Zróżnicowana zabudowa mieszkaniowa jako zasada nowego urbanizmu w procesie odnowy zdegradowanych osiedli

Monika Maria  Cysek-Pawlak

Titles

Principle of mixed housing within in the frames of new urbanism for the revival of distressed neighborhood

Abstract

Improvement of housing conditions is one of the basic elements of the process of revitalising urban structures. This study was conducted through the lens of mixed housing as a New Urbanism principle. Employment of this perspective is a result of contemporary adaptation of this American urban movement for revitalisation of urban tissue as a part of an infill development strategy.

This work examines the practice of mixed housing in contemporary redevelopment projects in Europe, based on two case studies: Minguettes Vénissieux in the Lyon agglomeration (France) and Retkinia in Lodz (Poland).The redevelopment policies were compared with the American HOPE VI programme, which, similarly to the examples under study, was focused on the revitalisation of high-rise housing estates. The study’s findings enabled the definition of the influence of mixed housing principles of NU on urban regeneration processes and to gain some insight into the practice of mixed housing today, as well as into existing regulatory frameworks, based on the examined cases from France and Poland (1). A need for synergy between various NU principles was revealed as indispensable to produce or rather rebuild vital urban forms (2). As aimed, European tendencies in the mixed housing policy were related to US practice derived from the NU, especially examining the need for a diversity of tenure rights and regulatory guidelines based on NU application for revitalisation (3). The entirety of the research confirmed that mixed housing, as a multi-dimensional principle of NU, can serve as a means of revitalising residential areas, particularly decayed panel-block neighbourhoods.

Principle of mixed housing within in the frames of new urbanism for the revival of distressed neighborhood

Improvement of housing conditions is one of the basic elements of the process of revitalising urban structures. This study was conducted through the lens of mixed housing as a New Urbanism principle. Employment of this perspective is a result of contemporary adaptation of this American urban movement for revitalisation of urban tissue as a part of an infill development strategy.

This work examines the practice of mixed housing in contemporary redevelopment projects in Europe, based on two case studies: Minguettes Vénissieux in the Lyon agglomeration (France) and Retkinia in Lodz (Poland).The redevelopment policies were compared with the American HOPE VI programme, which, similarly to the examples under study, was focused on the revitalisation of high-rise housing estates. The study’s findings enabled the definition of the influence of mixed housing principles of NU on urban regeneration processes and to gain some insight into the practice of mixed housing today, as well as into existing regulatory frameworks, based on the examined cases from France and Poland (1). A need for synergy between various NU principles was revealed as indispensable to produce or rather rebuild vital urban forms (2). As aimed, European tendencies in the mixed housing policy were related to US practice derived from the NU, especially examining the need for a diversity of tenure rights and regulatory guidelines based on NU application for revitalisation (3). The entirety of the research confirmed that mixed housing, as a multi-dimensional principle of NU, can serve as a means of revitalising residential areas, particularly decayed panel-block neighbourhoods.

Keywords: New Urbanism, mixed housing, Lodz, Lyon, affordable housing, urban regeneration

Streszczenie

Poprawa warunków mieszkaniowych jest jednym z podstawowych elementów procesu rewitalizacji struktur miejskich. Prezentowane badania przeprowadzono i osadzono w kontekście zróżnicowanej zabudowy mieszkaniowej jako jednej z zasad Nowego Urbanizmu (NU). Zastosowanie tej perspektywy jest wynikiem współczesnej adaptacji amerykańskiego ruchu urbanistycznego w procesie rewitalizacji w ramach strategii rozwoju miast do wewnątrz.

W pracy przeanalizowano praktykę zróżnicowanego budownictwa mieszkaniowego we współczesnych projektach rewitalizacyjnych w Europie na podstawie przykładów dwóch studiów przypadku: Minguettes Vénissieux w aglomeracji Lyon (Francja) i Rekini w Łodzi (Polska). Podejmowane przekształcenia porównywane są do działań w ramach amerykańskiego programu HOPE VI, który podobnie jak badane przykłady koncentrował się na rewitalizacji wysokiej zabudowy blokowisk. Uzyskane wyniki pozwoliły na zdefiniowanie wpływu zasady NU dotyczącej zróżnicowanej zabudowy mieszkaniowej na procesy rewitalizacji miast oraz na szersze poznanie praktyki zabudowy mieszkaniowej dzisiaj, a także jej współczesnych ram regulacyjnych (1). Potwierdzono również hipotezę o potrzebie synergii między różnymi zasadami NU w celu wytworzenia lub raczej przebudowania kluczowych form miejskich (2). Zgodnie z założeniami europejskie tendencje zróżnicowanej zabudowy mieszkaniowej okazały się ponadto związane z praktyką amerykańską wywodzącą się z NU, w szczególności gdy bada się potrzebę różnorodności prawa do lokalu i urbanistycznych uregulowań prawnych (3). Całość przeprowadzonych badań potwierdza zatem, iż zróżnicowane mieszkalnictwo, jako wieloaspektowa zasada NU może być sposobem na przeprowadzenie rewitalizacji obszaru mieszkaniowego w szczególności zdegradowanych obszarów blokowisk.

