Policy arrangements Munich, Germany

Bettina Oppermann and Stephan Pauleit, Germany

Paper made available to the COST C11 Working party.

 Click button to return to COST C11 - WG1B home page

Policy arrangements
Discussion	Concept	Challenges
Cases		Goteborg	Marseille	Munich	Sheffield	Utrecht	Warsaw

Policy arrangements Munich

The river Isar as the backbone of the greenspace policy

my case the most influential discours(es) in relation to green structure planning is / are*:

The backbone of the green structure system of the city and region of Munich is shaped by the natural "design" of an alpine river, the river Isar. During different historic periods the bed of the river and the banks in the city are formed more and more by the needs and means of flood management. In medieval times the city structure followed natural borders, but in the new times technical solutions with dams and dikes (in the mountains) cope with the danger of floods and allow the management of water flows and quality. Since the modern times also the possibility to gain energy from the river became more and more important. In the city centre the banks and the river are designed very artificially as an urban space with architectonical high-lights, bridges, pathways, views etc. The pavement and fortification was an issue for the Munich citizens since the beginning of the 20th century.

The river is also perceived as an important natural force that can be enjoyed for bathing, biking and other recreational functions. In the 80ies a new discourse occurred with the growth of the ecological movement. The issue at stake was, how much maintenance is necessary to provide green structures for recreation and does a low budget for building and maintenance of new structures force the planners to think about new green strategies. A low budget management possibly meets the need of ecological functions as well as aethetical and recreational functions better than the traditional park planning and building procedures. Is the river Isar a model for green structure planning in general or a very special gift of nature to the Munich citizens?

Today new challenges for flood-management evolve with the debate about the changing of climate, the increase of strong rains and the need to rebuild and build up the capacity of the dams of the river. This is primarily an economic need but can also be understood as an occasion for the reconstruction of the bed of the river in the town and especially in the centre of the city with the parts that are used for recreation in a very intensive way. A competition for landscape architects and water-engineers looks for solutions to fulfil recreational, ecological and technical functions at the same time and improve the ecological capacity of the river. First rebuilding measurements should be presented in the year 2005 at the German garden exhibition in Munich. This event, with its great visibility for everybody helps to accelerate the planning and building process and tends to gain money from the municipality and the Bavarian state budget.

To reach a good outcome it is also absolutely necessary to cooperate with the cities in the region and with the institutional body of the Bavarian state responsible for rivers of the first level of the rivers in the German system (?). This cooperation is driven by the target to rebuild the river banks. A win-win-solution must be found because it is not longer possible to force cooperation by law or money.

Some municipalities in the upper course of the river have to take their share to build up cleaning technologies. The bathing quality of the water in Munich today is good but not optimal. Also the municipalities in the lower course need regional help to cope with the problems of an industrialised regional area (northern part of the city) and provide facilities for a good living quality including natural recreation facilities. The quality of the water decreases after running through the city and taking all the cleaning functions a river has to take. Because much of the water is taken to gain energy, the river is only a "rest river" and controlled 100 % by the water management. In order to integrate the different functions of the river in a better way the flood management must change and give more dynamics to the river again.

The discourses in key words:

ß city shape follows nature,

ß river shape follows technical targets,

ß river banks are subject of cultural, aesthetical discourses,

ß technical nature serves recreational policy,

ß new challenges of flood management and city shape,

ß strategy for quality by an international architectural competition,

ß planning enforcement by international garden exhibition Munich 2005,

ß Cooperation with the municipalities of the region, forming the new institutional body of the region of Munich and cooperation with other institutions (Bavarian state, Technical "Deutsches Museum")

Argumentation: The driving force is the fear that the flood-management is not sufficient any more. But this is not mentioned in the public. The planners try to reframe the need with green space arguments to integrate different targets and functions of the river: ecological, social and also economic functions.

What actor (coalitions), rules of the game, tools, and resources go along with this / these discourses?

Actors:

Different departments of the City of Munich,

Different Departments of the Bavarian State

Different Municipalities along the river in the south (winners now) and in the north (loosers now)

Professionals of the landscape department and the water management department of the Universities of Munich (Weihenstephan, Nohl etc…)

Munich politicians

Munich citizens

Munich newspapers?

Rules of the game:

How to gain money or concentrate money of the Land bank system on a big project?

How to conduct an international competition for planners and designers?

How to accelerate the planning and decision process with the time line of the BUGA?

How to win partners for the project and integrate their interests for the reputation of an international event?

Ressources:

Money with good effects (to build a new museum and maintain it, is much more expensive)

Time of the Professionals (Knowledge to understand the ecological system of the river and the wishes of the people and ideas for the integration of different interests and perspectives)

Resonance in the professional public

International and city wide Resonance for politicians (the project produces many photos of "V.I.P.s with a spade")

Items that you miss in the above description that you think of relevance but have not been discussed: