The language of Danish welfare landscapes

The language of Danish welfare landscapes 1

The Language of Danish Welfare Landscapes Submitted May 31, 2021 Written by Anne Sofie Sørensen cmd477 & Katrine Lundemark bfc838 Supervisor Ellen Marie Braae University of Copenhagen Faculty of Science Department of Geoscience and Natural Ressource Management Credits 30 ECTS Master thesis in Landscape Architecture 2

Aknowledgements This is to all storytellers of landscapes, and those who, as we, are curious about the language of landscape.

We hope that this thesis will provide new perspectives and contribute to the development of new terminologies for Danish welfare landscapes.

Thanks to our supervisor Ellen Marie Braae for inspiring and helpful guidance throughout the thesis and for introducing us to the research field of welfare landscapes. Thanks to Niels Bjørn for providing us with contemporary insight. Thank you to SLA landscape architects for providing measurable drawings of Nøjsomhed. And thanks to our friends and family for general support.

Katrine Lundemark

Anne Sofie Sørensen

3

4

Abstract This thesis is a practice in the language of landscape. It addresses the imbalance between humans and our natural surroundings in the Anthropocene, which is also reflected in the Danish welfare landscapes. The thesis proposes new ways of enhancing the interconnectedness between people and place through an examination of Danish welfare landscapes as industrial housing from the 60ties and 70ties.

During these decades a regular building boom took place, and today a large number of social housing estates stand as proud monuments of the welfare visions of the time, providing the best possible frames for the good life. But today many of these estates are experienced as pockets of time since the post-war welfare visions no longer correspond to today’s wishes and needs. Therefore this thesis investigates how we may keep the language of welfare landscapes up to date and reinterpret the concept of welfare so it includes welfare for humans and non-humans.

The assignment consists of four parts; first historical and contemporary studies, secondly a comparative analysis of six social housing estates, then an extraction of essential findings which leads to a reinterpretation of the social housing estate Nøjsomhed.

It concludes that an adaptation of the language of landscape can be gained by a comprehensive groundwork of creating new approaches.

Furthermore, it reveals that an adaptation of the language is a prerequisite to accommodate the welfare landscapes to the Anthropocene challenges.

In Nøjsomhed this is investigated as the natural and the built becomes interconnected in new ways that celebrate the partnership between people and place.

5

Table of contents 1

Aknowledgements

3

Abstract

6

Landscape is language

9

Introduction to the thesis and project mission

10

Keywords and Concept Clarification

11

Methods and approach

Intro

Chapter 1: Essential stories and characteristics of post-war social housing 13

Description of outline

14

How the Anthropocene relates to the field of landscape architecture

16

Main principles and visions of industrial social housing

23

Contemporary stories of social housing estate’s outdoor space

29

From understanding to interpretation

Chapter 2: The stories of six Danish Welfare Landscapes

6

31

Investigating and interpreting dialogues

41

Brøndby Strand Parkerne

61

Gellerupplanen

77

Vejleåparken

93

Gadehavegård

109

Egedalsvænge

125

Nøjsomhed

141

Comparative analysis

Chapter 3: Renewing the language of Danish welfare landscapes 143

Description of renewal

144

Meaningful story 1

145

Meaningful story 2

146

Meaningful story 3

147

Meaningful story 4 (the new story)

149

From renewal to reinterpretation

Chapter 4: Designproposal for Nøjsomhed 153

Vision for Nøjsomhed

170

Conclusion

173

Reflection

174

Footnotes

175

Illustrations

175

Appendix

176

References

Outro

7

Intro

Landscape is language The language of landscape is our native language.

Landscape was the original dwelling; humans evolved among plants and animals, under the sky, upon the earth, near water. Everyone carries that legacy in body and mind. Humans touched, saw, heard, smelled, tasted, lived in, and shaped landscapes before the species had the word to describe what it did. Landscapes were the first human texts, read before the invention of other signs and symbols (Spirn 1998, 15).

Landscape and language are similar. Both consist of forms and structures and both can be understood, interacted with and interpreted. Landscape and language are adapted and renewed. Both evolves over time and both consist of many layers of meaning which are continuously developed.

This thesis seeks to investigate and develop of our understanding and interpretation of the language of Danish welfare landscapes. We need to understand and speak the language of landscape to set out new ways for approaching everyday life and continuous global challenges in this Anthropocene time. We see this as the greatest challenge for our generation of landscape architects. The initial quote is from Anne Spirn’s book ‘Language of landscapes’, and we use her analogy and method as a guideline and source of inspiration for our mission.

8

The relationship between humans and our natural surroundings has been in imbalance for many years. It is time for new notions, methods and perspectives for the profession of landscape architecture. We must learn how to engage in appropriate dialogues with the landscapes - as dwellers and as landscape architects. Because the landscape has many dwellers, humans and non-humans, and all dwellers reshape and project different meanings into it. All authors are part of the same system and thereby interconnected and interdependent. It is an ongoing process to renew the language to keep all authors in sync.

In that regard, the language of landscape responds to the Anthropocene imbalance of humans being extraordinarily talented at altering the natural surroundings for our utilization.

Alternating is not without consequences and, as Spirn (1998, 25) points, this is experienced when “[...] the ability to transform landscape beyond the capacity to comprehend it threatens human existence. Having altered virtually every spot on the planet, humans have triggered perturbations that threaten to change it irrevocably and dangerously.”

Therefore this thesis is a practice in the language of landscape. We focus on Danish welfare landscapes as industrial housing from the 60ties and 70ties and we do for several reasons.

There are many housing estates established all over Denmark, the sites are large and they house many dwellers. We experience that many of these landscapes are time pockets with an outdated language of a post-war society’s need for welfare to improve the health of its citizens.

To keep it in sync with this Anthropocene time, we want to reinterpret the concept of welfare, so it recognizes humans and non-humans.

We wish to see Danish welfare landscapes that interconnect the natural and the built in meaningful and in adaptive ways while providing welfare for all dwellers. But before this vision can be realized we must understand its language. We believe that these landscapes have great potential but also holds many misread and untold stories, which we wish to unfold. We want to play the part of storytellers who seek to understand and renew the language.

We read landscape as language

9

Intro

Introduction to the thesis and project mission We need to understand the language of Danish welfare landscapes. First, we explore the initial historical visions and the contemporary characteristics of social housing. Secondly, we analyze the stories of six social housing estates by noting recurring stories and organizing them in themes. We find these observations to be the core of the thesis since they constitute the foundation for renewing the language of Danish welfare landscapes.

In the renewal, we first extract the meaningful stories brought by thematic analysis and secondly we incorporate a new story that accommodates welfare for all dwellers. Lastly, we begin our reinterpretation of the social housing estate Nøjsomhed in a designproposal.

This is done to both qualify our findings and also to activate our role as storytellers as we create a base for new stories to evolve which are founded in a partnership between people and place. This lead to the thesis investigative statement:

How can the stories of Danish welfare landscapes be interpreted and give us a nuanced understanding of the language that allows for new stories to evolve?

Research questions 1. How does the Anthropocene relate to the field of landscape architecture?

2. What are the initial historical visions and contemporary characteristics of the welfare landscapes?

3. Which comparative stories can be drawn from a thematic analysis of six social housing estates?

4. Which meaningful stories of Danish welfare landscapes can be extracted from the thematic analysis?

5. How can a renewal of Danish welfare landscapes be phrased?

6. How can Nøjsomhed be reinterpreted through the language of landscape?

11

Intro

Keywords and Concept Clarification The thesis is based on a linguistic notion of landscape as language and refers to a range of contemporary theories.

Therefore central keywords and concepts will be clarified in the following section.

The Anthropocene was announced in the journal ‘Nature’ by scientist Paul Crutzen (2002) as our time human-dominated geological epoch, where mankind is a major environmental force. The challenges that the Anthropocene brings are felt globally and manifest in changing temperatures, dense human settlements, restricted access to resources and rapidly decreasing natural habitats.

Nature perception reflects human’s relation and understanding of our natural surroundings (B. L. Madsen 2016). Therefore the perception of nature can hold different meanings according to the perceiver. A nature perception is dualistic when nature is perceived as something from which humans gain value or when nature is perceived as a counterpart to human culture.

Danish welfare landscapes is defined in the article ‘Welfare landscapes: Open Spaces of Danish Post-war Housing Estates Reconfigured’, by Ellen Braae et. al.

(2020, 20) as human settlements from the post-war period that are “[...] directly associated with ideas of social welfare and well-being related to citizens’ health, morals and ethics”.

The general definition of welfare has several meanings that are all associated with human well-being. Welfare can be defined regarding a human emotion as ”the good fortune, health, happiness, prosperity, etc., [...]” (Dictionary. com 2021). Furthermore, welfare can be defined as a societal concept meaning “Freedom. Freedom to be educated, freedom to choose work, freedom to do what we want” (Socialdemokratiet n.d.). Concretely welfare can also be financial help as “money that the government pays regularly to people who are poor, unemployed, sick, etc.” (Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary n.d.). Please note that we will not define welfare solely associated with human well-being.

12

Our reinterpretation of welfare Welfare is associated with well-being of humans and non-humans.

The language of landscape is the recovery and “[...] the dynamic connection between place and those who dwell there” (Spirn 1998, 17). We have set out to use ‘language of landscape’ as our overall approach to understanding and speaking about the field of Danish welfare landscapes.

This approach is based on Anne Whiston Spirn’s theory unfolded in ‘Language of landscapes’ from 1998. The theory has served as our philosophical backbone, the attitude of our readings of the social housing estates, and has been the framework for reinterpreting Nøjsomhed.

Authors and dwellers are all living things and creatures that have the ability to affect and understand the language of landscape. “Humans are not the sole authors of landscape. [...] All living things share the same space, all make landscape, and all landscapes, wild or domesticated, have coauthors, all are phenomena of nature and culture” (Spirn 1998, 17–18) Dialogue is the ongoing interaction between people and place, “Landscape is loud with dialogues, with story lines that connect a place and its dwellers” (Spirn 1998, 17).

Stories is an interpretation that can be drawn from engaging in a dialogue. This is e.g. experienced when ”[...] humans interpret landscape signs and elaborate upon them, reading meanings to tell stories” (Spirn 1998, 32) Meaningful stories are defined as meaningful by its interpreter. When we interpret stories that we find meaningful, it regards our mission and Danish welfare landscapes. The stories either represent a significant general feature or points to an uncovered potential that can foster appropriate dialogue between people and place.

Intro

Methods and approach We approach this thesis in four intertwined and overlapping phases: Phase 1: Collecting research Early in the process, we decided to use ‘the language of landscape’ as our main approach and guiding tool. The thesis was initiated by gathering background knowledge about social housing estates then and now. We started researching historical and contemporary information from books, architectural drawings of social housing estates, new papers, and podcasts. We spend time searching for original drawings from the social housing estates.

Unfortunately, due to Covid-19, the libraries were closed and we could not access the drawings until late in the process.

Furthermore, we obtained knowledge from various development plans and engaged in two interviews. The first interview was conducted with urban designer Sofie Clemmesen, who had worked with the development of the social housing estate Tingbjerg, and the second with urbanist and Ph.d. Niels Bjørn. We engaged in this phase with great curiosity and openness, which is reflected in the many perspectives and stories of the thesis.

Phase 2: Case-based studies Simultaneously with phase 1 we conducted several casebased studies. In total, we visited ten social housing estates from the 60ies and 70ies both in Jylland and Sjælland.

We selected the cases considering their size, location, and stage of renovation. The case-based studies were carried out at each estate one time during one season, which was wintertime. This premise has limited our registrations regarding vegetation growth and dwellers activities taking place.

Engaging in the case-based studies we used our obtained knowledge and our approach as landscape architects.

We registered the estate using photography and sketching while discussing and reflecting upon our experiences.

We engaged in an open interaction with the place whereas the most immediate signs were elaborated and processed using drawings. Again, this phase has been characterized by great curiosity and openness, which is reflected in the many studies of social housing estates.

Phase 3: Processing the data From the case-based studies, we gained a large amount of empirical data to process. Due to the extensiveness of this, we decided on six social housing estates for further analysis. The initial rough sketches were transferred into diagrams which we have continuously altered. The deeper we engaged in the material, the more precise our terminology came to be. To develop a comparative analysis we decided on appropriate terms and descriptions.

Hereby we could uncover general and essential stories across all six housing estates. We have continuously refined this terminology.

For organizing the findings we used the theory of the epistemes. This has widened our reading and findings since the epistemes represent frames of thought linked to specific values and discussions (Riesto, Braae, and Avermaete 2020). The outcome became the comparative and thematic analysis of six housing estates. To obtain the essence of our interpretation we furthermore formulated chapter 3 ‘Renewing the language of Danish welfare landscapes’.

Phase 4: Interpreting Nøjsomhed From the start, we found it important to process our findings in design and not solely diagrams and writing.

This has been a base for all previous phases, for example, we have found inspiration when conducting the casebased studies, studying development plans and historical drawings. Furthermore, we were constantly aware that the extraction of the analysis, chapter 3, could be materialized in a design.

The mountain-like landscape of Nøjsomhed immediately drew our attention during our site visits, and we decided on this estate for further investigation. It was resolved in a reinterpretation of Nøjsomhed in chapter 5. We name it an interpretation because we perceive the design of Nøjsomhed as an open process in which knowledge and inspiration are continuously developed and reflected upon.

We link this process to our development and expansion of the language of landscape. Chapter 4 is a momentary image of this reinterpretation.

13

14

Chapter 1: Essential stories and characteristics of post-war social housing Description of outline The following chapter outlines distinctive features and movements which have formed Danish welfare landscapes. We address the complexity of this field with a kaleidoscopic approach that allows us to outline essential historical and contemporary stories.

First, we wish to demonstrate how the Anthropocene relates to landscape architecture to set the overall framework for the thesis. Further on we concentrate on general characteristics of post-war social housing estates and the associated welfare landscapes. Lastly, we give a contemporary perspective on social housing. From this, we bring forward significant voices, who investigate how ideas of welfare were materialized in the post-war period and provide perspectives on how these may be configured in the future.

From this chapter, we draw a complex and extensive picture of Danish welfare landscape.

This we do to provide an overall understanding of the field from which our renewal will evolve.

15

Outline

How the Anthropocene relates to the field of landscape architecture The Anthropocene has become an interdisciplinary concept and it is closely linked to the field of landscape architecture. The reason being that the Anthropocene regards the connections we, as humans, have with our natural surroundings. The connectedness calls for new ways of addressing the relationship between culture and nature. Professor in landscape planning, Martin Prominski, calls for new concepts and new terms. In the article ‘Andscapes’ Prominski (2014, 18) concludes the following:

“This performance of a unitary approach to nature and culture is an asset in the ‘Anthropocene’, where scientists and artists are still searching intensely for new concepts to replace vanished nature. Landscape architects should promote these efforts by using the correct terms in their reflections and communication” In the article Prominski (2014, 6) emphasizes that the western perception of nature is obsolete because it is dualistic and therefore we need new concepts for ‘nature’. From an Anthropocene perspective, we must not only regulate our communication, but also our behaviour. Ph.d. in Architectural history, Marianne Krog (2020, 13) addresses this in her introduction to ‘An Incomplete Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene’: “For centuries, we have assigned ourselves a central position as superior beings, able to control our habitat by means of language, reason and consciousness. Precisely because plants and animals lack (human) language and consciousness, we believe that we have the right to exploit them for our own needs” Krogh argues that the superior role that humans have positioned ourselves in creates an imbalance. This inequality has consequences, and the consequences are felt all over the world: “[...] we are reducing the planet’s capacity for binding CO2, pollution is threatening our fundamental biological survival, biodiversity is plummeting and everything that we once took for granted is becoming increasingly uncertain, including air, water, soil…” (Krogh 2020, 14)

16

Outline

Skt. Kjelds Plads by SLA landscape architects in Copenhagen is an implementation of Urban nature in landscape design.

We agree that the connectedness of the Anthropocene is a premise of our time and that we must address this using new terms. As an example, Copenhagen’s strategy for urban nature defines ‘Urban Nature’ as “an overarching term that includes all living beings and plants in the city” (City of Copenhagen 2015, 9). City of Copenhagen wants to embrace the connectedness, but we find the term’s immediate understanding based upon a dualistic perception of nature.

Therefore we set out to practice the language of landscape to both expand our vocabulary and refine new terms.

“Humans survival as a species depends upon adapting ourselves and our landscapes - settlements, buildings, rivers, fields, forests - in new, life-sustaining ways, shaping contexts that acknowledge connections to air, earth, water, life and to each other, and that help us feel and understand these connections, landscapes are functional, sustainable, meaningful, and artful. Not everyone will be farmers or fishermen for whom the landscape is livelihood but all can learn to read landscape, to understand those readings, and to speak new wisdom into life in city, suburb, and countryside, to cultivate the power of landscape expression as if our life depends upon it. For it does” (Spirn 1998, 26).

17

Outline

Main principles and visions of industrial social housing Most large scale post-war housing estates in Denmark stand as markers of a historical set of modernist principles. These principles are inspired by the international movement from the 1930’ties, widely known as CIAM, which came to dominate the structure and form of many social housing estates, and has shaped cities all over the world (Bjørn 2008, 16).

During the 1930’ties many European cities were densely populated and heavily affected by sickness and poverty (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017b, 18; Bjørn 2008, 11). The issues of poor living conditions were something that occupied many architects and urban planners during this time, and they set out to change the conditions by providing a framework of better housing for all citizens. The intentions were clear; the large housing estates were established in the suburbs in vast and open landscapes where sunlight, fresh air and green open spaces could be provided and ensure a better life quality (Bjørn 2008, 16).

CIAM and visions of ‘the good life’ In 1933 the congress of modern architecture, Congrés International d’Architecture Moderne, took place under the theme ‘The Functional City’. This event became pivotal for the visions of improving housing conditions. The conclusions of the congress were formulated in ’The Athens Charter’ in 1942, which proposed solutions to the urban problems by a dedicated set of functionalistic urban planning principles. It was a number of the most acknowledged architects and city planners, among the swiss-french architect Le Corbusier, who defined the Charter for “the modern city to be built by rational principles and divided into zones according to function”1 (Bjørn 2008, 16). The CIAM-association thereby advocated that the functional city could realize an ideological practice of sustainable urban planning.

‘The Athens Charter’ was written during the post-war period and in the midst of a rapid development of industrialized construction methods. This meant that most of the large social housing programmes in the 50’ties to the 70’ties were built with new industrialized materials and methods. A regular post-war building boom took place, which made it possible to build fast and in great numbers.

Many large housing estates from the 60’ ties and 70’ ties are therefore designed by the same following principles of ‘The Functional city’: (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017b, 18): 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

18

Large, tall blocks typically situated in parallel rows and with good accessibility Estates are placed in open land with large green spaces and fresh air Large green open spaces for display from the balconies Separate zones for parking, dwelling and shopping Institutions and municipal buildings close by for resident’s basic needs

Outline

Brøndby Strand Parkerne from above. The estate is an example of modernist city planning in a Danish context (Illustration 1)

Today these estates can be recognized as modular concrete blocks rising as proud monuments of welfare visions of that time. It was a clear conviction that the open spaces designed for contemplation were an antidote to the filthy, crowded cities. This notion of ‘open space’ is something which may be interpreted as ‘free space’, and as professor in landscape architecture Ellen Braae (2020, 39) notes:

“It emphasizes emancipatory aspects and suggests an openness to the user’s own interpretation and appropriation. The freedom to do sports or bask in the sun, a safe space for the children to play.[...] However, freedom can also mean freedom from something. And when the word ‘free’ or ‘open’ appears in connection with ‘space’ rather than ‘landscape’ or ‘nature’, it refers to freedom from the cumbersome aspects and restraints of nature, which was regarded as one of the benefits of industrialization.”

This quote gives a clear impression of the relation between ‘people’ and ‘nature’ of that period as a dualistic notion and how it came to be significant for the zeitgeist.

19

Outline

Universal welfare from cradle to grave The Danish welfare society has developed over centuries and is a crucial part of Danish identity. It is based on values such as solidarity, equality, trust, and community and thereby a fundamental principle that all citizens are entitled to the same societal benefits (Danmarkskanon n.d.).

The development of large scale housing derives from the ideal of universal welfare for all people. For more than 150 years every citizen in Denmark has had the right to a decent place to live, and today more than one million Danes live in social housing (Rogaczewska, Lønne, and Friis Sørensen 2015, 9). Tenants of social housing represent around 180 different nationalities and there is a broad representation on the social and economic scale. Social housing is by law a part of the Danish welfare society aiming “to offer people of all kinds good quality and decent housing at an affordable rent while giving tenants a right to influence their housing conditions” (Rogaczewska, Lønne, and Friis Sørensen 2015, 15).

The welfare system in Denmark is based on the ideal of universal rights - economically and socially. In the 1960’ties the welfare state expanded significantly as the international economic boom from the 50’ies reached Denmark. The 60’ies became the ‘golden age’ of the Danish welfare state where women entered the labour market which led to a societal demand of building nursing homes, kindergartens, nurseries, schools etc. (Bejder and Kristensen 2026).

Expansion of the Danish welfare state One year after WW2 the housing shortage in Denmark was estimated at 50.000 (Bjørn 2008, 10). As a response to the substantial shortage, the Danish welfare state generated a building boom to meet society’s demand for new facilities and to sustain the welfare principles and societal growth. This called for the architects to design and build to large extents.

‘Montagecirkulæret’ was a financial incentive introduced by the Ministry of Housing in 1960 which stimulated the industrial building methods using prefabricated concrete modules. The outcome was massive. In the years 1960-1979 the largest building boom in Danish history took place and more than 600.000 housings were constructed, hereby around 200.000 social housings (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017b, 16–18).

The construction was dominated by rational manufacturing techniques, using large and effective machinery. Even the buildings were, on a practical note, placed straight along the large crane tracks. As Claus Bech-Danielsen (2017b, 18) describes the outcome of the industrialized constructions were extensive plans where the estates became independent units, “and the goal was to create suburbs and residential areas where everything was planned so that it became possible to live a coherent and whole life in the suburbs“2 There was great confidence and high expectations that the industrialized architecture movement would meet the welfare visions of the time.

Fingerplanen (Illustration 2) 20

Outline

Danish welfare landscapes As early as 1931 landscape conservation associations formulated a need for preserving and safeguarding landscapes of great value to balance the growing urbanization. As an example of this C. Th. Sørensen’s (1978) publication ‘Parkpolitik i Sogn og Købstad’ called upon a greater political awareness about park policies and illustrated the conviction that people needed experiences in nature as a consequence of urbanization. No later than in 1936 ‘Den Grønne Betænkning’ was published and aimed at safeguarding important recreational landscapes and ensuring interconnectivity of green areas and access to them within the region of Copenhagen (Lund 2002, 3:183). The balance between conserving the rural landscapes and developing the urban landscapes was in 1947 represented by the figure of a hand projecting the future urban development as ‘fingers’ and the green wedges in between as the dedicated recreational landscape.

The policy was to ensure large green areas in proximity to the city, and as Malene Hauxner (2007) concludes “With the Finger Plan, Copenhagen got a perceptible plan and the modern democratic outdoor life got its recreational landscape concentrated around movement lines, streams and coasts”3 This mindset dominated through the late 60’ties, 70’ties and 80’ties where large recreational areas, such as the Køge Bugt Strandpark and the forest of Vestskoven, were established (Lund 2002, 3:184).

Historical photo from Vestamager. The area was a recreational destination for the Copenhageners, as it still is today (Illustration 3)

21

Outline

From garden architect to landscape architect The building boom put forward new demands on the garden architect already from the 50ties and into the 70ties. The field of work for the garden architect expanded with new tasks on much larger scales than before, as the welfare state made large impacts on the cities and landscapes. During the 70ties terms like ‘landscape planning’, ‘landscape management’ and ‘open space’ were adapted in the profession’s vocabulary (Braae 2020, 36). Generally, garden architects were experts in orchestrating spatial experiences and aesthetic details in smaller scales. As garden architect and historian Johannes Tholle elaborates in the publication ‘Fællesrådet for havekultur og landskabsgartneri - Etagehusenes haveanlæg’: “ The garden architects must also change their work and working methods (...). And these open spaces will actually be considered as housing parks. While the garden architect may have previously sacrificed his attention to refined details in a rich man’s garden in Ryvangen or the Marselisborg district, he must now include playgrounds for children of all ages, and he must make sure to shape the terrain surrounding the buildings with its excavated soil as a ”Landscape garden”, which can at the same time function as a kind of semi-public park and at the same time be a private garden for those who inhabit the multi-storey houses”4 (Langkilde 1954, 2) In other words; the scope of the garden architect’s work expanded as did the profession’s self-image. And contemporary welfare visions of rationality, structure and openness were also interpreted in the landscapes around social housing estates.

Original hand drawing of the landscape garden, Brøndby Strand Parkerne. The drawing neatly shows how the precise form of the hedges form a pastoral landscape (Illustration 4) 22

Outline

Many well-known landscape architects worked with the construction of open spaces around schools, housing estates, cultural institutions etc. Some of these landscape architects were Eywin Langkilde (1919-97), J. Arevad-Jacobsen (1917-2003), Edith (1919-89) og Ole Nørgård (1925-78), J. Palle Schmidt (1923-2010), Knud Lund-Sørensen (1930), Morten Klint(1918-78) and Sven-Ingvar Andersson (1927-2007) (Lund n.d.).

As Eywin Langkilde (1954, 3) writes in his introduction to ‘Etagehusenes haveanlæg:

“When publishing a journal like this it has to be the image of how the development of large scale housing these days is closely tied to the recreational areas where children and adults are able to seek a place of refuge as the counterweight to the hectic existence of our time”5 Eywin Langkildes statement delicately illustrates how the vision of welfare was deeply rooted in the landscapes of social housing estates and played a significant role in counterbalancing undesired aspects of living conditions.

We have now gained a historical understanding of initial and fundamental visions of equity and welfare that formed social housing estates in the 60ies and 70ies. From this understanding, we see welfare landscapes that are constituted in large scale as recreational arteries while accommodating the scene of everyday life in the housing estates.

Portrait of Eywin Langkilde.

During his career Langkilde has drawn private gardens to large scale social housing estates (Illustration 5) 23

1.The modernist social housing estates are a product of the industrialized society

2. Some social housing estates are parallel societies, also known as ghettos

3. There is a boom of renovations transformations of social housing estates

4. The social housing estate is structured as an isolated ‘island’

5. The large scales of industrial housing affect the sensory experience and thereby the liveliness and social interaction

6. A lack of zoning affect the feeling of ownership and community

7. There is a lack of knowledge and lack of research regarding Welfare landscapes

Outline

Contemporary stories of social housing estate’s outdoor space Now we dive into the contemporary characteristics of social housing estates. The following part brings forth seven stories based on a selection of contemporary authors that engage in this field in various ways. We extract stories from the media, architects, urbanists, landscape architects and consultants of social housing. The perspectives of the authors differ and thereby an ambiguous and complex narrative emerges. We use the stories to describe the contemporary zeitgeist and language from which our forthcoming renewal will evolve. Furthermore, it points to linguistics that the language of landscape will both accommodate and differ from.

The stories are presented one by one.

First story: ”The modernist social housing estates is a product of the industrialized society” The first story we find essential for gaining a contemporary understanding draws upon Stephane Parize, a consultant of the social housing association KAB. Parize describes social housing estates as modernistic products of an efficient and industrialized society. In the podcast ‘Den Ekstra Indsats” (2021), Stephane Parize elaborates: ”[...] Le Corbusier states, they [The modernist social housing estates] are thought of as big, as practical and in a way that makes them easy to operate. So you end up with some big planes of concrete that are relatively easy to maintain, and you have big, tiled pathways and some big lawns [...] You come with a machine - all of this is the machine, it is the industry - you come “bruum”, and it takes what?

Maybe half an hour to get through this big courtyard with your lawnmower and then you can move on to the next chapter. But the problem with this frame of thought is that you do not create places that reflect those who dwell here. You create places that reflect that society should be extremely efficient.

All should be employed, you know. And people should be able to come here in the evening, when they are tired and finished working. Then they can sit here, and the grass has been mowed for them.

Everything has been made, everything is ready. They can just eat their dinner, go to bed and be ready for work the next day. [...]”6

Historical photo from Urbanplanen. In the 60ties the women started the job market, which greatly changed the wishes and needs of the ‘modern’ families of that time (Illustration 6)

25

Outline

Second story: Some social housing estates are parallel societies, also known as ghettos The second story draws upon statements from the media and the Danish parliament regarding the rhetorics of social housing estates.

“The long road for Gellerupparken from being a ghetto to becoming a regular city district.

During the 2010s a gigantic sanitation of Denmark’s largest ghetto was launched. An investment of DKK 7-8 billion will make Gellerupparken a regular neighbourhood (H. H. Madsen and Pedersen 2019, 10)”7 This headline was brought in Århus Stiftstidende in 2019 and illustrates certain rhetorics that are commonly used today. The rhetorics culminated with the political strategy ‘Et Danmark uden parallelsamfund - Ingen ghettoer i 2030’ - or ‘the ghetto-plan’ as it is commonly referred to - by the Danish government (2018). Derived from this strategy, a majority of the Danish parliament decided on a set of regulations (The Danish government et al. 2018) as concrete initiatives against the so-called ‘parallel-societies’ and ‘disadvantaged housing areas’.

By repeatedly finding words like ‘ghetto’, ‘disadvantaged’, ‘sanitation’, ‘unsafe’ while researching social housing estates we find these terms broadly accepted as common speech. It adds to a negative narrative of social housing estates as being socially and physically problematic.

26

Outline

The ’golden gate’ of Gellerupparken is a symbol of the major transformation the estate is currently undergoing.

Third story: There is a boom of renovations and transformations of social housing estates Social housing estates that have been listed on the ghetto list for four years is ordered to make a plan for development “[...] that demonstrates a concrete way to reduce the amount of social housing for families in the estate to maximum 40 per cent”8 (The Danish government 2018, 13) The ghetto-list has fostered many development plans for ‘disadvantaged’ housing estates.

Several estates are undergoing development (e.g. Nøjsomhed in Helsingør) or are planned to undergo development (e.g. Gadehavegård in Taastrup or Brøndby Strand Parkerne in Brøndby Strand). These plans will be unfolded in chapter 2.

Niels Bjørn is a consultant on transformation and renovation projects regarding disadvantaged social housing estates. When interviewing Niels Bjørn on the 5th of March 2021 we asked him: ”What do you experience as the biggest difference in the approach from the 90ties to the boom of renovations today?”9. He gave us the following answer: “[...] new types of renovations have emerged [...] where you address the structure of the city and how the estate is connected to the surrounding city. [...] The newer renovations represent what I would call the new generation of transformations because they are more transformations than renovations right?

Because here you address the estates with a structural approach. And that I am really glad to see and I think that there should just be more of them because they are a proper trajectory. Exactly then can we incorporate the estates in the future”10 (Bjørn 2021)

27

Outline

Fourth story: The social housing estate is structured as an isolated ‘island’ The fourth story draws upon professor in architecture Claus Bech-Danielsen regarding the structural and aesthetic appearance of social housing estates. In one of his many books regarding renovations of the post-war social housing estates Bech-Danielsen (2011, 18) points to “[...] a problem that has been called attention to repeatedly in the recent years”11. He argues that many estates appear as enclosed entities and how this isolated appearance is the result of the aesthetic and structural dissimilarities. The manufactured materials of ‘Montage-cirkulæret’ such as concrete, give the estates a characteristic aesthetic appearance, and therefore it does not ‘blend in’ with the surroundings. The characteristic open buildings of the estates are well-defined by outer boundaries (for example plantings of parking lots) and this structural appearance furthermore enhances the isolation.

Fifth story: The large scales of industrial housing affect the sensory experience and thereby the liveliness and social interaction The fifth story draws upon ‘Funktion følger form’ by Kristian Skovbakke Villadsen and Louise Kielgast (2008) from Gehl Architects regarding the morphology and social interaction of social housing estates.

Villadsen and Kielgast argue that estates do not encourage liveliness and social interaction due to a lack of sensory experiences. When an estate is sensed as a ‘good place to be’ it invites for staying and thereby the potential for social interaction and liveliness is enhanced. Villadsen and Kielgast (2008, 44–45) argue that the large scale of the estate has a negative influence on lived life. The sensory experience is strengthened when something is experienced at close range. “The closer we get to a thing or a person, the more personal and intimate is the experience [...] this relates to the fact, the smaller the distance becomes, the more senses can be used”12 (Villadsen and Kielgast 2008, 45).

Historical aerial photo of Urbanplanen. When the estate was built east of central Copenhagen, it was surrounded by fields and smaller residential areas 28

(Illustration 7)

Outline

Sixth story: A lack of zoning affect the feeling of ownership and community The sixth story draws upon the earlier mentioned interview with Niels Bjørn regarding ‘zoning’ of social housing estates. Bjørn pointed at a ‘lack of zoning’ as one of the major issues since it relates to the dwellers’ feeling of ownership and community. Bjørn (2021) elaborates: ”[...] in many of the estates that I have analyzed, it quickly appeared how most outdoor space has the same niveau or character. It is for everyone but often ends up being for no one, right? So the point of allocating some outdoor space for someone, instead of everyone [...] that, I think, is incredibly important”13 In collaboration with Copenhagen Municipality, Bjørn developed the publication ‘Trygt og skønt boligområde - et dialogredskab’ (2014), which is a design guide for social sustainability.

The design guide argues that when the outdoor space of a housing estate is experienced as open and public, it becomes hard for the dwellers to differentiate who belongs to the estate or who is a stranger. To meet this challenge, the following principles are put forward: “Establishing semi-private zones near the entrances provide the possibility of adding a range of functions that relates to everyday life e.g. outdoor drying racks and tables and benches. Semi-public zones can facilitate different functions from sports and playgrounds. Are the functions established at a close range, a social synergy can appear, because it becomes an attraction in its own that other humans are present”14 (‘Trygt og skønt boligområde - dialogredskab 2014’ 2014, 10) From the term ‘zoning’ we extract several themes. First, it regards the spatial organization and thereby the form and structure of the estate’s public space. Secondly, it regards the distribution of functions that hold different socio-cultural practices such as playgrounds or sports.

Seventh story: There is a lack of knowledge and lack of research regarding Welfare Landscapes The last story takes place within the academic circles, where primary research about the open spaces of post-war housing estates in Denmark was carried out by the research project ‘Welland- Reconfiguring Welfare Landscapes’. The research project aimed at exploring “[...] new ways to revisit the open spaces of social housing estates in their own right, with their own histories and as part of a larger urban landscape. By doing so, we aim to understand what ideas about well-being and welfare these welfare landscapes materialise, and how they change over time together with changing conceptions, ideas and uses” (Braae 2018).

The research group developed and investigated new methods of spatial readings of the landscapes to understand how ideas of welfare and well-being are materialized.

29

Outline

From understanding to interpretation Now we have explored the initial historical visions and the contemporary characteristics of social housing. It has materialized in a kaleidoscopical outline pointing to different historical references and contemporary discourses whereof many are underlined by a quote from a prominent storyteller. The goal is to perceive welfare landscapes through the perspectives brought by its storytellers and authors.

Danish welfare landscapes have been subject to different uses, critiques, and affiliations through time. Regardless of historical time and place, Danish welfare landscapes prove as the hinge between people and place as they reflect visions of ‘the good life’ and are subject to change accordingly.

Collecting these perspectives has been necessary for our understanding of the language of Danish welfare landscapes. From these perspectives, we can indicate specific terms that we find either lacking, inadequate or fulfilling. To propose a renewed and nuanced language we must know from which substance this language can evolve.

First, the Anthropocene is accentuated as a premise for our time which must be addressed using new terms. Secondly, the main principles and visions of industrial housing illustrated the historical chronology from modernist urban planning to the ‘welfare landscapes’ as we may read them today. Lastly, seven stories show how different views and discourses of social housing estates can be characterized.

Standing on this knowledge, we bridge from the theoretical studies to conclude on some shared and general themes that will be the basis of the next chapter ‘The stories of six Danish welfare landscapes’.

•

We noticed a theme regarding recreational landscapes and a connection thereto. Social housing estates were placed along the green ‘fingers’ in the suburbs and were intentionally planned to entwine with the public green open space.

•

We noticed a theme regarding ‘morphology’ since social housing estates were based on prevalent ideas of ‘the good life’ that could be recognized in the physical structures of the landscapes.

•

We noticed a theme regarding ‘community’ since social housing estates were based upon a universal welfare for all citizens. Furthermore, social housing estates should accommodate the ‘good life’ and therefore they were settled near public institutions, infrastructure and recreational areas.

All together this is the point of departure when we move on and engage in our own dialogues and interpret our own stories. By doing so we aim to gain an even deeper understanding of Danish welfare landscapes in the next chapter.

31

Chapter 2: The stories of six Danish Welfare Landscapes Investigating and interpreting dialogues “For more than thirty years the Swedish landscape architect Sven-Ingvar Andersson has engaged in dialogues with his garden. He described how four privet shrubs, leftover after planting the hedges of his garden, were set in a serendipitous group, and then a few years later ‘developed a sudden desire to become long-necked birds’. “We helped them,” he said, “with pruning and clipping”. His garden is full of dialogues - a single rose stem ‘decides’ to grow through the privet hedge and blooms alone against clipped green” (Spirn 1998, 15).

The above is a story of Sven-Ingvar Andersson and his garden, as told by Anne Spirn in ‘Language of Landscape’. Spirn describes an ongoing interaction between Andersson and the shrubs of his garden. When she tells the story, she gives the garden life and a voice of its own that communicates with Andersson. And it is exactly in this interaction that an actual dialogue happens.

When we enter the place we engage in dialogues. This is the interaction between us, as people, and the place. The dialogue is what happens when we explore the landscape of an estate. It happens when we orientate through the path systems of Brøndby Strand Parkerne, feel the steepness of the terrain in Nøjsomhed and experience the linear streets penetrating Vejleåparken. It is in this interaction with the place that we read our stories.

The stories are what we interpret from our dialogues, the ongoing interaction with the place.

As an example, we experienced a poor orientation when walking through the path system of Brøndby Strand Parkerne. The deeper we engage in the dialogues, the better we become at elaborating the signs of the landscape to read “meanings in to tell stories” (Spirn 1998, 32) Stories can be interpreted in many ways according to who interprets them. As Spirn writes: ” Landscapes are loud with dialogues, with storylines that connect a place and its dwellers.” (Spirn 1998, 17). To help us navigate through dialogues we use the theoretical framework of the epistemes and our knowledge gained from the previous chapter. This works as a guiding tool to help identify the meaningful stories regarding this thesis.

“Never do all people have the same response or read identical stories in the same landscape through the lens of the same metaphor, and few recognize the picture whole [...] Whether landscape is habitat, nature, system, artifact, historical record, ideology, wealth, site, or scenery depends on one’s perspective, as visitor, resident, actor or student” (Spirn 1998, 36).

33

Figure of ’Welfare indicator’

34

Method of investigation The following analysis of six social housing estates is the outcome of case-based studies where we have investigated ten different estates. We have engaged in one site visit per estate and supplemented by maps, pictures and researching literature and info-search on the internet.

The site visits were carried out from February to March 2021. We have only experienced the sites at one specific time a day and a year, and we have not conducted interviews with the dwellers. Thus, we are aware that a risk of bias could be argued here.

To organize the stories and extract the meaningful ones we use three themes for organizing the analysis: landscape connections and typologies, morphology, and community. The themes are investigated in three scales: city, district, and quarter.

The general themes which we extracted from chapter 1, are supported by the following theories and knowledge. We have attained basic knowledge about ecology in our practice as landscape architects. This is the base for the first theme, landscape connections and typologies. For the remaining two themes we use two epistemes of landscape architecture as our framework. The first episteme is ‘morphology’ which is defined as “The study of form and structure” (Riesto, Braae, and Avermaete 2020, 4). The second episteme ‘praxeology’ has informed the third theme ’community’. Praxeology regards ”the study of human action and conduct”(Riesto, Braae, and Avermaete 2020, 7), and allows us to see how the landscape is ‘practised’ by different types of communities.

The dialogues which stem from the case-based studies and the themes mutually interact and influence each other while continuously working with them.

Welfare indicator To sum up, the most fundamental stories we have read, we introduce the ‘Welfare Indicator’.

This model serves as a graphical representation that shows to which degree these stories are present within every estate across all themes and in all scales. The headlines of the ‘Welfare Indicator’ are therefore derived directly from the analysis. The model is not used as an estimation of the stories as ‘good’ or ‘bad’. We solely use the ‘Welfare Indicator’ to illustrate the present degree of a story, and thereby obtain a representation of the ‘welfare-level’.

The 10 sites of the case-based studies.

35

Figure of ’Themes of analysis’

36

Themes of analysis First, we look at the estate in city scale to see the larger context. In the scale of the city we map the estate’s connection to larger green and blue landscapes such as forests, meadows, creeks, lakes and wetlands. The green and blues landscapes themselves serve a recreational purpose and therefore constitute a welfare good. In this scale, we also map how the estate is connected to the urban landscape by showing the main infrastructural arteries. Here we map how the estate is situated in relation to the city. As the infrastructural arteries bind the estates together with a larger urban network it constitutes a welfare good.

The three key themes of analysis This is illustrated in figure on the opposite page, where the three themes are shown.

We investigate stories regarding the theme ‘Landscape connections and typologies‘. In general, this concerns the connection and relation between the estate and the green and blue landscape. We investigate how the typologies constitute the welfare landscape, how the types of each typology can indicate a level of diversity and connectivity.

•

•

District scale (green and blue typologies): We map green and blue typologies such as forest, thickets, green planes, and lakes and creeks to show the distribution of these typologies and the amount of each. We address the relation between the built and the typologies and how these may intertwine.

Quarter scale (types of green and blue): We zoom in and map the different types of green and blue elements such as trees, plantings, grass, tall grass, hedges, and site-specific biotopes. This shows the distribution of types and the amount of each. In this scale, we see the composition and combination of green and blue types.

We investigate stories regarding the theme ‘Morphology’.

In general, this concerns how the estate is defined and experienced as its own unit and how it relates to the surroundings.

•

District scale (district structures): We map the building forms, voluminous elements, and the net of larger roads. This shows the structures within the district and how the estate is defined. Within the estate, it shows how the forms are situated in relation to each other and thereby the spaces in between. The net of roads are boundaries and the axes that underline the structures. In this scale, we see the combination of structures and how they relate and differ.

•

Quarter scale (spatial composition): We map voluminous boundaries under- and above eye level, linear vertical boundaries, trees and terrain. In general, this demonstrates how space is defined and to which degree. This shows how spaces within an estate can differ in shape, size, and expression of form. In this scale, we see the spatial composition and combination of forms.

We investigate stories regarding the theme ‘community’.

In general, this concerns how welfare goods and their ‘consumers’, the dwellers of the estate, use the functions and facilities of these goods.

•

District scale (welfare institutions and consumption): We map municipal institutions and buildings, shopping and groceries, other essential functions, industry, café, and doctors. In general, this demonstrates how certain buildings within the district are planned to constitute ‘the good life’. It shows the internal and external distribution of welfare facilities and the different types of offers and the distance thereto.

•

Quarter scale (programmed and unprogrammed encounters): We map open fields, parking, sports fields, gardening, benches and tables, playgrounds, and areas of encounters - such encounters are related to programmed functions. It shows the distribution and offers of socio-cultural functions. In this scale, we see the relation between the programmed and unprogrammed and the size of potential areas of encounters.

37

38

39

Name: Brøndby Strand Parkerne Municipality: Brøndby municipality Housing organizations: Danske Funktionærers Boligaktieselskab, Postfunktionærernes Andels-Boligforening, Brøndby Boligselskab, Tranemosegård Architect: Svend Høgsbo and Th. Dreyer Landscape architect: Morten Klint and Knud Lund-Sørensen Year of construction: 1969-1974 Number of rentals: 2.620 Number of residents: 7.000

Name: Gellerupplanen Municipality: Aarhus municipality Housing organization: Brabrand Boligforening Architect: K. Blach Peter Petersen and Mogens Harbo Landscape architect: Jørn Palle Schmidt Year of construction: 1967-1972 Number of rentals: 2.256 Number of residents: 5.084

Name: Vejleåparken Municipality: Ishøj municipality Housing organizations: AAB and DOMEA Architect: KBI and Tormod Olesens Architects Landscape architect: Ole Nørgård Year of construction: 1970-1973 Number of rentals: 1.711 Number of residents: 5.110

40

Name: Gadehavegård Municipality: Høje-Taastrup municipality Housing organizations: DFB/ DOMEA afd. 93 143 Architect: Palle Nørholm Landscape architect: Frank Pettersons Tegnestue A/S Year of construction: 1977 Number of rentals: 986 Number of residents: 2.133

Name: Egedalsvænge Municipality: Fredensborg municipality Housing organizations: Københavns Almene Boligselskab Architect: Hoff and Windinge Landscape architect: Andreas Bruun Year of construction: 1972-1973 Number of rentals: 663 Number of residents: Unknown

Name: Nøjsomhed Municipality: Helsingør municipality Housing organization: Boliggården Architects: Poul Ipsen Landscape architect: Eywin Langkilde Year of construction: 1972- 1964 -1972 Number of rentals today: 464 Number of residents: approx. 1000

41

Orthophoto of Brøndby Strand 1:20000

Brøndby Strand Parkerne Introduction Brøndby Strand Parkerne is one of the largest social housing estates in Denmark and is a part of Køge Bugt planen. It consists of three types of buildings: 16 storey high-rise blocks, 4 storey blocks and row houses. The estate is planned as a district consisting of four quarters each connected to three high-rise blocks. The quarters were initially planned with centre buildings, shops, institutions and common facilities (fig. 1.3.) (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017a, 146). The four-storey blocks are organized as a U-shape that surrounds a common courtyard.

