Copenhagen, Denmark
The Finger City
Abstract
For almost 50 years the development of the greater Copenhagen metropolitan area has been based on the concept of the "finger city" to control urban growth. This urban concept promotes the use of public transport and the protection of green space between the fingers. The modifications and refinements of this theme through the years all show a clear development in one consistent line: the four respective regional plans of '48, '61, '73 and '89 all display the further development and elaboration of the same concept.
Policy Goals
The original 'finger plan', the 1947 regional plan for the Copenhagen area, defined an urban structure shaped like a hand with five fingers. The strategy to restrict new urban development to locations along the existing railway lines aimed at making the use of public transport, especially railways, attractive, and at preserving the green spaces between the urban areas encouraging these areas to penetrate towards the city centre. Since then in later regional plans, the fingers just grew longer and the railway system became more comprehensive and the relocalisation strategy was more explicitly formulated.
Project Status
After the Greater Copenhagen Council was abolished in 1989 regional planning has been carried out by five regional units: the City of Copenhagen, the City of Frederiksberg, the County of Copenhagen, the County of Frederiksberg and the County of Roskilde. Each of those five regional units made their own 1993 Regional Plan based on the main guidelines in the common 1989 Regional Plan for the Greater Copenhagen Area. Each of them is now working on a revision. Besides the five regional plans there are fifty Municipal Plans covering the whole Greater Copenhagen Area.
Background Information
Several master plans have been developed since the original 1947 regional plan. They have aimed at improving and extending the finger concept and at allocating space to activities that would otherwise put pressure on the city centre and lead to congestion and other problems. A concentration of urban development was proposed in 1969 in a new secondary regional centre at the main railway line running west from Copenhagen. The regional plan of 1976 drew a circle around Copenhagen and proposed urban growth in the nodes where the new circle crossed the old fingers. This plan had no significant impact on regional development and a new regional plan was made in 1989, based on the finger plan, and the aim to preserve and refine the existing city structure. A regional localisation strategy was formulated.
Implementation
Strategy
The regional plan is prepared and consistently maintained over a long period. In the plan itself transport planning and landscape planning are essential aspects and many relevant partner organisations are involved (horizontal integration). On the other hand, vertical integration is practiced upwards as well as downwards: interregional cooperation in the qresund Region with Sweden and the regional plan of the greater Copenhagen Area is elaborated in many municipal activities.
Activities
Two municipal activities which are closely linked to the Òfinger cityÓ concept are:
Areas around stations - This theme is developed within the framework of the 1989 regional plan and considers locations around stations as essential for traffic control and urban development. The concept is that industries and especially offices should be located there to promote public transport and to reduce reliance on private cars. Priority areas for urban development and renewal have been defined near stations and major bus terminals.
Green city - the conservation and development of green spaces and public gardens with an ecological function. The limitation of the space taken up by parking areas is one means of achieving that. The green wedges between the fingers of the city contain a lot of green area and are protected.
Partners
From 1947 to 1989 the Greater Copenhagen Council was responsible for the regional planning in the Copenhagen metropolitan area. After abolishment of regional planning in the area was carried out by the five units mentioned under Òproject statusÓ. Close cooperation is organised between those units and the Ministry of the Environment and Energy, the Danish State Railways and the fifty municipalities in the greater Copenhagen area.
Analysis
Results
The Copenhagen planning system has, to a certain extent, been successful in favouring public transport and reducing average travel time. Car traffic to the city of Copenhagen today is at a lower level than in 1970. The decentralisation and development of secondary centres has also been successful, giving the population of the suburbs better access to jobs and services. As a result, traffic and related congestion and pollution, in the centre of Copenhagen is under more efficient control. Besides the green wedges between the fingers are protected.
Barriers and Conflicts
The plans have not been successful in all respects. A recent survey of office construction in the Greater Copenhagen area reveals that only about half of the office floorage built between 1980 and 1990 was actually developed in the priority areas near the stations.
Lessons Learned
The Copenhagen example of regional and municipal land use and transport planning shows that long term consistency in planning is an important factor. In spite of modifications and changing planning objectives, the main planning concept of the finger city has been maintained. It is because of this consistency that the integration of land use planning and public transport planning could be achieved. Recent planning themes such as the concentration of working areas around stations and the development of green and ecological zones fit well within this main planning concept. The lesson is that environmental policy should be based on consistent and sustainable land use plans and principles.
Further Information
Contact
P. Hartoft Nielsen
Spatial Planning Department
Tel: +45 / 33 - 92 76 00
Fax: +45 / 33 - 32 22 27
Acknowledgments
The original text for this project summary was developed by theExpert Group on the Urban Environment (September, 1994). Revision by EURONET, 1996.
© EURONET/ICLEI Consortium, 1996. See Impressum.
|