In a space normally dominated by traffic, completely new impressions and perceptions were suddenly created: a meeting space with a wide range of uses that invites everyone to participate and help shape it. Of course, this was also accompanied by a major change that made itself felt through new influences and noises. This did not always lead to approval, and there was also criticism. This resulted in a negotiation process that was accompanied and documented by the research team. At this point, Martin Schreiner from the mobility department emphasizes how essential a good cooperation partner is and praises the dedicated work of the research team, which "did not duck away from criticism" and tirelessly defended the project despite resistance and faced provocative questions from the press. Nevertheless, the will to redesign the area is strong, as over 70% of residents in Haidhausen do not have a car and there is cross-party support for improving the quality of life. If not here, then where else could such processes be initiated, said Jörg Spengler, emphasizing the role model character that could also motivate others to dare to bring about change.

The car-oriented city as a habitual problem?

Christine Hannemann's video contribution on social justice in connection with stationary traffic brought a new, undiscussed aspect into play. The car-oriented society is a habitual problem, she says, and backs this up with a study result from Stuttgart: there, parking facilities are the highest measure of quality of life, because living is thought of in terms of mobility. Such associations urgently need to be questioned and the discrepancy between a growing population and ever decreasing spaces requires renegotiation. However, she also warns against an overly polarized discussion and black-and-white thought patterns. A strong reference to reality is necessary, because conviction must be brought about through one's own individual and everyday experience.
The question of good examples leads to Paris, where traffic was not completely banned through a consistent redesign, but priority was given to pedestrians and cyclists. Copenhagen, on the other hand, only managed to shift traffic into underground parking garages and still has a deficit of greenery, not least because of the cycle highways, which have resulted in the loss of quite a few trees, reports Martin Schreiner. He believes that the city of Munich's systemic approach has great potential. The aim here is "not to fall into the trap of acting radically, but to create a permanent basis."
This also includes the creation of a legal basis, as road traffic regulations are unsuitable for this. Martin Schreiner therefore sees the rededication of street space as a more time-consuming but feasible and legally secure way to pave the way for concepts such as shared space and multicoding.

Public space as a socially important space for debate and discussion

Concepts that are also an exciting playing field for landscape architects like Felix Lüdicke. He sees public space as a socially important space for debate and discussion. The space between the façades must therefore be treated as a communal space and viewed on a human scale. This is the only way to develop new ideas and create atmospheres. In this context, Martin Schreiner calls for the use of images to inspire the imagination and whet the appetite for change. Green also plays a key role here. But how can temporary measures meet the demand for more and permanent greenery in the city? Felix Lüdicke sees them as a tool to secure spaces for future transformations that require well thought-out planning, which takes time and loses space to the expansion of e-mobility and the technical infrastructure required for this, which is being developed at a rapid pace. In general, there needs to be a paradigm shift in planning, because infrastructure leaves no room for trees. "Trees must have priority!" Lüdicke resolutely demands, because "the trees that will provide the important shade in 20 years' time must be planted now". Jörg Spengler also calls for trees to be planted more quickly. At the moment, it is easier to build cycle paths.
And Christine Hannemann adds that heat will play a decisive role in determining the speed of development, as local authorities must react to the health consequences.

In the subsequent audience discussion, Felix Lüdicke "outed" himself as a social romantic and pleaded for the front garden, which has disappeared due to the growing importance of mobility over the decades, but can make an important contribution to society as an intermediate space, contact zone and place of communication.
He thus supports Christine Hannemann in her thesis that society is growing together in public space and that the increasingly limited space in the city must therefore be redistributed according to contemporary priorities. Both also pointed out that the discussion in rural areas is completely different and must be evaluated according to different parameters.

Another contribution from the audience points out the false incentives, such as tax-incentivized company cars, which ultimately lead to "parking space overkill". And city councillor Paul Bicklbacher recommends being loud, as people only become aware when the first excavator rolls in. Christian Horn draws a positive conclusion at the end of the discussion and promises a willingness to be open to change, provided that co-design and involvement in the process are made possible.

In addition to this rapprochement between planners, politicians and tradespeople, the evening brought up many other exciting aspects, which were discussed in a relaxed bar atmosphere after the official part of the event. We are particularly pleased that, in addition to colleagues from the field of landscape architecture, more related disciplines and interested members of the public were represented this time. The participation of Cornelius Mager, the former head of the Munich Local Building Commission, and Paul Bickelbacher from the Munich City Council was also very welcome.

The AG Impulse would like to extend a special thank you to

• the panel guests Prof. Christine Hannemann, Mareike Schmidt, Felix Lüdicke, Jörg Spengler, Christian Horn and Dr. Martin Schreiner for their diverse perspectives on the topic
• Andreas Rockinger for his moderation
• Elisabeth Auer, office manager of bdla Bavaria and board member Doris Grabner for the great organizational support
• the company RINN for sponsoring our event
• the Bavarian Chamber of Architects for their support as a cooperation partner
• the Perle: Mucbook Clubhaus andamp; Steinchen Kulturcafé for their hospitality
• all listeners and fellow panelists in the audience for their active participation

The third edition of LAtalks on the topic "Green gentrification or the question of social green" will take place on 08.05.2024 at the Perle in Munich-Laim. You can find all information here.

Author: Nicole M. Meier, board member of bdla Bayern, head of the Impulse working group and initiator of the LAtalks. Salon Talks

Latitude: 0

Longitude: 0