Together this forms the largest part of the estate. The 16 storey high-rise blocks are known as iconic buildings and can be spotted from a far distance (Pedersen 2005, 87).

In 2018 it was decided that 5 out of 12 high-rise blocks are to be demolished because the blocks are polluted. The demolishing will start in spring 2021 and continue until 2023 (Brøndby Strand n.d.).

The social composition This information draws upon ‘Boligområder i Bevægelse’ from 2017. The publication informs that Brøndby Strand Parkerne is characterized by a high cultural diversity and a large number of young people and children. There are more than 60 nationalities represented whereas 59% of the dwellers have another ethnicity than Danish. Furthermore, the publication informs that more than four out of ten dwellers are below 29 years old (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017a, 146).

GrønBy Strand GrønBy Strand is a master plan developed for Brøndby Strand Parkerne in 2014 by Team DOMUS architects, and it consists of the three strategic interventions. The first is to strengthen the four quarters, secondly to reshape Esplandadeparken and incorporate solutions for rainwater and biodiversity, and thirdly a new path system that connects the Brøndby Strand Parkerne west to east (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017a, 148–49).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

43

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

44

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

45

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Green connections (fig. 1.1, 1-20000)

46

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Urban connections (fig. 1.2, 1-20000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

47

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Division of the estates. Brøndby Strand Parkerne is divided in four quarters each consisting of four courtyards. (fig. 1.3).

48

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Connection to green and blue landscapes and urban landscape Brøndby Strand Parkerne is in proximity to two recreational large green and blue landscapes which are Brøndby Strandpark and the stretch of Fæstningskanalen which is further connected to Brøndbyskoven (fig. 1.1). Brøndby Strand Parkerne is in close proximity to infrastructural arteries since the estate is surrounded by larger highways to the east and north (fig. 1.2).

District scale From above Brøndby Strandparkerne appears as an oblong stretch of green typologies, in which the built and green are intertwined. To the south Esplanadeparken lies parallel to Brøndby Strand Parkerne. There are no blue typologies at district level (fig. 1.4 ).

The building forms of Brøndby Strand Parkerne create an open structure of a two-kilometre oblong square, and along with this, groups of three vertical high-rise buildings are regularly distributed. The estate is oriented south towards Esplanadeparken, which is underlined by the building forms and the terrain (fig. 1.5; fig. 1.7). Reversed from the southern orientation is an axis from east to west, and this axis is underlined by Esplanadeparken and Mæglergårdsstien (fig. 1.5). Brøndby Strand Parkerne consists of four quarters which subdivides the large structure of the estate (fig. 1.3). Concerning this subdivision, there are two spatial categories defined as the courtyard and the wedges. The wedges are the link that connects Brøndby Strand Parkerne to Esplanadeparken. These wedges are furthermore the pathways where soft traffic, among these pedestrians and bikes, can flow. (fig. 1.3; fig. 1.5).

Many welfare institutions are regularly distributed in buildings of the estate, in a fair distance within each quarter (fig. 1.6). The wide range of different types of welfare facilities address dwellers from young kids to the elderly, e.g. kindergartens and nurseries, a cultural house, local café and bars and a church.

Model of one of the four quarters in Brøndby Strand. It shows how the three high rise blocks stand out as the centerpiece of the quarters. The model is digitized by Danmarks Kunstbiblioteket in Søborg (Høgsbro and Dreyer n.d.) (Illustration 8)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

49

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Green and blue typologies (fig. 1.4, 1-6000).

50

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

51

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

District structure (fig. 1.5, 1-6000)

52

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

53

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Welfare institutions and consumption (fig. 1.6 1-6000)

54

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

55

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Types of green and blue (fig. 1.7, 1-2000)

56

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Quarter scale Each quarter of Brøndby Strand Parkerne consists of three high-rise buildings, four U-shaped 4-storey blocks, a courtyard, an institution and a traffic system with internal roads and parking (fig. 1.3).

The landscape of Brøndby Strand Parkerne has different types of green elements, and the dominating type is cut grass. The planes of cut grass function as both the ‘floor’ of the courtyards and as verges along the wedges. On this ‘floor’ stands thickets and plantings of shrubs. Cut grass is the primary green element of Esplanadeparken. The park also consists of other large green elements such as trees linearly placed in a grove and plantings of thickets that stretch along the southern slope (fig. 1.7). There are no blue types at quarter level.

In Brøndby Strand Parkerne pedestrians and cars are separated. The hard traffic such as roads and parking are planned at a level lower than the soft traffic, and therefore influences the spatial composition. The voluminous boundaries of the buildings are structured in a large ‘U’ defining the courtyards. The staggering facade of the buildings is supplemented by the forms of the landscape types, and together this gives Brøndby Strand Parkerne a vibrant appearance (fig. 1.9). The quarters can be accessed internally from west to east. By doing so you need to go across, between, behind and in front of the buildings (fig. 1.9). The many bends that the movement along the buildings creates, is experienced labyrinthine.

Several programmed encounters are placed within the intimate setting of the courtyards such as benches and tables, and along with the wedges sports fields are situated (fig. 1.10; fig. 1.11).

These are seldom combined and therefore many small areas of potential encounters are seen (fig. 1.10). Furthermore, the unprogrammed encounters can serve different socio-cultural functions e.g. the large areas of open fields which can be utilized for sports, social gatherings or for relaxing.

The levels of infrastructure. Large parking areas are situated underground. A steep terrain going from the road Strandesplanaden to Esplanadeparken underlines the height of the blocks (fig. 1.8, 1-800).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

57

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Spatial composition (fig. 1.9, 1-2000)

58

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Programmed and unprogrammed encounters (fig. 1.10, 1-2000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

59

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

60

Analysis, Brøndby Strand Parkerne

Essential findings Brøndby Strand Parkerne is in proximity to larger green and blue and recreational landscapes. When it is seen in combination with the parallel park, Esplanadeparken, it constitutes the district’s main green figure. The variation of green typologies are moderate but the larger patches of typologies consist primarily of monocultural lawn.

Brøndby Strand Parkerne is an open structure of large building forms organized in four quarters and well-defined by outer boundaries. The replicated quarters are similar, but the staggering facade and the forms of the landscape create a vibrant appearance.

Brøndby Strand Parkerne is placed near the infrastructural arteries of the highway and the train station. Many buildings of welfare facilities such as kindergartens, shopping, community houses are distributed within the estate. There is a relatively high amount of programmed and unprogrammed encounters, but they are precisely placed in separate spots and therefore the size of the areas of potential encounters is low.

Courtyards and wedges (fig. 1.11 below, 1-500)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

61

Orthophoto of Gellerupplanen 1:10000

Gellerupplanen Introduction Gellerupplanen is situated in Brabrand, a district west of central Aarhus. It consists of the housing estates Gellerup and Toveshøj. The estates were constructed from 1967 to 1972, and Gellerupplanen is one of the largest industrialized housing estates in Denmark - a well-known example of modernist city planning (Brabrand Boligforening 2018). The estate is characterized by tall north-southern building blocks, where the tallest blocks are 8 storeys high and the remaining blocks 4 storeys. At the centre of the estate is a large green area (Pedersen 2005, 79).

The social composition This information draws upon ‘Boligområder i Bevægelse’ from 2017. The publication informs that there is a large number of children and young people in Gellerup since 40% of the dwellers were under 18. Furthermore, the estate is characterized by a high cultural diversity since 8 out of 10 has another origin than non-western (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017a, 156).

Renovations ‘Fremtidens Gellerup’ is a master plan by Brabrand Boligforening and a result of Gellerupplanen being a part of the Ghetto List since 2018 (The Danish government 2018, 12). In the master plan, Brabrand Boligforening (2018) put forward some ‘recommendations’ to create a social and cultural balance. The master plan is carried out in a collaboration between Brabrand housing association and Aarhus municipality (Helhedsplan Gellerup og Toveshøj 2018).

Recently Gellerupplanen has undergone major infrastructural changes, since the master plan aims to connect the estate to its surroundings by creating better accessibility for cars and public transportation (Helhedsplan Gellerup og Toveshøj 2018).

Gellerup Bypark Gellerup Bypark is a part of the master plan that has been realized. It was finished in 2019 designed by SLA (SLA 2014). The park has received international recognition and is nominated for the European Union Prize for Contemporary Architecture, the Mies van der Rohe prize (Fundació Mies van der Rohe 2021). Due to the publicity of the park, it has the potential to become a destination in Aarhus.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

63

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

64

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

65

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Green connections (fig. 2.1, 1-20000)

66

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Green connections (fig. 2.2, 1-20000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

67

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Green and blue typologies (fig. 2.3, 1-10000)

68

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Connections to the green and blue landscapes and the urban landscape Gellerupplanen is in proximity to large recreational green landscapes, which are Brabrand Sø to the north and Hasle Bakker to the south. Hasle Bakker is further connected to Skjoldhøjskilen which is situated west of Aarhus (fig. 2.1). Gellerupplanen is a part of the dense city, and south of the estate is the road Silkeborgvej which leads directly to the heart of the city (fig. 2.2).

District Gellerupparken functions as a district within Aarhus.

Gellerupplanen appears as a massive green district in which the built and green are intertwined. The central green figure is ‘Gellerup Bypark’, which consists of various green and blue typologies. The green figure is furthermore extended to Hasle Bakker (fig. 2.3).

Gellerupplanen creates a large open structure in the otherwise dense urban structure. The forms of the large building are oblong squares that are orientated north to south which maximize the influx of sunlight. The building blocks are 8 storey-high and the tall figures rise from the district’s landscape. The net of roads in the estate divide the district into quarters, and Karen Blixen’s Boulevard is an axis from south to north that penetrates the estate. The path system within Gellerup Bypark is a structure of twining forms that have a similar appearance to the path system in Hasle Bakker (fig. 2.4).

Many welfare institutions are distributed in buildings within the Gellerupplanen as well as in proximity to the estate. Furthermore are two large shopping centres, City Vest and Bazar Vest, situated north and south of the estate (fig. 2.5). There are different types of institutions within estates, and thereby addressing different dwellers across culture, age etc.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

69

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

District structure (fig. 2.4, 1-10000)

70

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Welfare institutions and consumption (fig. 2.5, 1-10000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

71

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Types of green and blue (fig. 2.6, 1-3500).

72

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Quarter The district of Gellerupplanen consist of several quarters and the following description focuses on the quarter connected to Gellerup Bypark.

The landscape consists of different types of green and blue elements, and the dominating type is tall grass, whereas the largest part is found in Gellerup Bypark. The meadow of Gellerup Bypark underlines the contrast between the types of green in the park and the courtyard.

The courtyard is characterised by cut grass, cut hedges and tall trees and Gellerup Bypark is, apart from the tall grass, characterized by larger groups of plantings in combination with trees. Furthermore lakes and creeks are part of the landscape of Gellerup Bypark, and thereby adding on types of blue elements (fig. 2.6).

The contrast between the types of green is also clear when comparing the structure of the courtyards to Gellerup Bypark. The courtyards are defined as the spaces between two parallel blocks, and the precise form is furthermore represented in the linear and vertical structure of hedges within the courtyards. The park is characterized by a structure of twining paths and voluminous plantings under eye level almost floating within the park (fig. 2.8). The floating forms of Gellerup Bypark and linear forms of the courtyards are both organized in clusters, and from this different morphological principles can be seen (fig. 2.7). The terrain in Gellerup Bypark is a distinct spatial figure with a clear highest point as the southern hills and a clear lowest point as the northern lake. This spatial figure is underlined by the twining path system and creates an almost flood delta atmosphere (fig. 2.8).

Both in Gellerup Bypark and the courtyards are programmed encounters. The programmed encounters are often combined in the park e.g. when a pavilion is situated next to a playground. In comparison, the programmed encounters of the courtyard are seldomly combined and thereby the areas of encounters are of small sizes. Socio-cultural functions such as sports fields are often situated near pathways which furthermore enhance the potential of encounters between the dwellers walking on the pathways and the dwellers practising sports (fig. 2.9). The landscape of Gellerup Bypark is in itself an unprogrammed encounter where as inviting meadow, the crossing path system and the attraction of the lake.

Morphology (fig. 2.7)

1. Clustering of organic forms

2. Clustering of geometric of

3. Clustering of organic and

4. Clustering of organic forms

linear hedges

geometric forms which are

created the terrain

embraced by trees 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

73

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Spatial composition (fig. 2.8, 1-3500).

74

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Programmed and unprogrammed encounters (fig. 2.9, 1-3500).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

75

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

76

Analysis, Gellerupplanen

Essential findings Gellerupplanen is connected to central Aarhus, and is meanwhile in proximity to the two large landscapes of Brabrand Sø and Hasle Bakker. Furthermore, Gellerup Bypark has a similar appearance to Hasle Bakker. Apart from these landscapes, Gellerupplanen is the main green figure in the urban context. The estate is a rich system of greens and blue typologies. In quarter-scale, there is a clear distinction between the types of green and blue elements when comparing the courtyards and the park.

This difference between types of green and blue elements are also detected when comparing the forms and shapes. The courtyards are characterized by large trees and precise linear hedges, and the forms of Gellerup Bypark have a floating appearance.

Many buildings of welfare facilities are situated within Gellerupparken such as kindergartens and nurseries, a library and a church.

There is a high amount of programmed and unprogrammed encounters in Gellerupplanen, and also a variety of socio-cultural functions such as sports fields, pavilions, and gardening. The size of potential encounters is high in Gellerup Bypark. This is both because socio-cultural functions are clustered, and also because these functions are situated near pathways.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

77

Orthophoto of Vejleåparken 1:10000

Vejleåparken Vejleåparken is a large social housing estate centrally placed in Ishøj along the Fingerplan stretch of Køge Bugt. It was built from 1970-1973 then by the name Ishøjplanen and it was landscape architect Ole Nørgård who drew the landscape. The estate consists of 54 building blocks of 4 storeys and is characterized by two long ‘wings’ of carrées running parallel, which shape three squared courtyards inwards. Back then, Ishøjplanen was the largest social housing estate in Denmark with more than 2000 leased apartments and it received a broad international recognition:

“The residential area was regarded as a prime example of its time, where large and independent units were the ideal, fulfilling daily needs of families with children” 15 (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017c, 120) Social composition This information draws upon ‘Boligområder i Bevægelse’ from 2017. This publication states that 40% of residents are between 30-64 years old and thereby the majority of the estate. It also states that residents of ethnic minorities form half of the total number of residents (BechDanielsen and Christensen 2017a, 121).

