Waterfront Regeneration
Waterfront Regeneration
By Chunsong Wang By Chunsong Wang
MSc in City and Regional Planning MSc in City and Regional Planning Cardiff University
Cardiff University
1.0 Introduction
1.0 Introduction
The historical relationship between cities and ports
The historical relationship between cities and ports were interwoven,were interwoven, both physically
both physically and economically. Howeverand economically. However, the , the long-establishedlong-established symbiosis was broken during the 20
symbiosis was broken during the 20thth centurycentury. That . That the cities the cities becamebecame more multifunctional lessened their dependence on the ports.
more multifunctional lessened their dependence on the ports.
Structural economic changes weakened the traditional relationship Structural economic changes weakened the traditional relationship between cities
between cities and ports (van der and ports (van der Knaap and PinderKnaap and Pinder, 1992). , 1992). TheThe
movement of port activities and the evolution of maritime technology movement of port activities and the evolution of maritime technology also deteriorated the city-port relationship. The port closure was also also deteriorated the city-port relationship. The port closure was also associated with the decline
associated with the decline of traditional industryof traditional industry, especially in, especially in
relation to docklands (Hoyle, 1988). These factors put considerable relation to docklands (Hoyle, 1988). These factors put considerable pressure onto the inner c
pressure onto the inner cityity. The success . The success of Baltimore Inner Harbourof Baltimore Inner Harbour has provided a solution to those cities, which suffered from dramatic has provided a solution to those cities, which suffered from dramatic decline in the port areas. Therefore, to some degree, waterfront
decline in the port areas. Therefore, to some degree, waterfront regeneration was seen as an urban panacea, a
regeneration was seen as an urban panacea, a cure-all for ailing citiescure-all for ailing cities in search of new self-images or ways of dealing with issues of
in search of new self-images or ways of dealing with issues of competition for capital development or tourist dollars (Marshall, competition for capital development or tourist dollars (Marshall, 2001a, p.6). T
2001a, p.6). To open o open up the waterfront became up the waterfront became an internationalan international phenomenon of urban development.
phenomenon of urban development.
1.
1. 1
1 Aims
Aims and
and objectives
objectives
Although the reclamation of waterfront has spread out elsewhere, the Although the reclamation of waterfront has spread out elsewhere, the theory of waterfront regeneration was far behind the practice. Also, theory of waterfront regeneration was far behind the practice. Also, most of the research focused the attention on the waterfront
most of the research focused the attention on the waterfront redevelopment implemented in North American. Lack of st
redevelopment implemented in North American. Lack of study relatedudy related to contemporary waterfront regeneration undertaking in the
to contemporary waterfront regeneration undertaking in the
European countries. Therefore, this paper aims to fill the research European countries. Therefore, this paper aims to fill the research gaps and provide a holistic
gaps and provide a holistic picture for European waterfrontpicture for European waterfront regeneration.
regeneration.
2.0
2.0 Literature
Literature review
review
According to Robers (2000, p.24), urban regeneration is driven by (i) According to Robers (2000, p.24), urban regeneration is driven by (i) economic transition; (ii) concerns of social and community
environment; (iii) physical obsolescence and new land and property environment; (iii) physical obsolescence and new land and property requirements; and (iv) environmental quality and sustainable
requirements; and (iv) environmental quality and sustainable
development. In terms of waterfront regeneration, it is forced by port development. In terms of waterfront regeneration, it is forced by port closure, deindustrialisation, land abandon and desire of open space closure, deindustrialisation, land abandon and desire of open space (Hoyle et al.1988; Bruttomesso,
(Hoyle et al.1988; Bruttomesso, ed 1991; Breen and ed 1991; Breen and RigbyRigby, 1996)., 1996).
2.1
2.1 Lessons
Lessons from
from North
North American
American
North American is known as
North American is known as the cradle of waterfront regeneration.the cradle of waterfront regeneration. Cities like Baltimore, Boston and New York are citied as the models of Cities like Baltimore, Boston and New York are citied as the models of waterfront regeneration. Their approaches to redeveloping the
waterfront regeneration. Their approaches to redeveloping the waterfront have been well documented (de Jo
waterfront have been well documented (de Jong, 1991; Millspaugh,ng, 1991; Millspaugh, 1993; T
1993; Tunbridge, 1993; Gordon, unbridge, 1993; Gordon, 1996,1997; Marshell ed 1996,1997; Marshell ed 2001).2001).
Baltimore Baltimore
Baltimore has been seen as the earliest example of urban renewal, Baltimore has been seen as the earliest example of urban renewal, especially the area of
especially the area of the inner harbourthe inner harbour. According to H. According to HUD (1985),UD (1985), Baltimore waterfront revitalisation process can be divided into three Baltimore waterfront revitalisation process can be divided into three stages, corresponding with different projects and approaches to stages, corresponding with different projects and approaches to development. The first project stage (Charles Centre) may be development. The first project stage (Charles Centre) may be charaterised as ‘assistant development’
charaterised as ‘assistant development’, the second , the second as (Inner Harbour)as (Inner Harbour) as ‘directed development’
as ‘directed development’, and final one , and final one (market centre) as(market centre) as ‘collaborative
‘collaborative development’development’..
Baltimore’s success was underpinned by the following aspects. The Baltimore’s success was underpinned by the following aspects. The networking enabled both public authorities and private organizations networking enabled both public authorities and private organizations to come to an agreement on development goals (de Jong, 1991). de to come to an agreement on development goals (de Jong, 1991). de Jong also claimed that the powerful public
Jong also claimed that the powerful public leader was able to executeleader was able to execute the whole process. Both de Jong (1991) and Millspaugh (2001)
the whole process. Both de Jong (1991) and Millspaugh (2001) pointed out that the innovation of quasi-public agency led to the pointed out that the innovation of quasi-public agency led to the success of Baltimore
success of Baltimore waterfront renewal. The quasi-public agency waswaterfront renewal. The quasi-public agency was evolved from Charles Management Office to Charles
evolved from Charles Management Office to Charles Centre / InnerCentre / Inner Harbour Management Inc then Market Centre Development
Harbour Management Inc then Market Centre Development Corporation and finally the Baltimore Economic Development Corporation and finally the Baltimore Economic Development
Corporation. Although these agencies were directly responsible to Corporation. Although these agencies were directly responsible to municipal government, their distinctive characteristics allowed them municipal government, their distinctive characteristics allowed them to have discretion in execution
to have discretion in execution and implementation under the contractand implementation under the contract with municipality
with municipality. According . According to Millspaugh (1993, to Millspaugh (1993, 2001), Baltimore2001), Baltimore was an example of using public
was an example of using public investment to lever a private one. Forinvestment to lever a private one. For instance, by 1984, a total investment of $180 million had been
instance, by 1984, a total investment of $180 million had been realized, of which $35 million (20 per cent) was public funding realized, of which $35 million (20 per cent) was public funding
(including subsidies from federal and state), and $ 145 million (80 per (including subsidies from federal and state), and $ 145 million (80 per
cent) was provided by
cent) was provided by private sectorprivate sector. de J. de Jong (1991) argued ong (1991) argued that athat a variety of approaches were adopted to attract private investors, such variety of approaches were adopted to attract private investors, such as financial incentives. In order to change the city image, three
as financial incentives. In order to change the city image, three methods of design control
methods of design control were adopted, namelywere adopted, namely, establishing, establishing Architectural Review Board, holding design competition and
Architectural Review Board, holding design competition and obligatingobligating private developer to meet the design
private developer to meet the design parametre set by publicparametre set by public authority.
authority. However
However, despite its , despite its success, Baltimore success, Baltimore waterfront renewal waswaterfront renewal was criticised from a social aspect. This was because the net job growth criticised from a social aspect. This was because the net job growth was absorbed by the suburban residents
was absorbed by the suburban residents rather than the low-incomerather than the low-income groups (de Jong, 1991). As
groups (de Jong, 1991). As a result of prosperity brought by tourism,a result of prosperity brought by tourism, existing working class population had to face the increase of living existing working class population had to face the increase of living cost and pressure of massive gentrification.
cost and pressure of massive gentrification.
Boston Boston
Boston’s waterfront development consisted of four projects, i.e. Boston’s waterfront development consisted of four projects, i.e. Charlestown Navy Yard, Harbour Point, Rowe’s Wharf and South Charlestown Navy Yard, Harbour Point, Rowe’s Wharf and South Seaport District. They have built
Seaport District. They have built up a reputation on reintegrating cityup a reputation on reintegrating city fabric with waterfront and maximising public benefit
fabric with waterfront and maximising public benefit (Mambro, 1993;(Mambro, 1993; Gordon, 1996). Mambro (1993) argued that the underlying factors of Gordon, 1996). Mambro (1993) argued that the underlying factors of success were “
success were “ substantial public landownership, interagencysubstantial public landownership, interagency cooperation and a development plan. A similar conclusion
cooperation and a development plan. A similar conclusion was drawnwas drawn by Cook al (2001). They claimed that the Boston’s success was
by Cook al (2001). They claimed that the Boston’s success was underpinned by strong public leadership and
underpinned by strong public leadership and partnership, andpartnership, and recodification of Chapter 91 – the ancient legal doc
recodification of Chapter 91 – the ancient legal doctrine with regard totrine with regard to tidelands.
tidelands.
Three public authorities – Massport, Boston Redevelopment Agency Three public authorities – Massport, Boston Redevelopment Agency (BRA) and Commonwealth of Massachusetts involved in the Boston (BRA) and Commonwealth of Massachusetts involved in the Boston waterfront redevelopment. In particularly
waterfront redevelopment. In particularly, BRA , BRA played an importantplayed an important role in the redevelopment process
role in the redevelopment process. As a . As a development agencydevelopment agency, it was, it was the largest landowner on the
the largest landowner on the downtown. Being a planning agencydowntown. Being a planning agency,, BRA took the responsibility for zoning the waterfront as well as the BRA took the responsibility for zoning the waterfront as well as the local projects. (Cook, al 2001).
local projects. (Cook, al 2001). Moreover
Moreover, the , the recodification of recodification of Chapter 91 was Chapter 91 was approved through theapproved through the cooperation with those public agencies and others representing
cooperation with those public agencies and others representing maritime, environmental, development and legal interest on maritime, environmental, development and legal interest on thethe waterfront renewal. This amendment was intended to promote waterfront renewal. This amendment was intended to promote harmony – both procedural and substantive – among three
harmony – both procedural and substantive – among three mainmain public authorities. Cook al (2001) implied that the amendment helped public authorities. Cook al (2001) implied that the amendment helped to address the conflicts between different sectors and ensure the to address the conflicts between different sectors and ensure the
public benefit. public benefit.
Hall (2002) pointed out that it was difficult for British cities to Hall (2002) pointed out that it was difficult for British cities to
duplicate the redevelopment model approved to be success in both duplicate the redevelopment model approved to be success in both Baltimore and Boston. This was because both cities were
Baltimore and Boston. This was because both cities were long-established commercial centers. In
long-established commercial centers. In particularlyparticularly, Boston was a, Boston was a major home for financial institutions. (Hall, 2002, p.384). He claimed major home for financial institutions. (Hall, 2002, p.384). He claimed that this distinctive characteristic gave the advantage to both cities to that this distinctive characteristic gave the advantage to both cities to allocate new land uses of retailing, residential and leisure facilities. allocate new land uses of retailing, residential and leisure facilities. Also, the same agent – James
Also, the same agent – James Rouse led a pro-growth coalition, whichRouse led a pro-growth coalition, which skillfully marshaled public support and co
skillfully marshaled public support and combined federal and privatembined federal and private funds to promote large-scale commercial redevelopment.
funds to promote large-scale commercial redevelopment.
New York City New York City
Battery Park City was built on landfill adjacent to
Battery Park City was built on landfill adjacent to the former Worldthe former World T
Trade Centre. The project rade Centre. The project was driven by a was driven by a speculative imperative tospeculative imperative to accommodate financial services restructuring; was
accommodate financial services restructuring; was managed bymanaged by globalised developer (Olympia and York); was designed by an globalised developer (Olympia and York); was designed by an
international entourage of architects; was commissioned by local and international entourage of architects; was commissioned by local and central government, which offered public subsidy and
central government, which offered public subsidy and support; wassupport; was attempted to create a ‘Complete Urban Community’ by fusing the attempted to create a ‘Complete Urban Community’ by fusing the ‘best’ dimension of ‘
‘best’ dimension of ‘city’ and ‘country-town’ life into a stimulating newcity’ and ‘country-town’ life into a stimulating new urban life style
urban life style (Crilley(Crilley, 1993, , 1993, p.128).p.128). In the comparative studies of
In the comparative studies of waterfront redevelopment implementedwaterfront redevelopment implemented in New York City, London, Boston and Toronto, Gordon (1996, p.265) in New York City, London, Boston and Toronto, Gordon (1996, p.265) deduced that each waterfront development agency had to
deduced that each waterfront development agency had to meet themeet the requirements of changing the image of the waterfront. This goal has requirements of changing the image of the waterfront. This goal has been achieved in developing the project
been achieved in developing the project of Battery Park Cityof Battery Park City. The. The development agency
development agency, Battery Park City , Battery Park City Authority (BPCA) took Authority (BPCA) took anan active part in controlling the quality of physical environment. A series active part in controlling the quality of physical environment. A series of approaches were
of approaches were adopted, i.e. developing adopted, i.e. developing the physical strategythe physical strategy,, making the master plan, multiplying the sites, using urban design making the master plan, multiplying the sites, using urban design guidelines, selecting developers and managing the public open s
guidelines, selecting developers and managing the public open space.pace. In the history o
In the history of developing Battery Park Cityf developing Battery Park City, two master , two master plans wereplans were approved in succession. The 1979 Plan was severely criticised for approved in succession. The 1979 Plan was severely criticised for intending to control the project by building the megastructure spine. intending to control the project by building the megastructure spine. On the contrary
On the contrary, the 1979 , the 1979 Plan was appreciated Plan was appreciated for usingfor using
infrastructure to shape the public open space (Gordon, 1996). infrastructure to shape the public open space (Gordon, 1996). According to S
According to Seymoureymour, the , the 1979 Plan was also 1979 Plan was also physically integratedphysically integrated new development with urban context. Streets were mapped to protect new development with urban context. Streets were mapped to protect view corridor
1997). 1997).
Both Gordon (1996, 1997)
Both Gordon (1996, 1997) and Mayer (1999) indicated thatand Mayer (1999) indicated that
incrementally building high quality public space was a model for other incrementally building high quality public space was a model for other waterfront redevelopments. They argued that the city has
waterfront redevelopments. They argued that the city has beenbeen reconnected with the waterfront by a series of public open space. reconnected with the waterfront by a series of public open space. However
However, Gordon (, Gordon (1996, p.287) implied that 1996, p.287) implied that it was difficult it was difficult for otherfor other cities to reproduce the approaches applied in the project of Battery cities to reproduce the approaches applied in the project of Battery Park City
Park City. This was . This was because an independent because an independent authority – BPCA took authority – BPCA took thethe place of City Authority in controlling public space and regulating
place of City Authority in controlling public space and regulating individual projects, in which the authority has executed superbly individual projects, in which the authority has executed superbly (Fisher
(Fisher, 1988, p.82) , 1988, p.82) as well as as well as its tradition of insisting first-rate designits tradition of insisting first-rate design even close to bankruptcy.
even close to bankruptcy.
2.2
2.2 Lessons
Lessons from
from UK
UK
UK’s interest on waterfront started from 1970s.
UK’s interest on waterfront started from 1970s. In UK, national andIn UK, national and local authorities have been relatively slow to take up the chance of local authorities have been relatively slow to take up the chance of waterfront redevelopment (Clark, 1985). Three major cityports – waterfront redevelopment (Clark, 1985). Three major cityports – London, Liverpool and Bristol have achieved considerable
London, Liverpool and Bristol have achieved considerable
transformation of their abandoned docklands. Other redevelopment transformation of their abandoned docklands. Other redevelopment took place in a
took place in a variety of cities, including Cardiff, Dundee, Edinbourgh,variety of cities, including Cardiff, Dundee, Edinbourgh, Glasgow, Hull, Manchester
Glasgow, Hull, Manchester, Newcastle, , Newcastle, Portsmouth, Southampton andPortsmouth, Southampton and Swansea. Hoyle (1988) argued that the current practice of
Swansea. Hoyle (1988) argued that the current practice of waterfrontwaterfront in UK did not meet its social, economic and political objectives. For in UK did not meet its social, economic and political objectives. For instance, the redevelopment of London Docklands was the
instance, the redevelopment of London Docklands was the
counterexample of waterfront regeneration, in which planning and counterexample of waterfront regeneration, in which planning and design intentions were subverted by concerns of power and capital design intentions were subverted by concerns of power and capital (Malone, 1996). Therefore, it was important to learn the lessons from (Malone, 1996). Therefore, it was important to learn the lessons from the planning and development process of London Docklands program. the planning and development process of London Docklands program. Brownill (1990) provided a holistic picture of the redevelopment of Brownill (1990) provided a holistic picture of the redevelopment of London Docklands. She indicated that London Docklands failed to London Docklands. She indicated that London Docklands failed to achieve its development objec
achieve its development objectives both physically and tives both physically and sociallysocially. The. The government lost the control on the quality of public realm, failed to government lost the control on the quality of public realm, failed to provide support of infrastructure and neglected the social impact. provide support of infrastructure and neglected the social impact.
2.3
2.3 Other
Other European
European countries
countries
The wave of waterfront redevelopment in Continental countries The wave of waterfront redevelopment in Continental countries
started in the 1980s. Cites like Barcelona, Amsterdam and Berlin have started in the 1980s. Cites like Barcelona, Amsterdam and Berlin have involved in this spread. In Berlin, the government district is being built involved in this spread. In Berlin, the government district is being built
on the riverfront. As mentioned before, relatively small amount of on the riverfront. As mentioned before, relatively small amount of research examined the regeneration approaches applied in these research examined the regeneration approaches applied in these cities. This situation has changed. Researchers like Hoyle and Pinder cities. This situation has changed. Researchers like Hoyle and Pinder (et al.1992), Jauhianien (1995), McCarthy (1996), Jones (1998), (et al.1992), Jauhianien (1995), McCarthy (1996), Jones (1998), Meyer (1999) and Marshall (ed. 2001)
Meyer (1999) and Marshall (ed. 2001) have provided comprehensivehave provided comprehensive understanding of Continental reclamation of waterfront, which
understanding of Continental reclamation of waterfront, which included urban
included urban planning policyplanning policy, development , development strategystrategy, land , land useuse pattern and partnership.
pattern and partnership.
2.4
2.4 Key
Key elements
elements of
of success
success
In concluding the literature of waterfront regeneration, it is
In concluding the literature of waterfront regeneration, it is obviousobvious that no matter what kind of
that no matter what kind of approach is adopted in approach is adopted in regenerating theregenerating the waterfront, the following consideration should be
waterfront, the following consideration should be taken into account:taken into account:
Development framework – master planning andDevelopment framework – master planning and implementation
implementation
Delivery mechanismDelivery mechanism
Public-private partnershipPublic-private partnership
Timing and marketing the regenerationTiming and marketing the regeneration
Outcome – economic and social balanceOutcome – economic and social balance
3.0 Methodology
3.0 Methodology
The methodology applied in this research consisted of documentary The methodology applied in this research consisted of documentary review of waterfront regeneration and comparative case studies base review of waterfront regeneration and comparative case studies base on the key element listed
on the key element listed above. Tabove. Two cases, Barcelowo cases, Barcelona Port Vell andna Port Vell and Amsterdam Eastern Docklands were selected. The primary data were Amsterdam Eastern Docklands were selected. The primary data were based on site visits and interviews. The secondary data came from based on site visits and interviews. The secondary data came from master plan, development strategy and other document provided master plan, development strategy and other document provided byby public authorities.
public authorities.
4.0
4.0 Research
Research findings
findings and
and analysis
analysis
Essential context will be provided before the interpretation of the Essential context will be provided before the interpretation of the comparative analysis. It will help to develop
comparative analysis. It will help to develop the background of the background of waterfront regeneration undertaken in both Barcelona and
waterfront regeneration undertaken in both Barcelona and
Amsterdam. Also, it will help to understand why different approaches Amsterdam. Also, it will help to understand why different approaches were adopted, and why they worked or
4.1
4.1 Context
Context of
of Barcelona
Barcelona
The city of Barcelona has undergone a significant change since
The city of Barcelona has undergone a significant change since 1980.1980. This urban transformation was the result of
This urban transformation was the result of three interrelated urbanthree interrelated urban processes: the improvement of transport system
processes: the improvement of transport system and infrastructure,and infrastructure, the construction of c
the construction of centralityentrality, and the economic re-, and the economic re-conversion (City of conversion (City of Barcelona, 1996, p.2 – 3). Holding the 1992 Olympic Games was Barcelona, 1996, p.2 – 3). Holding the 1992 Olympic Games was another impetus of urban transformation. Four of twelve Areas of another impetus of urban transformation. Four of twelve Areas of Centrality were the Olympic installation. They have directed property Centrality were the Olympic installation. They have directed property development and stimulated neighbourhood revitalization in which development and stimulated neighbourhood revitalization in which they were located (Riera and Keogh, 1995).
they were located (Riera and Keogh, 1995).
4.2
4.2 Context
Context of
of Amsterdam
Amsterdam
In the early of 1980s, the municipality of Amsterdam introduced a In the early of 1980s, the municipality of Amsterdam introduced a new policy of ‘Compact City’, which took the place of previous
new policy of ‘Compact City’, which took the place of previous ‘Overspill policy’
‘Overspill policy’. It aimed to . It aimed to accommodate as many urban functionsaccommodate as many urban functions as possible in a
as possible in a compact urban form (dRo, 1994). The compact urban form (dRo, 1994). The GovernmentGovernment report indicated that Amsterdam had to face a great shortage of report indicated that Amsterdam had to face a great shortage of housing. Thus, the 1985 Structure Plan of Amsterdam suggested that housing. Thus, the 1985 Structure Plan of Amsterdam suggested that the waterfront redevelopment along the IJ would help to meet the the waterfront redevelopment along the IJ would help to meet the city’s challenge of housing and fulfill the of objective that a
city’s challenge of housing and fulfill the of objective that a city shouldcity should attract people of all income groups. It is important to note that the attract people of all income groups. It is important to note that the land-lease system, which has been created
land-lease system, which has been created for a century (dRo, 1994),for a century (dRo, 1994), has played an important role in urban regeneration of
has played an important role in urban regeneration of Amsterdam.Amsterdam.
4.3
4.3 Comparative
Comparative Analysis
Analysis
Development framework Development framework
Gordon (1996) implied that an inc
Gordon (1996) implied that an incremental development plan isremental development plan is central to changing the image of
central to changing the image of the waterfront. Shaw (2001)the waterfront. Shaw (2001) indicated that the plan could not be ignored in practice. Although indicated that the plan could not be ignored in practice. Although Barcelona and Amsterdam have adopted different approaches Barcelona and Amsterdam have adopted different approaches inin making development plan, they have taken land use pattern,
making development plan, they have taken land use pattern, publicpublic access and city context into account. Therefore, the waterfront
access and city context into account. Therefore, the waterfront regeneration processes have been
regeneration processes have been implemented successfullyimplemented successfully..
In Barcelona, three objectives – to open up the Port to the city; to In Barcelona, three objectives – to open up the Port to the city; to introduce the recreation and leisure activities, which were traditional introduce the recreation and leisure activities, which were traditional lacking in the Ciutat Vella district; and reutilising the
could house more activities in accordance with its present needs could house more activities in accordance with its present needs without losing the harbour character (Sastre,
without losing the harbour character (Sastre, 1993) have been1993) have been
incorporated in making the Special Plan for the redevelopment of Old incorporated in making the Special Plan for the redevelopment of Old Port.
Port.
The site visit suggests that the objectives of the Special Plan have The site visit suggests that the objectives of the Special Plan have been achieved in redeveloping the Port Vell. In the history
been achieved in redeveloping the Port Vell. In the history of of Barcelona, the city was excluded from
Barcelona, the city was excluded from its waterfront by the physicalits waterfront by the physical barrier (Meyer, 1999). However, the redevelopment of Port Vell has barrier (Meyer, 1999). However, the redevelopment of Port Vell has changed many people’s mental image of the waterfront. Friendly changed many people’s mental image of the waterfront. Friendly public access has been provided for people to enjoy the new urban public access has been provided for people to enjoy the new urban frontier
frontier. In comparison . In comparison with the waterfront accesswith the waterfront accessibility in Amsterdam,ibility in Amsterdam, Barcelona has showed that it has not only taken the technical issues Barcelona has showed that it has not only taken the technical issues into consideration, but also the aesthetic ones when it designed the into consideration, but also the aesthetic ones when it designed the pedestrian access. Rambla de Mar
pedestrian access. Rambla de Mar, which is known as , which is known as the new citythe new city landmark, has been
landmark, has been created and crossecreated and crossed Espanya Quayd Espanya Quay. It . It togethertogether with another pedestrian footbridge has integrated with the
with another pedestrian footbridge has integrated with the city’scity’s network of public open space. In terms of land uses, the
network of public open space. In terms of land uses, the
redevelopment of Port Vell has been influenced by Baltimore’s Inner redevelopment of Port Vell has been influenced by Baltimore’s Inner Harbour renewal. Similar shopping
Harbour renewal. Similar shopping centre, conference centre, conference centercenter,,
Aquarium and other leisure facilities have been introduced to the old Aquarium and other leisure facilities have been introduced to the old port. Also, buildings of historical and architectural interest have been port. Also, buildings of historical and architectural interest have been conserved. Such as a 19
conserved. Such as a 19ththcentury warehouse has been converted intocentury warehouse has been converted into the Museum of Catelunya. It falls into
the Museum of Catelunya. It falls into the city strategy of promotingthe city strategy of promoting cultural identity. Today, Port Vell has integrated with the city both cultural identity. Today, Port Vell has integrated with the city both physically and economically due to the introduction of
physically and economically due to the introduction of new land usesnew land uses and city’s promotion
and city’s promotion of tourism of tourism industryindustry..
In Amsterdam, the redevelopment of Eastern Dockland has received In Amsterdam, the redevelopment of Eastern Dockland has received international recognition. T
international recognition. To some o some extent, the myth extent, the myth of Easternof Eastern Dockland redevelopment is attributed to its creative master plans. Dockland redevelopment is attributed to its creative master plans. The redevelopment was divided
The redevelopment was divided into five phrases: Veemarket,into five phrases: Veemarket, Abattoir site and Entrepot-east; KNSM
Abattoir site and Entrepot-east; KNSM island; Java island;island; Java island; Borneo-Sporenburg; and Rietlanden. Similar to
Borneo-Sporenburg; and Rietlanden. Similar to the regenerationthe regeneration process undertaken in
process undertaken in the project of the project of Battery Park CityBattery Park City, Amsterdam’s, Amsterdam’s Physical Planning Department has made the Public Space
Physical Planning Department has made the Public Space Plan, whichPlan, which designed the overall layout of public open space. This plan has been designed the overall layout of public open space. This plan has been seen as an impetus
seen as an impetus of creative architectural design rather than aof creative architectural design rather than a constraint to it. T
constraint to it. Taking the project of aking the project of Entrepot-east as an example, Entrepot-east as an example, thethe rectangular shape superblock, which was proposed by planning
rectangular shape superblock, which was proposed by planning department (Koster
department (Koster, 1995), has , 1995), has been converted into been converted into a curved anda curved and semi-open block. This five-storey residential bridge has been one of semi-open block. This five-storey residential bridge has been one of the landmark buildings of Eastern Docklands.
Different islands were
Different islands were directed by different directed by different master plans. Howevermaster plans. However, it, it is suggested that the redevelopment of Eastern Docklands has
is suggested that the redevelopment of Eastern Docklands has
responded to the specific character of the former harbour area, such responded to the specific character of the former harbour area, such as the KNSM island. The historical street pattern has been remained as the KNSM island. The historical street pattern has been remained and converted into a boulevard. The former harbour
and converted into a boulevard. The former harbour building has beenbuilding has been renovated.
renovated.
Despite the success of
Despite the success of making and implementing the master plan, themaking and implementing the master plan, the waterfront regeneration in Amsterdam has to face the
waterfront regeneration in Amsterdam has to face the problem of problem of inaccessibility
inaccessibility. The . The Central Station built centuries ago Central Station built centuries ago has broken thehas broken the relationship between the
relationship between the city and city and the riverthe river. Currently. Currently, the , the physicalphysical barrier of access
barrier of access still remained. The railway tracts present the majorstill remained. The railway tracts present the major difficulties for the public to access the waterfront.
difficulties for the public to access the waterfront.
Delivery mechanism Delivery mechanism
Having the real partnership between public and
Having the real partnership between public and private sectors,private sectors,
choosing the right timing and marketing the development process are choosing the right timing and marketing the development process are key components of delivering waterfront regeneration. In terms of key components of delivering waterfront regeneration. In terms of delivery mechanism, the approach adopted in Barcelona is stronger delivery mechanism, the approach adopted in Barcelona is stronger than that in Amsterdam. The former has benefited from powerful than that in Amsterdam. The former has benefited from powerful public authority and real public-private partnership throughout the public authority and real public-private partnership throughout the whole regeneration process. The latter
whole regeneration process. The latter has given both positive andhas given both positive and negative lessons to be learnt. It indicates that only public-oriented negative lessons to be learnt. It indicates that only public-oriented partnership can be survived in regenerating the waterfront.
partnership can be survived in regenerating the waterfront. In the case of Barcelo
In the case of Barcelona, the redevelopment of Port Vell has been ledna, the redevelopment of Port Vell has been led by the Autonomous Port of Barcelona. It has created the Port 2000 by the Autonomous Port of Barcelona. It has created the Port 2000 Urban Planning Management Board (Port 2000) to execute,
Urban Planning Management Board (Port 2000) to execute, operateoperate and manage the redevelopment proce
and manage the redevelopment process. Tss. Taking the advantage of thisaking the advantage of this decentralised management form, Port 2000 has taken an active part decentralised management form, Port 2000 has taken an active part in promoting the Port Vell as a cultural, leisure and commercial centre in promoting the Port Vell as a cultural, leisure and commercial centre of the city
of the city. The characteristic of quasi-public . The characteristic of quasi-public authority has enabledauthority has enabled Port 2000 to create and maintain a
Port 2000 to create and maintain a long-term public-privatelong-term public-private partnership.
partnership.