Keywords

New Urbanism, mixed housing, Lodz, Lyon, affordable housing, urban regeneration

Nowy Urbanizm, zróżnicowanie zabudowy mieszkaniowej, Łódź, Lyon, niedrogie mieszkalnictwo, rewitalizacja

References

Articles

[1] Bohl, C.C. (2000). New Urbanism and the city: Potential applications and implications for distressed inner-city neighbourhoods. Housing Policy Debate, 11(4), 761–802.

[2] Clampet-Lundquist, S. (2004). HOPE VI relocation: moving to new neighborhoods and building new ties. Housing Policy Debate, 15(2), 415–447.

[3] Danielsen, K. A., Lang, R. E. & Fulton, W. (1999) Retracting suburbia: smart growth and the future of housing. Housing Policy Debate, 10, 513–540.

[4] Dzieciuchowicz, J. (2005). Spółdzielcze budownictwo mieszkaniowe w Łodzi – struktura i typologia przestrzenna / Strukturę and SpatialTypology of Co-operativeHousing in Łódź. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Geographica Socio-Oeconomica, 6, 69-94.

[5] Fainstein, S. (2000). New Directions in Planning Theory. Urban Affairs Review, 35, 451-478.

[6] Gill, J.L. &Bohdanow S. (2008). New urbanism developments in Canada: a survey, Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 109-127.

[7] Hanzl, M. (2009). Założenia ruchu Nowy Urbanizm w Stanach Zjednoczonych Ameryki Północnej a problemy związane z rozlewaniem się miast w Polsce. Materiały III Kongresu Urbanistyki Polskiej, Zeszyty Urbanistyki, [8] Towarzystwo Urbanistów Polskich, 83-93.

[9] Jackson, A. (2018). Barriers to Integrating New Urbanism in Mixed-Income Housing Plans in Chicago: Developer, Housing Official, and Consultant Perspectives.Housing Policy Debate, 28(5), 695-726.

[10] Jonhson, J.S. & Talen, E. (2008). Affordable housing in New Urbanist Communities: A survey of developers. Housing Policy Debate, 19(4), 583-613.

[11] Jonshon, J.S. & Talen, E. (2010). Affordable housing in New Urbanist Communities: A survey of developers. Housing Policy Debate, 19(4), 583-613.

[12] Kashef, M. (2011). Walkability and residential suburbs: a multidisciplinary perspective. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Placemaking and Urban Sustainability, 4(1), 39-56.

[13] Kleit, R.G. (2005). HOPE VI New Communities: Neighborhood Relationships in Mixed, Income Housing. Environment and Planning A, 37, 1413–41.

[14] Larsen, K. (2005). New Urbanism’s Role in Inner-city Neighborhood Revitalization. Housing Study, 20(5), 795-813.

[15] Lewrence, J.V.& Shamsuddin, S. (2017). All Mixed Up: Making Sense of Mixed-Income Housing Developments, Journal of the American Planning Association, 83 (1), 56-67.

[16] Napiórkowska-Baryła, A &Witkowska-Dąbrowska, M. (2017). Przekształcanie praw do lokali mieszkalnych w spółdzielczym zasobie mieszkaniowym / Transformation of Ownership Rights to Flats in the Housing Stock Managed by Housing Cooperatives, Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Ekonomiczno-Społecznej w Ostrołęce, 27, 154-16.

[17] Pakla, R. (2017). Spółdzielcze własnościowe prawo do lokalu – wczoraj i dziś, ale czy jutro? / Cooperative Property Ownership – Yesterday and Today, but do Tomorrow? Przegląd Prawno-Ekonomiczny / Review of Law, Business & Economics, 38, 128-140.

[18] Porqueddu, E. (2015). Intensity without Density. Journal of Urban Design, 20(2), 169-192.

[19] Rowley, A. (1996). Mixed-use development: ambiguous concept, simplistic analysis and wishful thinking? Planning Practice and Research, 11(1), 85–97.

[20] Talen, E. & Koschinsky, J. (2014). Compact, Walkable, Diverse Neighborhoods: Assessing Effects on Residents. Housing Debate Policy, 24(4), 717-750.

[21] Talen, E. (1999). Sense of community and urban form: an assessment of the social doctrine of New Urbanism. Urban Studies, 36(8), 1361–1379.

Talen, E. (2000). New Urbanism and the culture of criticism. Urban Geography, 21(4), 318-341.