Renovations The estate has undergone a number of physical renovations and social housing initiatives since the 1980’ies. As Ishøjplanen the estate was highly acknowledged and awarded for its architectural quality but later on, as Vejleåparken, criticized for being too monotonous and unsafe. (Bech-Danielsen and Christensen 2017c, 120–23). Changing the name of the estate was a strategy toward changing the negative reputation. ’The largest renovation in Danish history’ as it was called, took place in 2004-2007. The aim was to break down the impression of the large scales by creating smaller units of blocks and outdoor space, add variation to the facades and generally improve the housing quality (Beckmann and Lindhardt 2018).

The estate was divided into eight neighbourhoods, each with its own visual identity. Today this is seen as various materials, colors and patterns decorate the facades and give a site specific appearance to the neighbourhoods. Artist Bjørn Nørgaard took part in the artistic renovations and landscape architect Charlotte Skibsted redesigned the street spaces that were originally intended as urban pedestrian streets, and transformed them into green spaces (Beckmann and Lindhardt 2018).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

79

Analysis, Vejleåparken

80

Analysis, Vejleåparken

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

81

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Green connections (fig. 3.1, 1-20000)

82

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Urban connections (fig. 3.2, 1-20000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

83

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Green and blue typologies (fig. 3.3, 1-8000)

84

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Connections to the green and blue landscapes and the urban landscape Vejleåparken lies in close proximity to the large green landscapes of Store Vejleå and the recreational landscape of Lille Vejleå. Here the creek Baldersbæk runs through the green landscape and the wetlands, and flows into the lake Lille Vejlesø. Further to the east is the stretch of Køge Bugt Strandpark and Øresund (fig. 3.1). Vejleåparken is in close proximity to infrastructural arteries and the estate is situated along central railways and close to the highway (fig. 3.2).

District From above Vejleåparken is seen as an elongated figure where the green southern landscape intertwines with the estate and forms the green ‘floor’ of the three courtyards. There are no blue elements within the estate at district level (fig. 3.3).

The building forms create long parallel axes in between the carrée-wings and shorter axes in between. The buildings are evenly placed along these axes, and thereby creating the central and open spaces of the courtyards. Within these courtyards minor buildings lie central and are connected by the axis cutting through the estate from south to north. The building structures lie continuously as an elongated form and opens up towards Ishøj Bycenter. Most parking is placed at the periphery (fig. 3.4).

Within every courtyard welfare facilities are close by, such as groceries and a number of daycare institutions and kindergartens. Also a municipal school is directly integrated in the southern end of Vejleåparken and at the northern part the estate is connected to Ishøj Bycenter. Ishøj Bycenter provides access to many shops, the police station, swimming hall, town hall, library and many more. In close proximity to the estate are also two churches that accommodate dwellers of different religions (fig. 3.5).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

85

Analysis, Vejleåparken

District structure (fig. 3.4, 1-8000)

86

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Welfare institutions and consumption (fig. 3.5, 1-8000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

87

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Types of green and blue (fig. 3.6, 1-2500).

88

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Quarter The landscape consists of different types of green elements, whereof the dominant types are large planes of cut grass within every courtyard. The green ‘floor’ stretches in between the carrées and is supplemented by a rich number of trees, thickets and other types of plantings.

Large thicket plantings that grow on the slopes are significant green elements in the southern courtyard. It is also significant that hedges or thickets embrace the welfare facilities within the open space. Hedges enclose all private front gardens within the estate and parallel to these are rows of trees placed (fig. 3.6).

In general the terrain of Vejleåparken varies and this creates a movement of going up, down and around and furthermore it forms niches (fig. 3.6.1). The terrain varies according to the shape and size - from large hills within the courtyards that provide a grand overview, to the smaller raised slopes along in between the karrées (fig. 3.7).

There are many programmed encounters placed in between the karrées and near the pedestrian streets. Many benches and tables are placed in combination with bike sheds and playgrounds often lie in connection to a pathway. This enhances the areas of potential encounters.

The unprogrammed encounters may serve different socio-cultural functions as the large open fields can be utilized for sports or social gatherings (fig. 3.8).

Terrain variations supports the movements of going up, down and around (fig. 3.6.1, 1-200).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

89

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Spatial composition (fig. 3.7, 1-2500).

90

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Programmed and unprogrammed encounters (fig. 3.8, 1-2500).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

91

Analysis, Vejleåparken

92

Analysis, Vejleåparken

Essential findings Vejleåparken lies central in Ishøj within close proximity to larger recreational landscapes and is almost directly connected to Lille Vejleå. The estate is centrally located in the urban landscape and well connected to the surrounding city.

In quarter scale the variation of green typologies is moderate, as there are many large thickets, plantings and trees placed along the carrées and in the courtyards. Though the largest typology is monocultural lawn.

The variation of green elements also emphasizes the spatial forms and structures, as seen in the courtyards where volumes of thickets create spatial niches. The buildings form a linear structure, which creates the pedestrian streets The large open courtyards become a counterpart to this elongated spatial configuration, and in general this gives a diverse spatial experience of the estate.

Vejleåparken consists of several welfare facilities that are distributed in the central courtyards and thereby attracts dwellers to move through and across the estate. There is a high amount of programmed and unprogrammed encounters. The majority of programmed encounters are situated along the pedestrian streets and the minor pathways, and thereby enlarges the areas of potential encounters.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

93

Orthophoto of Gadehavegård 1:8000

Gadehavegård Introduction Gadehavegård is located west of Copenhagen in Høje-Taastrup, and was built in 1977.

Gadehavegård consists of nineteen 4-storey blocks with 986 apartments and the blocks are distributed and placed with 90-degrees angles. The estate is subdivided in three sections named ‘Sylen’, ‘Øksen’ and ‘Murskeen’.

The apperance today Gadehavegård is a good example of the 60’ies and 70’ies ideal housing principles as the functionally divided city. Gadehavegård is placed in proximity to the train station, public institutions and business areas. Gadehavegård are industrialized concrete buildings in four stories with a homogenic look.

The three major characteristics: parking at the edge, pathway systems connecting the blocks and large green open spaces (mainly playgrounds) are very significant in this estate and gives a functionalistic impression. One block visually stands out today with significant colors and large windows pulled out towards the courtyards.

Renovations Gadehavegård was renovated in 2000, in 2014 and is facing yet another extensive redevelopment in 2022-2030 led by Arkitema Architects. The masterplan has the title “Mere Gade! Mere Have! Mere Gård!” and includes a new educational campus, new housing types, large green recreational areas and a new central pathway running through the estate. Arkitema envisions a future Gadehavegård as:

“ [...] an attractive residential area with a high degree of security, varied housing offerings, value-creating zoning of urban and landscape spaces, identity-bearing and experience-rich architecture, dissolution of the monofunctional city and radically changed infrastructure”16 (Arkitema 2020)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

95

Analysis, Gadehavegård

96

Analysis, Gadehavegård

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

97

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Green connections (fig. 4.1, 1-20000)

98

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Urban connections (fig. 4.2, 1-20000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

99

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Green and blue typologies (fig. 4.3, 1-8000)

100

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Connections to the green and blue landscapes and the urban landscape Gadehavegård is located south of a green and blue recreational landscape Hakkemosen, which is dominated by forests and wetlands. Generally there is a significant amount of agricultural fields towards the north-west (fig. 4.1). Gadehavegård is centrally located near infrastructural arteries such as a railway and the highway going east-west. Furthermore Gadehavegård lies right next to the social housing estaeTaastrupgaard (fig. 4.2).

District Gadehavegård is located within a district of Høje-Taastrup and is therefore seen in relation to its surrounding district. A large green figure the ‘floor ‘ underneath most of the estate. Towards north Roskildevej cuts off the estate from the forest and recreational area. The blue typologies are few and scattered in district scale (fig. 4.3).

In general the structure of the buildings is open towards the surroundings as the buildings are placed with 90 degrees angles. This creates a generic appareance as the forms are placed with the same distances, forming the same spaces in between (fig. 4.3.1) The rectangular building forms of Gadehavegård are also similar to the building forms of the surroundings. Large roads define clear outer boundaries towards north and east, and a pathway defines the southern boundary (fig. 4.4).

Several municipal institutions are located in proximity to the estate. Just opposite of the estate is a kindergarten and day care located, and nearby Gadehavegård School, the Technological Institute and Høje-Taastrup city hall (fig. 4.5).

Morphology (fig. 4.3.1)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

101

Analysis, Gadehavegård

District structure and form (fig. 4.4, 1-8000)

102

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Welfare institutions and consumption (fig. 4.5, 8000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

103

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Types of green and blue (fig. 4.6, 1-2500).

104

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Quarter The green types of Gadehavegård are thickets, large trees, hedges and cut grass, of which the cut grass constitutes the largest part. Tall trees and thickets are placed along the parking grounds and the outer edge of the estate. Generally many trees are scattered within the estate, some almost organized in shape of letters within the courtyards. All buildings have front yards fenced off by tall hedges (fig. 4.6), (fig. 4.6.1).

A larger street runs centrally from west to east within the estate and from this many minor pathways branches. The buildings are aligned with the pathways and this emphasises the axes going W/E and N/S. The terrain is mainly flat apart from the parking grounds, which are all lowered in terrain. One courtyard has significant hills, adding to a spatial variation and defining how the pathways run. (fig. 4.7).

In Gadehavegård the amount of programmed encounters are very high, and the majority consist of playgrounds, benches and tables and pergolas, primarily at the northern part of the estate. A large football ground lies in the southern part, and north of the parking ground a basket ball court is placed (fig. 4.8).

A typical image of types of green and its structure within the courtyards (fig. 4.6.1, 1-200).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

105

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Spatial composition (fig. 4.7, 1-2500).

106

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Programmed and unprogrammed encounters (fig. 4.8, 1-2500).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

107

Analysis, Gadehavegård

108

Analysis, Gadehavegård

Essential findings Gadehavegård lies near the recreational area of Hakkemosen, and the majority of surrounding green landscapes are agricultural fields.In quarter-scale the estate and the landscape is entwined as a ‘green carpet’ lying underneath the estate. The variation of green typologies is relatively low, dominated by trees, hedges and monocultural lawn. The trees are situated differently within each courtyard, some clustered and some placed on a row. Thereby the otherwise rather uniform courtyards differ from each other.

The estate consists of large building forms, which are angled 90 degreees. Thereby the overview within the estate becomes poor and the spaces between the buildings uniform. All in all the pattern of the estate is quite generic.

In district scale several institutions, a school and municipal facilities are close by. There are many programmed encounters distributed across the estate, these primarily being playgrounds and pergolas.

The potential areas of encounters are largest in the northern part of the estate compared to the courtyards.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

109

Orthophoto of Egedalsvænge 1:8000

Egedalsvænge Introduction Egedalsvænge is situated in Kokkedal, north of Copenhagen. It was built from 1972-1973 and the landscape was drawn by landscape architect Andreas Brunn. The estate consists of eighteen 4-storey blocks with 663 apartments that are orientated in a J-shape. Apart from housing, municipal institutions and businesses are integrated within the estate (Fællesadministrationen 3B 2010).

Renovation Egedalsvænge was renovated in 2021 by ADEPT, Rubow architects and Opland landscape architects. In the competition programme for the masterplan Fællesadministrationen 3B (Fællesadministrationen 3B 2010, 5) formulates the following vision “it [the masterplan] wishes to improve the standard of the apartments and attract dwellers from all social classes while improving the well-being and feeling of safety among the dwellers”17. To strengthen the dweller’s feeling of ownership, the process was characterized by a high degree of user involvement. The dwellers influenced e.g. the choice of plants or the design of the windows (Renoverprisen 2017; Opland Landskabsarkitekter n.d.). Opland Landskabsaritekter (n.d.) describe how the dwellers could influence planting outside each staircase by choosing between the three types of front yards: ‘nature’, ‘open and with dialogue’ and ‘private and calm’18. Thereby each staircase collaborated and marked their front yard.

“The vision for the renovation of Egedalsvænge was to provide room for both the community and the individial in relation to both buildings and outdoor space”19 (Opland Landskabsarkitekter n.d.).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

111

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

112

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

113

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Green connections (fig. 5.1, 1-20000)

114

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Urban connections (fig. 5.2, 1-20000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

115

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Green and blue typologies (fig. 5.3, 1-8000)

116

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Connection to the green and blue landscapes and urban landscapes Egedalsvænge is in close proximity to recreational green and blue landscapes, the east coast of Øresund and Usserød Å, which is connected to the large lake of Sjælsø further north (fig. 5.1).

Furthermore, the estate is situated centrally in Kokkedal, near other social housing estates. The largest, and nearest is Skovengen. Egedalsvænge is in proximity to infrastructural arteries since Helsingør highway runs west of the estate and Kokkedal station is a stop on the railway of Kystbanen (fig. 5.2).

District scale Egedalsvænge is situated within a district of Kokkedal and is therefore seen in relation to its surroundings.

To the north and the south Egedalsvænge is embraced by large green and blue typologies, and the estate becomes the link between the two. From the south and along the eastern side of the estate are the green and blue typologies of Usserød Å. Usserød Å is a recreational artery that runs through the district and from which the branch of Donse Å runs. Just south, tapping into the heart of Egedalsvænge is a forest, and through this forest, the estate is connected to the park associated with Egedal (fig. 5.3).

Egedalsvænge is an open structure with parallel forms which makes the estate structurally related to the social housing estate Skovengen. The building forms of Egedalsvænge creates a ‘J’ that embraces both an open field and the voluminous forest. The estate has clear outer boundaries that are defined by the net of roads and parking (fig. 5.5).

Egedalsvænge is a part of the district’s network of welfare facilities. The reason is that the estate has integrated municipal buildings while being situated in proximity to other welfare facilities. Integrated into Egedalsvænge is caretaking facilities for the elderly and a jobcentre.

In proximity to the estate is a range of different functions of welfare that address different dwellers of different ages such as a school, industry, a church and a sports centre (fig. 5.6).

Courtyard. By placing the playing equipment within the courtyard it connects to the daily life of the dwellers. When interconnected, meetings across interests and people can happen. (fig. 5.4, 1-300) 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

117

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

District structure (fig. 5.5, 1-8000)

118

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Welfare institutions and consumption (fig. 5.6 1-8000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

119

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Types of green and blue (fig. 5.7, 1-2000).

120

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Quarter scale The inner courtyard is situated between the two parallel J’s of buildings and is thereby the binding link. It is a pattern of trees, plantings, hedges and grass, and these types of green elements are evenly scattered in small patches (fig. 5.7). The dwellers were involved in the renovation and could influence the choice of plants, and therefore a wide range of different species is represented.

The form of the parallel J’s composes two different centres of the estate. This is both the inner plane of grass but also the gap between, also referred to as the courtyard. The inner plane of grass is an open field, surrounded by hedges that belong to the private gardens. The courtyard is spatially subdivided by the crossing pathways, which is supported by the voluminous plantings. Furthermore, the shape of these plantings creates small niches within the courtyard (fig. 5.7; fig. 5.8).

The plane of grass and courtyard each represent different programmed and unprogrammed encounters. At the open field, unprogrammed encounters can happen when utilized according to the dweller’s needs and interest. For example a gathering, a football match or for relaxing.