In Amsterdam, the partnership has evolved during the period of In Amsterdam, the partnership has evolved during the period of waterfront redevelopment. In the earliest stage,
waterfront redevelopment. In the earliest stage, only publiconly public
partnership existed in redeveloping the Northern of Amsterdam. In partnership existed in redeveloping the Northern of Amsterdam. In the second stage – the redevelopment of the South Bank, the
the second stage – the redevelopment of the South Bank, the public-private partnership emerged. But it soon collapsed due to
public-private partnership emerged. But it soon collapsed due to overover reliance on the market sector (Marshall, 2001b, 146). In the
reliance on the market sector (Marshall, 2001b, 146). In the redevelopment of Eastern Docklands, real
has developed and executed by the independent public authority – has developed and executed by the independent public authority – Project Management Bureau. Since this project was one of the five Project Management Bureau. Since this project was one of the five national pilot projects, the redevelopment has received one off national pilot projects, the redevelopment has received one off subsidy from central government (Koster
subsidy from central government (Koster, 1995). , 1995). A variety of A variety of publicpublic authorities and private organisations have involved in the earliest authorities and private organisations have involved in the earliest stage of redevelopment, such as the Physical Planning Department, stage of redevelopment, such as the Physical Planning Department, which designed the Public Space Plan for the islands.
which designed the Public Space Plan for the islands.
In terms of choosing redeveloping time of the waterfront, both In terms of choosing redeveloping time of the waterfront, both
Barcelona and Amsterdam shows that they have chosen the right time. Barcelona and Amsterdam shows that they have chosen the right time. The former has benefited from
The former has benefited from upgrading traupgrading transport system, buildingnsport system, building public open space and holding 1992 Olympic Games. The latter has public open space and holding 1992 Olympic Games. The latter has taken the advantage of central funding and economic climate
taken the advantage of central funding and economic climate in thein the early of 1990s.
early of 1990s.
In terms of new function of
In terms of new function of the waterfront, the Port Vell has presentedthe waterfront, the Port Vell has presented as the tourism catalyst of the city while the Eastern Dockland as the as the tourism catalyst of the city while the Eastern Dockland as the new residential community
new residential community. Therefore, . Therefore, difference has difference has emerged.emerged.
Barcelona has adopted a creative approach to marketing the project Barcelona has adopted a creative approach to marketing the project of the old port. It is considered to achieve the financial success by of the old port. It is considered to achieve the financial success by actively seeking financial resources and making profits. Port 2000 has actively seeking financial resources and making profits. Port 2000 has created, positioned and consolidated
created, positioned and consolidated the Port Vell image. Thisthe Port Vell image. This innovation has become the
innovation has become the generator of Port Vell’s own economicgenerator of Port Vell’s own economic dynamics, thus made it achieve
dynamics, thus made it achieve financial independence (PAB,financial independence (PAB, 1999,2003).
1999,2003).
Outcome Outcome
Looking at the economic and social effects brought by the waterfront Looking at the economic and social effects brought by the waterfront regeneration, in Barcelona, it has considerable economic effects, like regeneration, in Barcelona, it has considerable economic effects, like tourist expenditure while in Amsterdam, the long-established
tourist expenditure while in Amsterdam, the long-established
land-lease system has allowed the social housing to be built on the land-lease system has allowed the social housing to be built on the desirable location of the waterfront.
desirable location of the waterfront.
5.
5. 0
0 Conclusion
Conclusion
In conclusion, the waterfront regeneration implemented in
In conclusion, the waterfront regeneration implemented in bothboth Barcelona and Amsterdam is considered to be success. Their Barcelona and Amsterdam is considered to be success. Their successes have considerable implications to UK’s waterfront. successes have considerable implications to UK’s waterfront.
Although each site has its own characteristics, it is important to learn Although each site has its own characteristics, it is important to learn the lessons from other projects. It is suggested that the waterfront the lessons from other projects. It is suggested that the waterfront regeneration will be succeeded if the following aspects have been regeneration will be succeeded if the following aspects have been followed: (i) defining the waterfront, thinking the future role of the followed: (i) defining the waterfront, thinking the future role of the
waterfront in the city; (ii) making the master plan, especially to waterfront in the city; (ii) making the master plan, especially to involve the communities and developers in the earliest stage; (iii) involve the communities and developers in the earliest stage; (iii) fostering the physical and economic climate for the waterfront fostering the physical and economic climate for the waterfront regeneration; (iv) working in partnership with public authorities, regeneration; (iv) working in partnership with public authorities, private organisations and community groups; and (v)
private organisations and community groups; and (v) reviewing thereviewing the master plan so as to respond the market change and to reduce the master plan so as to respond the market change and to reduce the financial risk. All the stages must be led by a powerful and
financial risk. All the stages must be led by a powerful and independent development
independent development agencyagency..
References
References
Breen, A. and Rigby, A. (1996)
Breen, A. and Rigby, A. (1996) The New Waterfront: A WorldwideThe New Waterfront: A Worldwide Urban Success Story
Urban Success Story , London: Thames and Hudson, London: Thames and Hudson Brownill, S. (1990)
Brownill, S. (1990) Developing London Docklands: Another PlanningDeveloping London Docklands: Another Planning Disaster?
Disaster? London: Paul Chapman.London: Paul Chapman. Bruttomesso, R. ed. (1993)
Bruttomesso, R. ed. (1993) Waterfronts: A new frontier for cities onWaterfronts: A new frontier for cities on Wate
Water, Venice: International Center Cities on Water.r, Venice: International Center Cities on Water. City of Barcelona (1996)
City of Barcelona (1996) Barcelona: An urban transformation model Barcelona: An urban transformation model 1980 – 1995
1980 – 1995 , Quito Ec. Urban , Quito Ec. Urban Management Programme, PGU.Management Programme, PGU.
