After years of low economic wealth in Copenhagen, the plan of Orestad as a new city
center of high urban design was developed. With new infrastructure, modern
architecture and an international focus the city district was supposed to create a new
image of Copenhagen and thereby offset the costs spent on the new metro system.
Orestad is placed on a larger nature reserve and with a new strategy for a
strengthening of the nature in Copenhagen, the plan now seems contradicting. A
debate involving citizens and politicians has occurred on behalf of the loss of green
spaces. This paper aims to explore the planning of a smaller quarter of Orestad,
Amager Faelled Kvarter, and the debate fostered by it, in the search to survey the
conflicting interests in the planning of this particular city quarter. Through the theory
of David Harvey and Karina Sehested the economic interests and the right to the city
will be analyzed as the starting point of the strategical planning of Orestad.
Furthermore by analyzing documents from the planning and the public debate the
dichotomy will be discussed. General economics of city planning during a historical
perspective and the qualities of urban nature will be introduced. The paper concludes
that economic and nature interests can’t be measured by the same scale and therefore
doesn’t get included with the same necessity in modern city planning.
|Uddannelser||Plan, By og Proces, (Bachelor/kandidatuddannelse) Kandidat|
|Udgivelsesdato||3 jan. 2017|
|Vejledere||Majken Toftager Larsen|
- Amager Fælled
- Amager Fælled Kvarter
- David Harvey
- Karina Sehested