The courtyard facilitates programmed encounters such as petanque fields and playgrounds of different sizes. These functions are often combined in pairs when for example a bench and a table are situated near playgrounds, and this enhances the potential areas of encounters. In the outskirts of the estate the largest area of encounters is found (fig. 5.10).

Front- and courtyard (fig. 5.8)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

121

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Spatial composition (fig. 5.9, 1-2000).

122

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Programmed and unprogrammed encounter (fig. 5.10, 1-2000).

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

123

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

124

Analysis, Egedalsvænge

Essential findings Egedalsvænge is embraced by larger green and blue recreational landscapes. In itself, the estate is a green figure of a relatively high amount of different green typologies. In quarter-scale Egedalsvænge consists of many small patches of different types of green elements, and these types vary in species as the dwellers were involved in the selection.

The building forms are organized in two parallel J’s. Thereby the two different centres are constituted; the inner courtyard and the open field. The courtyard is a system of many spatial forms of voluminous plantings that are used to create small niches in the green centre.

Furthermore, the inner courtyard holds many programmed encounters that are evenly distributed. The encounters are different socio-cultural functions such as sports fields, petanque, bench and tables and playgrounds of different sizes. Thereby the functions address dwellers of different ages and interests. The size of potential encounters is high since functions often are paired, as an example when benches and tables are situated next to a playground.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

125

Orthophoto of Nøjsomhed 1:8000

Nøjsomhed Introduction Nøjsomhed is situated in Helsingør at the northeastern tip of Sjælland. It was built in 1964 and the landscape was drawn by landscape architect Eywin Langkilde. Nøjsomhed consists of 10 building blocks whereof three blocks are placed at a 90-degree angle to the remaining. The blocks vary in height from 3 to 8 storeys, and the tallest blocks are the ones facing south and situated farthest to the south. This is also the tallest point of the estate. Apart from housing Nøjsomhed consists of the youth house Tetriz, the kindergarten and nursery Globus and a community house (Vandkunsten 2019, 6).

Renovation Nøjsomhed is currently undergoing major renovations and transformations, and when we first visited the estate in February 2021 the metal plates were laid out for the machines to start digging. The outdoor renovations are based upon a master plan made in 2019 by Vandkunsten architects. Vandkunsten (2019, 3) envisions a future Nøjsomhed with new connections, an adaptation of the outdoor space and with new types of housing to provide a varied offer of housing and open up the estate. The future landscape plan is currently being designed by SLA landscape architects and the buildings by Mangor Nagel architects. The transformation of the estate should be finished in 2022 (Heim 2020).

“It is in the landscape that the estate’s immediate qualities are, the trees are large and are half-acentury old, there are many playgrounds, sport fields, community gardens and areas for barbeque.

The terrain is extraordinarily steep in a Danish context and the view from both the highest point and the large building blocks reach Øresund” 20 (Vandkunsten 2019, 6)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

127

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

128

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

129

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Green and blue connections (fig. 6.1, 1-20000)

130

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Urban connections (fig. 6.2, 1-20000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

131

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Green and blue typologies (fig. 6.3, 1-8000)

132

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Connection to the green and blue landscapes and urban landscapes Nøjsomhed is in proximity to recreational green and blue landscapes, these being the eastern coast of Øresund and Teglstrup Hegn which is a large wetland of creeks, lakes and bogs (fig.

6.1). Nøjsomhed is situated near the large road Kongevejen and further on to Helsingør Highway. The train station of Helsingør is the terminal station of Kystbanen (fig. 6.2).

Nøjsomhed is the second-largest social housing estate in Helsingør and is located just south of the largest one which is Vapnagård.

District scale Nøjsomhed is situated within a district of Helsingør and is therefore seen in relation to its surrounding district.

When looking at the green figure of Nøjsomhed it appears as the cross point between an eastwestern and a north-southern green figure. Thereby Nøjsomhed is embraced by blue and green typologies from all sides. Furthermore is the southwestern corner of the estate the end tip of Klostermoseskoven from which Teglstrup Hegn can be reached (fig. 6.3). The terrain of the district is hilly and the highest point in Helsingør is found in Vapnagård. Nøjsomhed is also placed on a steep north-southern slope (fig. 6.4).

The district is a pattern of various housing typologies since there are examples of structures of large and open forms, structures of small and open forms, and structures of small and dense forms. In this relation, Nøjsomhed consists of large, open, and linear forms. Two out of four boundaries of the estate are roads and the latter two are allotment gardens and Klostermoseskoven (fig. 6.5).

Several municipal institutions are integrated into Nøjsomhed, a youth house and a kindergarten. Nøjsomhed is within a fair distance from several other welfare facilities and among these are education for dwellers of different ages both primary schools and a college (fig. 6.6).

Terrain of Nøjsomhed (fig. 6.4, 1-1000) 1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

133

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

District structure (fig. 6.5, 1-8000)

134

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Welfare institutions and consumption (fig. 6.6 1-8000)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

135

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Types of green and blue (fig. 6.6, 1-2500).

136

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Quarter scale The green types of Nøjsomhed are cut grass, thickets, large trees and hedges, and among these cut grass constitute the greater part. Tall, solitary trees are scattered along the estate, primarily in relation to the blocks within the central part. The oblong patches of thickets on the slopes are relatively large and support the steep terrain. The southern corner of the estate is a large field of cut grass, where hedges of geometric shapes are laid out as sculptural objects near the blocks (fig. 6.6).

As mentioned, the terrain of Nøjsomhed is very steep and thereby a distinct spatial character.

The terrain is steepest at the foot of the tallest blocks, and this creates an almost mountainlike atmosphere. The blocks are laid out in a linear pattern where three out of ten blocks are angled 90 degrees to the remaining. The pathways are aligned with the linear buildings and in combination, this supports an east western axis in Nøjsomhed. Few pathways go from south to north because the steep terrain is a barrier to cross (fig. 6.8).

Many programmed encounters are scattered within the central Nøjsomhed. A large part of these is playgrounds and pavilions with benches and tables. In that regard, there is a low variation of the many socio-cultural functions. The encounters are often placed near an entrance to a staircase or in relation to a pathway which enhances the potential of encounters between dwellers (fig. 6.9).

Morphological observations (fig. 6.7, 1-500)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

137

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Spatial composition (fig. 6.8, 1-2500)

138

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Programmed and unprogrammed encounter (fig. 6.9, 1-2500)

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

139

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

140

Analysis, Nøjsomhed

Essential findings Nøjsomhed is the central point of crossing green and blue typologies, whereas the western stretch of Klostermoseskov is connected to Teglstrup Hegn outside of Helsingør. Since Klostermose skov constitutes the whole southwestern edge of the estate, Nøjsomhed is strongly connected thereto. Most of the green elements are either cut grass, thickets or tall, solitary trees.

The terrain is significant for Nøjsomhed as well as the surrounding district. Nøjsomhed consists of tall oblong blocks situated in a steep south northern slope and this combination manifests a feeling of being up or down - almost like experiencing a mountaintop. Due to the terrain, most pathways are along an east-west axis, since the steep slopes make it hard to cross from north to south.

The centre of Nøjsomhed is where most programmed encounters are distributed. These encounters can happen at the many pavilions or small playgrounds. Primary pathways from west to east go along and between these centrally placed encounters. Thereby making a large part of central Nøjsomhed potential areas of encounters.

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

141

1. Brøndby Strand Parkerne

4. Gadehavegård

2. Gellerupplanen

5. Egedalsvænge

3. Vejleåparken

6. Nøjsomhed

Comparative analysis Now, we have explored six social housing estates through a thematic analysis. It materializes in a broad presentation of stories organized in three themes and described in three scales. These findings have been presented both in text, sections, drawings, and diagrams. The goal is to gain a deep understanding of the estates by engaging in our own dialogues and interpreting our own stories. It enables us to provide notions across the estates, which we activate in our comparative analysis on the opposite side.

Engaging in dialogue and interpreting our own stories are necessary stepping stones in renewing the language of Danish welfare landscapes. These stepping stones make us able to indicate both general and case-based tendencies.

To propose a renewed and nuanced language, we must know which stories this language shall unfold and safe keep.

When we engage in dialogues, the same stories across different estates begin to evolve. The figure on the opposite side is a comparison of all case-based studies, and the assigned numbers represent comparable tendencies.

One of the most dominant tendencies we see across the estates is that welfare landscapes are strongly connected to and embraced by larger recreational landscapes (G.). This is a significant value for all estates. Furthermore, many of the estates constitute a large and strong green figure in the associated district. When we look closer at the variation of green and blue types, we see that it is fairly low, and often dominated by large patches of cut grass (C.). Potentially the diversity of these types of green and blue elements could be enhanced.

Secondly, we find welfare landscapes as open and welldefined structures, and many of these states are subdivided in repeated patterns of spatial forms of the same size (E.). This is primarily due to the large monumental buildings that take up a lot of space and determine the spatial structure of the estate. As a consequence we see a relatively low degree of spatial variations in shape, size and form (F.). A variation that potentially could be strengthened.

One of the most dominant tendencies is that welfare landscapes have a range of welfare facilities in close proximity - both in relation to institutions but also in the functions of the estate (I.). Welfare facilities are predominantly classic institutions such as schools, nurseries, kindergartens, or caretaking facilities and thereby addressing elderly people or families with young children. Considering the different types of welfare facilities, the amount of different types is significantly low compared to a large number of facilities ( J.). Even though the level of facilities is high, it addresses similar dwellers.

The analysis also shows a high amount of potential encounters within the estates, which are either programmed or unprogrammed (K.). Some estates have various programmed offers such as sports fields, gardening, playgrounds, and benches and tables. At other estates, these functions are predominantly benches and tables and playgrounds. But when we look at the size of encounters (L.), the general level is relatively low when compared to the amount of programmed and unprogrammed encounters. Therefore we detect a potential in the unprogrammed encounters, which are the encounters that can be associated with a function not necessarily intended for an encounter. An example could be the encounters that happen when a dweller on a path walks by children playing on a playground. Furthermore, it can be the encounters between dwellers parking their cars at the same time.

All together we can now extract the meaningful stories of our investigation and the comparative analysis and engage in the renewal.

143

” To [...] renew the language of landscape is to discover and imagine new metaphors, to tell new stories and to create new landscapes ” (Spirn 1998, 25)

Chapter 3: Renewing the language of Danish welfare landscapes Description of renewal In chapter 2 we have investigated and interpreted a range of stories to understand the prevalent language of Danish welfare landscapes. The renewal is formulated in order to process our findings in a design, and furthermore, it allows us to reinterpret the welfare landscapes of the Anthropocene.

We name it ‘the renewal’ because we wish to bring the language of Danish welfare landscapes up to date while keeping it deeply founded in our discoveries and interpretations.

The renewal consists of two parts. First is an extraction of three meaningful stories that we define as meaningful because they represent general features rooted in the comparative analysis and the case-based studies. From the comparative analysis, we extract the most distinctive features of the contemporary welfare landscapes. These features concern landscape connections and typologies, morphology and community, which we find crucial to integrate into the renewal of the language.

Secondly, we add on a new story to nuance the language. We find it necessary to engage a new story that considers welfare landscapes for humans and non-humans. The story we propose complements the three meaningful stories. This new story accommodates welfare in the Anthropocene by embracing Danish welfare landscapes as an interconnected environment.

It is our mission that both humans and non-humans are recognized as co-authors of the renewed language in order to bring it up to date.

145

Meaningful story 1 ” Danish welfare landscapes are part of larger landscapes while being a strong green figure consisting of various typologies ”

Elaboration The estate is connected to the open landscapes and is part of a larger system of green public spaces •

This clearly shows in Egedalsvænge as the estate is close to Usserød Å (fig. 5.1), and in Vejleåparken which is connected to Lille Vejleå (fig. 3.1).

The internal landscape is a strong green figure that unites the estate •

In Brøndby Strand Parkerne, the courtyards and green wedges intertwine with the built (fig. 1.4). Furthermore, in Gellerup the large Bypark is the green heart of the estate (fig. 2.3).

The estate consists of various types of green and blue elements •

146

A wide range of plant species are represented in the courtyard of Egedalsvænge (fig. 5.7), and in Gellerup Bypark this shows as plantings of various species floating in a large meadow near a lake (fig. 2.6).

Meaningful story 2 ” Danish welfare landscapes are open structures represented by spatial compositions that differ in form, size and shape ”

Elaboration The estate is a large open structure within the city •

The buildings of Nøjsomhed are laid out in parallel rows forming an open structure (fig. 6.5). In Vejleåparken the green open spaces are the centre of each carrée (fig. 3.4).

The morphology of the estate varies in form, size and shape, creating spatial variation within •

In Vejleåparken the pedestrian streets have a different hierarchy creating different spatial experiences (fig. 3.7). The courtyard of Egedalsvænge is spatially subdivided by the crossing pathways underlined by plantings of different shapes (fig. 5.9).

The estate is well-defined as a district or a quarter by its outer boundaries •

As an example the quarter of Nøjsomhed is defined by the northern parking lot, roads to south and east and the forest to the west. (fig. 6.8). The oblong district of Brøndby Strand Parkerne is defined by Esplanadeparken and the pathway of Mæglergårdsstien (fig. 1.5).

147

Meaningful story 3 ” Danish welfare landscapes consist of different communities supported by various welfare facilities which are associated with different daily doings and interests ”

Elaboration Welfare facilities are evenly distributed in the estate or within close proximity •

In Egedalsvænge municipal schools are placed next to the estate (fig. 5.6). In Vejleåparken multiple institutions and supermarkets are centrally located (fig. 3.5).

The outdoor spaces facilitate different functions - programmed and unprogrammed - which accommodate the interests of the dwellers •

In Brøndby Strand Parkerne sports fields, benches and tables, and petanque fields address dwellers of all ages (fig. 1.10). The sheds of Vejleåparken hold benches, tables and bike parking in combination (fig. 3.8).

The socio-cultural functions are clustered which enhance the encounters of the dwellers •

148

In Gellerup Bypark the pavilions are situated next to playgrounds (fig. 2.9). In Nøjsomhed the central pathway goes by playgrounds, and thereby enhances the encounters of different dwellers (fig. 6.9).

Meaningful story 4 (the new story) ” Danish welfare landscapes interconnect the natural and the built in meaningful and adaptive ways while providing welfare for all dwellers, humans and non-humans ”

This will be unfolded in the next chapter.

From renewal to reinterpretation Now, we have proposed a renewal of the stories of six social housing estates. The renewal is the essence of chapter 3 and our mission. It has materialized in four stories we believe are meaningful for the continuous adaptation of the language of Danish welfare landscapes.

The goal is to qualify our findings and to provide a base for new stories to evolve which are founded in a partnership between people and place.

To keep our renewal deeply founded in our case-based studies as well as in the historical and contemporary information, we had to reflect upon the essence of our findings. The renewal has enabled us to point at stories which we can reinterpret regarding our role as storytellers of Nøjsomhed.

When gaining a deep understanding of Danish welfare landscapes, we interpreted many stories linked to the general definition of welfare. This was interpreted in the connection between the estates and their associated recreational landscapes and welfare facilities. We interpret the forms of the open structures that provide air and free space as proud monuments of equality and welfare visions.