Clark, M. (1985) “Fallow land in old docks: why such a slow take-up of Clark, M. (1985) “Fallow land in old docks: why such a slow take-up of Britain’s waterside redevelopment opportunities?”,
Britain’s waterside redevelopment opportunities?”, Maritime Policy Maritime Policy and Management
and Management , 12 (2), pp. 157 – 157, 12 (2), pp. 157 – 157
Cook, A. al. “ Port and City relations: San Francisco and Boston”, in Cook, A. al. “ Port and City relations: San Francisco and Boston”, in Marshall, R. ed. (2001)
Marshall, R. ed. (2001) Waterfronts in Post-industrial CitiesWaterfronts in Post-industrial Cities, London, London and New York: SPON Press, pp. 117 –
and New York: SPON Press, pp. 117 – 133.133. Cooper Eckstut Associates (1979)
Cooper Eckstut Associates (1979) Battery Park City Draft Summery Battery Park City Draft Summery Report and 1979 Master Plan
Report and 1979 Master Plan, New York: Battery Park City Authority., New York: Battery Park City Authority. Crilley, D. (1993) “Megastructures and Urban Change: Aesthetics, Crilley, D. (1993) “Megastructures and Urban Change: Aesthetics, ideology and design” in Knox, L. P. (1993) et al.
ideology and design” in Knox, L. P. (1993) et al. The Restless UrbanThe Restless Urban Landscape
Landscape, Ne, New Jersey: Prentice – Hall Pressw Jersey: Prentice – Hall Press
De Jong, W. M. (1991) “Revitalizing the urban core waterfront De Jong, W. M. (1991) “Revitalizing the urban core waterfront development in Baltimore, Maryland”, in Fox-Przeworski, J. ed al. development in Baltimore, Maryland”, in Fox-Przeworski, J. ed al. Urban regeneration in a changing economy: an international Urban regeneration in a changing economy: an international prospective
DRO (1994)
DRO (1994) Physical Planning in Amsterdam: a city in progressPhysical Planning in Amsterdam: a city in progress,, Amsterdam: Physical Planning Department of Amsterdam
Amsterdam: Physical Planning Department of Amsterdam
Eckstut, S. (1986) “Solving Complex Urban Design Problems” in Eckstut, S. (1986) “Solving Complex Urban Design Problems” in Fitzgerald, A.R. (ed.)
Fitzgerald, A.R. (ed.) Waterfront Planning and Development Waterfront Planning and Development , New, New Y
York: American Society of ork: American Society of Civil Engineers, pp. 54 – 57.Civil Engineers, pp. 54 – 57. Edwards, B. (1992)
Edwards, B. (1992) London Docklands: Urban Design in An Age of London Docklands: Urban Design in An Age of Deregulation
Deregulation, Oxford: Butterworth Architecture., Oxford: Butterworth Architecture. Fisher, T. (1988) “Building the New City” in
Fisher, T. (1988) “Building the New City” in Progressive ArchitectureProgressive Architecture,, 3:88, pp. 86 – 93.
3:88, pp. 86 – 93.
Gordon, L. A. D. (1996) “Planning, design, and managing change in Gordon, L. A. D. (1996) “Planning, design, and managing change in urban waterfront redevelopment” in
urban waterfront redevelopment” in Town Planning Review Town Planning Review , Vol. 67, Vol. 67 (3), pp. 261 – 290.
(3), pp. 261 – 290. Gordon, L. A. D. (1997)
Gordon, L. A. D. (1997) Battery Park City: Politics and Planning on theBattery Park City: Politics and Planning on the New York Waterfron
New York Waterfron, Amsterdam, Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Publishers.: Gordon and Breach Publishers.
Hoyle, B. (1988) “Development dynamics at the port-city interface”, Hoyle, B. (1988) “Development dynamics at the port-city interface”, in Hoyle, S. B. ed. al. (1998)
in Hoyle, S. B. ed. al. (1998) Revitalising the Waterfront Revitalising the Waterfront , Chi, Chichestechesterr,, Belhaven Press.
Belhaven Press.
HUD (US Department of Housing and Urban Development) (1985)
HUD (US Department of Housing and Urban Development) (1985) Economic Economic Development in Baltimore: Three decades of public-private partnership Development in Baltimore: Three decades of public-private partnership,, Wash
Washington, Dington, DC.C.
Jauhiainen, J. (1995) Waterfront redevelopment and urban policy: the Jauhiainen, J. (1995) Waterfront redevelopment and urban policy: the case of Barcelona, Cardiff and Genoa, in
case of Barcelona, Cardiff and Genoa, in European StudiesEuropean Studies, Mar 95 Vol., Mar 95 Vol. 3, issue 1, pp. 3 – 21.
3, issue 1, pp. 3 – 21.
Jones, A. (1998) Issues in Waterfront Regeneration: More Sobering Jones, A. (1998) Issues in Waterfront Regeneration: More Sobering Thoughts – A UK Perspective,
Thoughts – A UK Perspective, Planning Practice and ResearchPlanning Practice and Research, Vol. 13,, Vol. 13, No.4, pp. 433 - 442
No.4, pp. 433 - 442
Koster, E. (1995)
Koster, E. (1995) Eastern Docklands, AmsterdamEastern Docklands, Amsterdam: Architecture & Nature.: Architecture & Nature.
Malone, P. (1996)
Malone, P. (1996) City, Capital and Water City, Capital and Water , London and New York:, London and New York: Routeledge.
Routeledge.
Mambro, D. A. (1993) “Development of Boston Waterfront”, in Mambro, D. A. (1993) “Development of Boston Waterfront”, in Bruttomesso, R. ed. (1993)
Water, Venice: International Center Cities on Water
Water, Venice: International Center Cities on Water , pp. 305 – 310., pp. 305 – 310. Marshall, R. (2001a) “Contemporary urban space-making at the Marshall, R. (2001a) “Contemporary urban space-making at the water’s edge” in Marshall R. ed. (2001)
water’s edge” in Marshall R. ed. (2001) Waterfronts in Post-industrial Waterfronts in Post-industrial Cities
Cities, London and New York: SPON Press pp.3 , London and New York: SPON Press pp.3 – 14.– 14.