[22] Talen, E. (2006). Design for Diversity: Evaluating the Context of Socially Mixed Neighbourhoods. Journal of Urban Design, 11(1), 1-32.

[23] Talen, E. (2010). Affordability in New Urbanist Development: Principle, Practice, and Strategy. Journal of Urban Affairs, 32(4), 489-510.

[24] Talen, E. (2013). Prospects for walkable, mixed-income neighborhoods: insights from U.S. developers, Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 28(1), pp. 79–94.

[25] Task Force, Inner-City & Congress for the New Urbanism (1999). Principles for Hope VI Development – Rebuilding Communities: Hope VI and New Urbanism, Places, 12(3), 72-75.

[26] Trudeau, D. & Kaplan, J. (2016). Is there diversity in the New Urbanism? Analyzing the demographic characteristics of New Urbanist neighborhoods in the United States. Urban Geography, 37(3), 458-482.

[27] Trudeau, D. (2013). A typology of New Urbanism neighborhoods. Journal of Urbanism: International Research on Place making and Urban Sustainability, 6(2), 113-139.

[28] Wexler, H. J. (2001). HOPE VI: Market Means/Public Ends-. Journal of Affordable Housing, 10(3): 195–233.

[29] Winstanley, A., Thorns D. C. & Perkins H. C. (2003). Nostalgia, Community and New Housing Developments: A Critique of New Urbanism Incorporating a New Zealand Perspective. Urban Policy and Research, 21(2), 175-189.

Book

[1] Boino, P. (2009). Lyon, la production de la ville.Marseille: Parentheses.

[2] Bressi, T.W. (1994). Planning the American Dream, In R. Katz (Eds.), The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

[3] Calthorpe, P. (1993). The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.

[4] Congress for the New Urbanism & U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (2000). Principles for Inner City Neighborhood Design. Washington DC.

[5] Congress for the New Urbanism (2000). Charter of the New Urbanism. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

[6] Driant, J.C. (2015). Les politiques du logementen France, Paris : La documentation française.

[7] Duany, A. & Plater-Zyberk, E. (1991). Towns and Town-Making Principles. New York, NY: Rizzoli.

[8] Duany, A. & Plater-Zyberk, E. (1994). The Neighborhood, the District and the Corridor In R. Katz (Eds.), The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

[9] Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk E. & Speck, J. (2010). Suburban nation : the rise of sprawl and the decline of the American Dream, New York : North Point Press.

[10] Fishman, R. (2002). The bounded city. In K. C. Parsons and D.Schuyler (Eds.), From Garden City to Green City. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

[11] Hayden, D. (2003). Building Suburbia: Green Fields and Urban Growth, 1820–2000. New York: Pantheon Books.

[12] Katz, R. (1994). The New Urbanism: Toward an Architecture of Community. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

[13] Kelbaugh, D. (1989). The Pedestrian Pocket Book. A New Suburban Design Strategy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Architectural Press.

Krystkowski T. (2019), Atlas historyczny Miasta Łodzi, plansza osiedla i zespoły mieszkaniowe z lat 70. i 80. XX wieku, Dialog.

[14] Leccese, M. & McCormick, K. (2000). Charter of the New Urbanism. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

[15] Liszewski, S. (2009). Łódź monografia miasta. Łódź: Łódzkie Towarzystwo Naukowe.

[16] Lynch, K. (1981). A theory of good city form. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

[17] Monnier, G. & Klein, R. (2002). Les années ZUP. Architectures de la croissance (1960-1973). Paris : Picard.

[18] Segaud, M., Brun, J. &Driant J-Cl. (2002). Dictionnaire de l’habitat et du logement, Paris : Colin.

[19] Speck, J. (2018). Walkable City Rules : 101 Steps to Making Better Places, Washington DC : Island Press.

Legal acts

[1] Solidarité et au renouvellement urbains law. no 2000-1208. Revitalization law in France.

Information

Information: Housing Environment, 2020, 31/2020, pp. 55 - 81

DOI: https://doi.org/10.4467/25438700SM.20.011.12688

Article type: Original article

Titles:

English:

Principle of mixed housing within in the frames of new urbanism for the revival of distressed neighborhood

Polish:

Zróżnicowana zabudowa mieszkaniowa jako zasada nowego urbanizmu w procesie odnowy zdegradowanych osiedli

Authors

Monika Maria Cysek-Pawlak

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8175-6779

Faculty of Civil Engineering Architecture and Environmental Engineering, Lodz University of Technology

Published at: 30.10.2020

Article status: Open

Licence: CC BY

Percentage share of authors:

Monika Maria Cysek-Pawlak (Author) - 100%

Article corrections:

-

Publication languages:

Polish

View count: 969

Number of downloads: 951

<p> Principle of mixed housing within in the frames of new urbanism for the revival of distressed neighborhood</p>

Pobierz pełny tekst