To truly embrace the partnership between people and place we reinterpret stories in which welfare is provided for all dwellers. From here we now engage in the reinterpretation of the welfare landscape Nøjsomhed.

151

154

Chapter 4: Designproposal for Nøjsomhed Vision for Nøjsomhed “ Nøjsomhed will interconnect the natural and the built in meaningful and adaptive ways while providing welfare for all dwellers ” A reinterpreted Nøjsomhed celebrates the partnership between people and place. The main concept is to strengthen and expand the green stem of the welfare landscape. Therefore the forest is pulled through the estate and creates a strong natural environment. This green stem is the manifestation of the interconnectedness between the built and the natural environment, and the encounter between all dwellers. The four meaningful stories are translated to concrete design concepts, and therefore the reinterpretation is deeply rooted in the language of Danish welfare landscapes.

A reinterpretation is an open process which is reflected in our design and can be further refined. It proposes a main concept accompanied by interventions and is the starting point for further elaboration. A further elaboration could unfold and explore interactions between people and place and investigate how the welfare facilities will be materialized.

155

N

Masterplan 1:1500

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

Main concept The forest is expanded into the estate and enhances Nøjsomhed’s connection to its natural surroundings. This is a diagonal stretch that connects the two large green areas to the west and to the east of the estate. The stretch is an evolving system of green and blue typologies, and is a counterpart to the otherwise linear and precise building blocks. The open structure of the estate is preserved as a common good but refined by spatial details in the plantings.

Diverse green and blue typologies and various welfare facilities make the welfare landscape of Nøjsomhed itself an area of potential encounters between people and place.

159

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

The diagonal green stretch •

The typologies of the forest are expanded into the estate

•

A southern lake, Langkilde Sø, accompanies the forest lake and adds wetland biotopes.

Potential encounters

160

•

New pathways and socio-cultural functions are established in the forest

•

Different programmed and unprogrammed functions are clustered

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

Connection to the district and arrival areas •

The main route, Fyrvej, is an east-western shortcut for pedestrians and bikes

•

Klostermose path is a recreational route that flows through the typologies.

•

These are all linked to the neighbourhood at four arrival areas

Pathway hierarchies •

A main route invites the district’s neighbours through the estate

•

From the forest, a pedestrian pathway splits into two and creates a connection to the north and south.

•

The entrances of the blocks will be accessed by internal linear pathways

•

A pathway of stepping stones runs long with the landscape-side of the buildings 161

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

Excisting pine trees Excisting pine trees

KLOSTERMOSE PATH

FYRVEJ

Dense planting of trees and scrubs

Climbing frame

NØJSOM PLADS

Urban gardens

Bench and table

Entrance

The central estate is characterized by a dense planting of various trees and scrubs. Within this planting, several spaces are established of different sizes and functions. Nøjsom Plads is the largest one, and it can be used accordingly, for example for larger gatherings or as a dance scene. The pathways are organized in three systems.

Near the entrances, small pathways make the apartments accessible for the dwellers. Central from east to west, Fyrvej lets cyclists and pedestrians through the estate. Klostermose path moves along the dense plantings in a diagonal route from southwest to northeast (section A, 1:300).

162

Parking

j

e rdv

No

Parking

Stairs

Parking

Urban gardens FYRVEJ Bench and tables

Bike parking

Bench and tables

Bike parking Swings

Entrance

Entrance

Urban gardens

Exit from ground floor

Sitting steps Stepping stones

KLOSTERMOSE PATH

Entrance

KLOSTERMOSE PAT

H

Poles inviting into the forest

Playground

Platform wih benches

Stepping stones

Shelter Hill top

Oak tree

Platform Big climbing treec

Playground

Tall grass in the forest

Cave in the forest

Story tree

Hidden pathway

Clearing in the forest

Playform w. benches

Climbing trees Forest pathway

Bank

Lake bank Wooden deck

Lake bank

Willow tree

N

Plan A 1:500 Edge of forest

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

BLOCK 6

Existing pine trees BLOCK 3

Community house

KLOSTERMOSE PATH

Terrace

Plantings of trees and schrubs

Pavilion

The steep terrain from south to north is made accessible by Klostermose path and smaller stairs, and leads the visitors to a top point at the community house. From the terrace, the view of Klostermose Forest can be enjoyed, as the green stretch is on display. As the stretch moves through the estate towards the top point it becomes less dense. At the top point, the existing pine trees step out of the plantings as large sculptural figures on a hillside. (section B, 1:300).

164

Entrance

ej

rdv

No

Bike parking Entrances

BLOCK 6 Parking

Exit from ground floor

Stepping stones Scrubs

Sitting steps Scrubs

Tall grass

Bench and tables

KL

TH E PA

MOS

ER OST

Sports ground

Entrances

NØJSOM PLADS

BLOCK 4 Cut grass

Bench and tables

OSE

PAT H

Sitting steps

Stepping stones

KLO

STE

RM

Scrubs

FYRVEJ

Bike parking

Swings

Urban gardens

Little playground

Pavilion

Bike parking

BLOCK 3

Sitting steps

Exit form ground floor Scrubs

Scrubs Scrubs

Stepping stones

Tall grass Front area, Globus and Tetriz

TETRIZ

BLOCK 9

Sitting steps

N

Stepping stones GLOBUS

Plan B 1:500 Nøjsom Plads

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

BLOCK 7

BLOCK 8

KLOSTERMOSE PATH

Small trees

Exit from ground floor Schrubs

Entrance

Bike parking

Parking

Sitting steps Swale

To collect rainwater from the parking lots and add a blue typology, a swale runs from the east-northern corner to Langkilde sø. It accompanies Klostermose path along with plantings of small trees and scrubs. The swale is a rich biotope of various plants, animals etc. that can be experienced and explored from the path and small bridges. From a few steps, the residents can access the landscapeside from their ground-floor apartments. Along this side, a small pathway of stepping stones makes these entrances accessible.

Plantings of shrubs are placed along this pathway and define small intimate niches near the buildings. (section C, 1:300).

166

Sitting steps Swale

Bridge

Bike parking

Stepping stones

BLOCK 8

Parking

Scrubs

Wetland

Stepping stones

Swale

Parking

BLOCK 7

Pavilion

OS

E

PA TH

Bridge

OS

TE

RM

Wetland

KL

Scrubs

Bench and tables Community house

Wood deck

Bench and tables

Bridge

Terrace

Wood deck

Stepping stones BLOCK 1

Stairs

Sitting steps

Langkilde lake

Willow tree

Wetland

Wetland Sitting steps

Pavilion

Stepping stones Bike parking

Bike parking Bulky refuse

BLOCK 2

N

Bench and tables

Plan C 1:500 Langkilde lake

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

Trees degenerating

Birds singing and catching insects

People listening to the birds

Insects eating the fruits of bushes

Girl looking for flowers

168

Blossoming trees

Children playing among trees Water infiltrating the soil

Couple wandering the pathways

Intrepreting Nøjsomhed

The partnership between people and place

Trees providing shadow

Flowers being pollinated

Insects humming

Man enjoying the water’s reflections

Roots absorbing water

Dog scratching the ground

Youg boy catching frogs

Ducklings learning how to swim

Bird looking for food

Algae among stones Plants cleansing the water

169

Outro Conclusion This thesis is the result of our curiosity and practice in the ‘language of landscapes’. Our project focus and statement raised the questions: How can the stories of Danish Welfare Landscapes be interpreted and give us a nuanced understanding of the language that allows for new stories to evolve?

This involved background research of the initial visions and the contemporary characteristics of social housing. From this, it was possible to perform a thematic and comparative analysis of six social housing estates. We conducted in-depth case-based studies of the estates and unfolded our insights in diagrams organized in three themes. The comparative analysis gave us a deep understanding of the estates, which became the offset of the renewal. The renewal is formulated in four meaningful stories, one of which we narrated. To translate the renewal to design, we initiated our interpretation of the welfare landscape Nøjsomhed. This outlined how the natural and the built can be interconnected in new ways while providing welfare for all dwellers. We articulated a main concept that expands the variety of green and blue typologies.

We conclude that through historical and contemporary research and case-based studies, we have gained a nuanced understanding of the welfare landscapes. This was proved by the extensive material, a renewed terminology, diagrammatic work and drawings. Thereby a nuanced understanding evolved across scales - from the welfare landscapes of the concrete social housing estate to the larger landscapes. Also, the renewal proved to be an inspiring offset for articulating a vision for Nøjsomhed.

From chapter 1 we gained insights and perspectives about different uses, critiques and affiliations that Danish welfare landscapes have been subject to over time. We learned that welfare landscapes prove as the hinge between people and place regardless of historical time and location. From chapter 2 we drew general and site-specific tendencies across six social housing estates, and from the comparative analysis, we concluded on three distinct tendencies.

First, that welfare landscapes are strongly connected to larger recreational landscapes. Second, that they are open and well-defined structures. And third, that welfare landscapes have a range of welfare facilities in close proximity. From the comparative analysis and the case-based studies, we extracted three meaningful stories of the contemporary welfare landscapes which concern landscape connections, morphology and community. We concluded that the three stories were crucial when giving nuances to the language as they represent a fundamental constitution of the welfare landscapes.

172

Furthermore, we conclude that these stories predominantly concern ‘human welfare’.

It is the landscapes serving as an important recreational value, the homes provided for ‘the good life’, and socio-cultural functions supporting communities. This also proves the hypothesis of this thesis, that Danish welfare landscapes dominantly concern human well-being.

It was evident that we needed to formulate a new story that complimented the former three to provide welfare for humans and non-humans. Therefore a fourth story accommodates welfare in the Anthropocene. It embraces Danish welfare landscapes as an interconnected environment and recognizes all co-authors.

We conclude that an adaptation of the language is a prerequisite to accommodate the Anthropocene challenges. We approached our thesis statement with the framework of the Anthropocene and by following Anne Spirn’s analogy of ‘the language of landscape’. This proves to be beneficial as we address the connectedness and intertwined relation between people and place. A whole new field of research has opened up for us which demands a comprehensive groundwork of creating new methods and approaches within landscape architecture.

Our mission was to understand and speak the language of landscape and to set out new ways for approaching everyday life and continuous global challenges in this Anthropocene time. Therefore we have renewed the language of welfare landscapes, and we have activated our role as storytellers.

The language of landscape prompts us to perceive and shape the language whole. Reading and speaking it fluently is a way to recognize the dialogues ongoing in a place, to appreciate other speaker’s stories, to distinguish enduring dialogues from ephemeral ones, and to join the conversation (Spirn 1998, 25).

173

174

Outro

Reflection With this thesis we hope to convey appropriate dialogues within the field of welfare landscapes. Furthermore, we have learned how to engage in dialogues with the landscapes both as dwellers and as landscape architects. But what determines an appropriate dialogue?

And for whom? These questions must constantly be revisited, and we have reflected upon them repeatedly. We find them essential for our future practice as landscape architects, and we spent a long time understanding the language, while constantly revising our findings.

We set out to understand the language of Danish welfare landscapes, and to do so we developed a comparative and thematic analysis. We found this a demanding task, and we acknowledge that our thesis has its limitations. There has been a limit on how many coauthors of the welfare landscapes we have been able to integrate in this project. A further investigation could also involve looking closer at plant species or talking to the residents.

Furthermore we use ‘typologies’ and ‘types of green and blue’ to describe compositions of the landscape. To truly accommodate Anthropocene challenges, such as a decreasing biodiversity, the ‘types’ and ‘typologies’ must be further investigated and qualified.

This being said, we were constantly reassured of the importance and relevance of Danish welfare landscapes. Both because there are many social housing estates, they are large in size and house many dwellers. But most important, we repeatedly came across the unresolved and sometimes misunderstood potentials. We find great potential in the open public space that connects the natural and the built. Furthermore, we find great potential in the connection to recreational landscapes, and principles of welfare.

At the end of our research, we came across the book ’The welfare city in Transition’. The book stresses why a reinterpretation of welfare is urgent regarding the Anthropocene.

“Thus, we find ourselves in the era of the Anthropocene where one species is deeply affecting the destiny and life conditions of every other form of life on this planet. An impact that we are only gradually realizing but which nonetheless urgently demands a radical reinterpretation of our relation to nature and the meaning of interdependence, A reinterpretation that is also increasingly reflected within urbanism and architecture as the old dichotomy of nature and city slowly loses its meaning, pointing instead towards a future where planning will be a question of managing the responsibilities of multispecies interdependence.”(Danish Architectural Festival 2020, 136)

175

Outro

Footnotes 1.

Translated from: ”[...] at den moderne by skulle bygges efter rationelle principper, hvor byerne blev opdelt i zoner alt efter funktioner”

2.

Translated from: ”[...] og det blev målet at skabe forstæder og boligområder, hvor alt var planlagt, så det blev muligt at leve et sammenhængende og helt liv i forstaden”

3.

Translated from: “Med Fingerplanen fik København en opfattelig plan og det moderne demokratiske friluftsliv sit rekreationslandskab koncentreret omkring bevægelseslinier, vandløb og kyster”

4.

Translated from: “Havearkitekterne må følgelig også ændre deres arbejde og arbejdsmetoder, ide byggelove og vedtægter kræver opholdsarealer i forhold til bebyggelseshøjderne. Og disse friarealer bliver faktisk at behandle som boligparker. Mens altså havearkitekten før måske ofrede sin opmærksomhed på raffinerede detailler i en rigmandshave i Ryvangen eller Marseilisborg-kvarteret, må han nu tænke i legeredskaber til børn i alle aldre, og han må sørge for at forme det bebyggelserne omgivende terrain med dets udgravede jordmasse som en “landskabshave”, der på een gang kan fungere som en slags halvoffentlig park og samtidig være privathave for dem, der bebor etagehusene”

5.

Translated from: “Når man udgiver et skrift som dette, må det ses som udtryk for, at det store boligbyggeri, der finder sted nuomstunder, i stedse stigende grad knyttes sammen med rekreationsområder - grønne områder, hvor børn og voksne kan finde fristeder som modvægt mod vor tids forjagede tilværelse”

6.

7.

8.

176

Translated from: “Le Corbusier siger, de er tænkt stor, de er tænkt meget praktisk og de er tænkt på en måde der skal være nem at drifte. Så du har nogle store store beton-flader som er forholdsvist nemme at vedligeholde, du har nogle store flisebelagte stier og nogle store græsplæner. Og alt det der, er super nemt, du kommer med en maskine, alt der her er maskinen, det er industrien, du kommer der, bruum, det tager hvad? måske en halv time at komme igennem den kæmpe gård her med din græsslåmaskine og så er du videre i kapitler. Men problemet med den tankegang er, at du skaber ikke et rum som er... som bærer præg af dem der lever her. Du skaber et rum, som bærger præg af at samfundet skal være utroligt effektivt.

Alle skal være i arbejde, du ved. Og folk skal kunne komme her, om aftenen når de er trætte og færdige med at arbejde, de kan sætte sig og der er blevet slået græs for dem. Alt er blevet lavet, alt er klart. De skal bare spise og gå i seng for at være klar og at møde op på arbejde dagen efter. [...]”