Marshall, R. (2001b) “Waterfronts, development and World Heritage Marshall, R. (2001b) “Waterfronts, development and World Heritage cities: Amsterdam and Havana, in Marshall R. ed. (2001)
cities: Amsterdam and Havana, in Marshall R. ed. (2001) WaterfrontsWaterfronts in Post-industrial Cities
in Post-industrial Cities, London and New York: SPON Press,, London and New York: SPON Press, pppp. 137. 137 -159.
-159.
McCarthy, J (1996) Waterfront regeneration in the Netherlands: the McCarthy, J (1996) Waterfront regeneration in the Netherlands: the cases of Rotterdam and Maastricht,
cases of Rotterdam and Maastricht, European Planning StudiesEuropean Planning Studies, Oct96,, Oct96, Vol. 4, Issue 5, pp. 545 – 561.
Vol. 4, Issue 5, pp. 545 – 561. Meyer
Meyer, H. (, H. (1999)1999) City and Port, urban planning as a cultural venture inCity and Port, urban planning as a cultural venture in London, Barcelona, New York and Rotterdam: changing relations London, Barcelona, New York and Rotterdam: changing relations between public urban space and large-scale infrastructure
between public urban space and large-scale infrastructure, Utrecht:, Utrecht: International Books.
International Books.
Millspaugh, L.M. (1993) “Baltimore: the success of a 25-year Millspaugh, L.M. (1993) “Baltimore: the success of a 25-year public-private partnership”, in
public-private partnership”, in Waterfronts: a new frontier for cities onWaterfronts: a new frontier for cities on water
water , Venice: International Centre Cities on Water, pp. 297 - 304., Venice: International Centre Cities on Water, pp. 297 - 304. Millspaugh, L.M. (2001) “Waterfront as catalyst for city renewal”, in Millspaugh, L.M. (2001) “Waterfront as catalyst for city renewal”, in Marshall, R. ed. (2001)
Marshall, R. ed. (2001) Waterfronts in Post-industrial CitiesWaterfronts in Post-industrial Cities, London, London and New York: SPON Press, pp.74 -85.
and New York: SPON Press, pp.74 -85. Port Authority of Barcelona (1999)
Port Authority of Barcelona (1999) Activities Report of the Urban Activities Report of the Urban Planning Management Board of the Barcelona Port Authority, 1995 Planning Management Board of the Barcelona Port Authority, 1995 -1998
-1998, Barcelona: PAB., Barcelona: PAB.
Port Authority of Barcelona (
Port Authority of Barcelona (20032003)) Activities Report of the Urban Activities Report of the Urban Planning Management Board of the Barcelona Port Authority, 199 Planning Management Board of the Barcelona Port Authority, 19988
--20022002, Barcelona: PAB., Barcelona: PAB. Riera, P
Riera, P. and . and Keogh, G. (1995) Keogh, G. (1995) Chapter 12: BarceloChapter 12: Barcelona, in Berry, J. andna, in Berry, J. and McGreal, S. ed al (1995)
McGreal, S. ed al (1995) European Cities, Planning Systems and European Cities, Planning Systems and Property Market
Property Market , London, E & FN SPON, pp 219 – 243., London, E & FN SPON, pp 219 – 243.
Robert, P. (2000) “The Evolution, Definition and Purpose of Urban Robert, P. (2000) “The Evolution, Definition and Purpose of Urban Regeneration” in Robert, P and Sykes, H. ed. al. (2000)
Regeneration” in Robert, P and Sykes, H. ed. al. (2000) UrbanUrban Regeneration: A Hand Book
Sastre, R. J. (1993) “Remodeling the Old Port of Barcelona” in Sastre, R. J. (1993) “Remodeling the Old Port of Barcelona” in Bruttomesso, R. ed. (1993)
Bruttomesso, R. ed. (1993) Waterfronts: A new frontier for cities onWaterfronts: A new frontier for cities on Water, Venice: International Center Cities on Water
Water, Venice: International Center Cities on Water , pp. 58 – 62., pp. 58 – 62.
Shaw, B. (2001) “ History at the water’s edge” in
Shaw, B. (2001) “ History at the water’s edge” in Marshall R. ed. (2001)Marshall R. ed. (2001) Waterfronts in Post-industrial Cities
Waterfronts in Post-industrial Cities, London and New York: SPON, London and New York: SPON Press,
Press, pppp. 1. 16060 -1-17272..
Turbridge, J. (1988) “Policy convergence on the waterfront? A Turbridge, J. (1988) “Policy convergence on the waterfront? A comparative assessment of
comparative assessment of North American Revitalisation sNorth American Revitalisation strategies”trategies”,, in Hoyle, S. B. ed. al. (1998)
in Hoyle, S. B. ed. al. (1998) Revitalising the Waterfront Revitalising the Waterfront , Chi, Chichestechesterr,, Belhaven Press, pp. 67 – 89.
Belhaven Press, pp. 67 – 89. T
Turbridge, J. urbridge, J. (1993) “The (1993) “The TTourist-leisure Dimension: ourist-leisure Dimension: North AmericanNorth American Waterfronts in Comparative Perspectives, in Bruttomesso, R. ed. Waterfronts in Comparative Perspectives, in Bruttomesso, R. ed. (1993)
(1993) Waterfronts: A new frontier for cities on Water, Venice:Waterfronts: A new frontier for cities on Water, Venice: International Center Cities on Water
International Center Cities on Water , pp. 301- 304, pp. 301- 304 Van der Knaap, B. and
Van der Knaap, B. and PinderPinder, A. , A. D. (1992) “Revitalising the D. (1992) “Revitalising the EuropeanEuropean waterfront: policy evolution and planning issues” in Hoyle, S. B. and waterfront: policy evolution and planning issues” in Hoyle, S. B. and Pinder, A. D.
Pinder, A. D. ed. (1992)ed. (1992) European Port Cities in TransitionEuropean Port Cities in Transition, London: Belhaven, London: Belhaven Press, pp. 155 –175.