Translated from: ”Gellerupparkens lange vej fra ghetto til helt almindeligt bykvarter. I 10’erne blev der taget hul på en gigantisk sanering af Danmarks største ghetto. En investering på 7-8 milliarder kr. skal gøre Gellerupparken til et almindeligt kvarter” Translated from: ”Derfor skal ghettoområder, der har stået på ghettolisten i de seneste fire år [...] indsende en udviklingsplan,

som viser en konkret vej til at nedbringe andelen af almene familieboliger i området til højst 40 pct.”

9.

Translated from: ”Hvad oplever du, som den største forskel fra 90’ernes tilgang til renovering til nutidens renoverings boom?”

10. Translated from: ”Desværre så ser vi jo i dag der gør man også meget af det man gjorde i gamle dage. Altså selvom de nye typer af renoveringer er kommet til, hvor man kigger på bystrukturer, kigger på, hvordan området hænger sammen med den omkringliggende by, det grundlæggende er jo det, man gør i Gellerup, og man har gjort i Gyldenrisparken og sådan ser også, selvom den er lidt anderledes, og i Rosenhøj, og i Kildeparken i Aalborg. De nyere renoveringer de er jo meget mere [...]. De er forskellige typer af greb; altså delvis nedrivning, at man renoverer bygningerne, så de ser forskellige ud, og at man fører infrastruktur ind i gennem, og at man får allokeret zonering i udearealerne. Alle de der greb bliver jo brugt på forskellig vis i de der lande, og det er jo dem, som jeg også ser blive brugt i de der, jeg vil kalde dem, den nye generation af omdannelsesplaner, det er mere omdannelser måske end det er renovering ikke? Fordi man tager nogle strukturelle greb på dem. Og det er jo dem jeg virkelig er glad for, og jeg synes bare der skal komme flere af dem, for det er vejen frem. For så kan vi netop få tænkt bebyggelserne i nutiden” 11. Translated from: “[...] et problem, som er blevet påpeget gentagne gange i de senere år” 12. Translated from: “Jo tættere vi kommer på en ting eller person, des mere personligt og intimt opleves det [...] Dette hænger også sammen med, at jo mindre afstanden bliver, des flere sanser kan vi anvende” 13. Translated from: ”[...] mange af de områder jeg har analyseret, der er det meget hurtigt at se, at alt areal, det meste af udeareal, har sådan den samme... hvad skal man sige? Niveau, eller den samme karakter. Det er til for alle, og det ender med at blive for inden ofte ikke? Så den der med at få allokeret noget udeareal til nogen, i stedet for til at alle. Det kan være til nogle funktioner, altså nogle interessefællesskaber, det kan også være til nogen der bor hér. Altså i den her opgang, eller i den her blok, eller hvad det måtte være… så det er mere geografisk, tror jeg, er enormt vigtigt”.

14. Translated from: “At anlægge halvprivate zoner tæt ved indgangene giver mulighed for at tilføre en række funktioner, der knytter sig tæt til hverdagslivet, fx tørrestativer og bænkeborde.

Halvoffentlige zoner kan rumme forskellige funktioner fra idrætsfaciliteter til legeplads. Anlægger man funktionerne tæt ved hinanden, kan der opstå social synergi, fordi det bliver en attraktion i sig selv, at der er andre mennesker.”

15. Translated from: ”Boligområdet blev betragtet som et mønsterbyggeri for sin tid, hvor idealet var store, selvstændige enheder, hvor børnefamiliers daglige behov var dækket ind.”

Outro

Illustrations 16. Translated from: ”Vi sigter højt og går efter at skabe et attraktivt boligområde med høj grad af tryghed, varierede boligudbud, værdiskabende zoneopdeling af by- og landskabsrum, identitetsbærende og oplevelsesrig arkitektur, opløsning af den monofunktionelle by og radikalt forandret infrastruktur” 17. Translated from: ”[...] at den ønsker at forbedre boligstandarden og tiltrække beboere fra alle samfundslag samt styrke trivsel og tryghed blandt beboerne”.

18. Translated from: ”Natur, Åben med dialog, Privat med ro” 19. Translated from: ”Visionen for renoveringen af Egedalsvænge er at give plads til fællesskabet og til individet i relation til både bygninger og udearealer.”

20. Translated from: ”Det er i landskabet at bebyggelsens umiddelbare kvaliteter findes, træerne er store og et halvt århundrede gamle, der er masser af legepladser, sportsbaner, fælleshaver og grillområder. Terrænet skråner usædvanligt meget i dansk kontekst og udsigten både fra det højeste terræn samt fra de store blokke rækker ud til Øresund”

Illustration 1: Forstadsmuseet. n.d. ‘Brøndby Strands Historie’.

Forstadsmuseet. Accessed 30 May 2021. https://forstadsmuseet.dk/ historien-om/broendby-strands-historie/.

Illustration 2: Lund, Annemarie. n.d. ‘Historie - Danske Landskabsarkitekter Danske Landskabsarkitekter’. Translated by Tine Gils. Danske Landskabsarkitekter. Accessed 16 May 2021.

Illustration 3: Miljøministeriet and Planstyrelsen. 1984. Hovedstadens Grønne Kiler Historien Om de Grønne Områder i KøbenhavnsEgnen. Hovedstadsrådet., page 55 Illustration 4: Høgsbro, Svend, and Th. Dreyer. 1967. Grønnegård.

Drawing. Danmarks Kunstbibliotek.

Illustration 5: Permin, Karen and Danske Landskabsarkitekter. 1998.

‘Samtale med landskabsarkitekt Eywin Langkilde’. Landskab, 1998.

Illustration 6: Rønnow, Julie, and Københavns Museum. 1971.

‘Urbanplanen’. kbhbilleder.dk. 1971. https://kbhbilleder.dk/kbhmuseum/21958.

Illustration 7: Rønnow, Julie, and Københavns Museu m. 1971.

‘Urbanplanen’. kbhbilleder.dk. 1971. https://kbhbilleder.dk/kbhmuseum/21958.

Illustration 8: Høgsbro, Svend, and Thorvald Dreyer. n.d. København, Brøndby Strand Brøndby Strand; 2605 opført - Kunstbib. dk. Digitaliseret model. Danmarks Kunstbibliotek. Accessed 21 May 2021. http://kunstbib.dk/samlinger/arkitekturmodeller/ modeller/000035189.

All photos and illustrations that have not been credited on this list is by the authors All digital map material and aerial photos by Styrelsen for Dataforsyning og Effektivisering (kortforsyningen.dk)

Appendix Vandkunsten. 2019. ‘Nøjsomhed Helhedsplan’. Helhedsplan Rev.02. ’Nøjsomhed Helhedsplan’ attached separately.

177

Outro

References Arkitema. 2020. ‘Arkitema | Gadehavegård’. Arkitema. 2020. https:// arkitema.com/dk/projekt/gadehaveg%C3%A5rd.

Brøndby Kommune. 2020. ‘Fremtidens Brøndby Strand Foranalyse’.

Foranalyse. Brøndby Strand.

Bech-Danielsen, Claus, and Gunvor Christensen. 2017a. ‘Planer for Fremtiden’. In Boligområder i bevægelse: fortællinger om fysiske og boligsociale indsatser i anledning af Landsbyggefondens 50 års jubilæum, 124–64. Copenhagen: Landsbyggefonden.

Brøndby Strand. n.d. ‘Nedrivning af de fem højhuse’. Brøndby Strand. Accessed 29 April 2021. https://www.brondbystrand.dk/ nedrivning/.

———. 2017b. ‘Sanering, byggeboom og områdeløft’. In Boligområder i bevægelse: fortællinger om fysiske og boligsociale indsatser i anledning af Landsbyggefondens 50 års jubilæum, 18–33. Copenhagen: Landsbyggefonden.

———. 2017c. ‘Tilbageblik’. In Boligområder i bevægelse: fortællinger om fysiske og boligsociale indsatser i anledning af Landsbyggefondens 50 års jubilæum, 104–26. Copenhagen: Landsbyggefonden.

Bech-Danielsen, Claus, Jesper Ole Jensen, Inge Mette Kirkeby, Søren Ginnerup, Anne Clementsen, and Martin Ø. Hansen.

2011. Renovering af efterkrigstidens almene bebyggelser Evaluering af ti renoveringer med fokus på arkitektur, kulturarv, bæredygtighed og tilgængelighed. 1st ed. Hørsholm: Statens Byggeforskningsinstitut.

Beckmann, Anne Winther, and Charlotte Lindhardt. 2018.

‘Vejleåparken | lex.dk’. Leksikon. Trap Danmark. 2018. https:// trap.lex.dk/Vejle%C3%A5parken.

Bejder, Peter, and Benjamin Kristensen. 2026. ‘Velfærdsstaten og de universelle rettigheder, efter 1849’. Danmarkshistorien. 11 April 2026. https://danmarkshistorien.dk/leksikon-og-kilder/vis/ materiale/velfaerdsstaten-og-de-universelle-rettigheder/.

Bjørn, Niels, ed. 2008. Arkitektur der forandrer: fra ghetto til velfungerende byområde. Copenhagen: Gads forlag.

———. 2021. Conversation with Niels Bjørn Interview by Katrine Lundemark and Anne Sofie Sørensen. Zoom.

Braae, Ellen. 2018. ‘Wellad - Reconfiguring Welfare Landscapes’.

Department of Geosciences and Natural Recource Management. University of Copenhagen. 25 June 2018. https:// ign.ku.dk/english/welland/.

———. 2020. ‘Landskabsarkitektens nye rolle’. Landskab, 2020.

Braae, Ellen, Riesto Svava, Henriette Steiner, and Anne Tietjen.

2020. ‘Welfare Landscapes. Open Spaces of Danish PostWar Housing Estates Reconfigured’. In Mass Housing of the Scandinavian Welfare States. Exploring Histories and Design Strategies, 27–38. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. https:// www.academia.edu/43895283/Welfare_landscapes_Open_ Spaces_of_Danish_Post_war_Housing_Estates_Reconfigured.

Brabrand Boligforening. 2018. ‘Liv i Bydelen: Fremtidens Gellerup’.

Udviklingsplan. Aarhus: Brabrand Boligforening.

178

City of Copenhagen. 2015. ‘Urban Nature in Copenhagen Strategy 2015-2025’. City Development. Copenhagen: City of Copenhagen. https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/kk_pub2/index. asp?mode=detalje&id=1653.

Crutzen, Paul J. 2002. ‘Geology of Mankind’. Nature, 2002.

Danish Architectural Festival. 2020. ‘Urgency’. In The Welfare City in Transition: A Compilation of Texts and Images 1923-2020, edited by Pernille Maria Bärnheim, Signe Sophie Bøggild, and Kristoffer Lindhardt Weiss, 1st ed., 136–38. Copenhagen: Danish Architectural Press.

Danmarks Almene Boliger. 2018. ‘De 16 ”hårdeste ghettoområder’ - Dokumentation af de konkrete virkninger af parallelsamfundspakken’. Copenhagen.

Danmarkskanon. n.d. ‘Velfærdssamfundet’. Danmarkskanon.

Accessed 22 May 2021. (https://www.danmarkskanon.dk/vaerdi/ velfaerdssamfundet/.

‘Den ekstra indsats, afsnit 1’. 2021. Podcast. Den ekstra indsats.

København: Bylyd. http://www.bylyd.dk/5759-den-ekstraindsats.

Dictionary.com. 2021. ‘Definition of Welfare’. Www.Dictionary.Com. 2021. https://www.dictionary.com/browse/welfare.

Fællesadministrationen 3B. 2010. ‘Fremtidssikring af Egedalsvænge Overblik over afdelingen’. Konkurrenceprogram. Copenhagen: Fællesadministrationen 3B. Fundació Mies van der Rohe. 2021. ‘EUMiesAward’. Mies van Der Rohe Award. 2021. https://eumiesaward.com/work/4625.

Gadehavegård. 2020. ‘Fakta Om Udviklingsplanen’. Gadehavegård.

2020. http://www.gadehavegaard.dk/udviklingsplan/fakta-omudviklingsplanen/.

———. n.d. ‘Gadehavegård’. Gadehavegård. Accessed 25 May 2021a. http://www.gadehavegaard.dk/.

———. n.d. ‘Om Gadehavegård’. Gadehavegård. Accessed 28 April 2021b. http://www.gadehavegaard.dk/om-gadehavegaard/.

Hauxner, Malene. 2007. ‘Fingerplanen som landskabskunst’.

Outro

Videntjenesten. Københavns Universitet. 1 September 2007. https://videntjenesten.ku.dk/planlaegning_og_friluftsliv/ byudvikling/generelt/videnblad_03.00-06/.

Heim, Simon Wincentz. 2020. ‘De skal stå for 200 millioner dyr Nøjsomhed-renovering’. Sjællandske Nyheder. 16 April 2020. https://sn.dk/Helsingoer/De-skal-staa-for-200-millioner-dyrNoejsomhed-renovering/artikel/933990.

Helhedsplan Gellerup og Toveshøj. 2018. ‘Helhedsplanen for Gellerup og Toveshøj’. 2018. https://helhedsplangellerup.dk/.

Høgsbro, Svend, and Thorvald Dreyer. n.d. København, Brøndby Strand Brøndby Strand; 2605 opført - Kunstbib.dk. Digitaliseret model. Danmarks Kunstbibliotek. Accessed 21 May 2021. http:// kunstbib.dk/samlinger/arkitekturmodeller/modeller/000035189.

Kraul, Marie. 2020. ‘Nedrivning af Brøndby-højhuse blev sminket billigere, mener kritikere: »Man ønsker i virkeligheden at udskifte beboerne. Det er den brutale virkelighed«’. Politiken Byrum. 25 August 2020. https://politikenbyrum.dk/Nyheder/ art7892080/%C2%BBMan-%C3%B8nsker-i-virkeligheden-atudskifte-beboerne.-Det-er-den-brutale-virkelighed%C2%AB. Krogh, Marianne. 2020. ‘Con-nect-ed-ness: An Introduction’.

In Connectedness: an incomplete encyclopedia of the anthropocene, 1st ed., 12–27. København: Strandberg Publishing.

Pedersen, Poul Bæk. 2005. Arkitektur og plan i den danske velfaerdsby 1950-1990: container og urban raster. 1st ed. Århus: Arkitektens Forlag.

Prominski, Martin. 2014. ‘Andscapes: Concepts of Nature and Culture for Landscape Architecture in the “Anthropocene”’.

Journal of Landscape Architecture 9 (1): 6–19.

Renoverprisen. 2017. ‘Egedalsvænge’. Renoverprisen. 2017. https:// renover.dk/projekt/egedalsvaenge-3/.

Riesto, Svava, Ellen Braae, and Tom Avermaete. 2020. ‘Landscape Architecture and Its Epistemes: Notes for Students’.

Kompendium: Theories and Methods in Landscape Architecture, 2020.

Rogaczewska, Natalia Anna, Rikke Lønne, and Kristoffer Friis Sørensen. 2015. At huse alle = How to house. 1st ed.

Copenhagen: BL - Danmarks Almene Boliger.

SLA. 2014. ‘SLA :: Gellerup Bypark’. SLA. 2014. https://sla.dk/dk/ projects/gellerup/.

Socialdemokratiet. n.d. ‘Velfærd’. Socialdemokratiet. Accessed 22 May 2021. https://www.socialdemokratiet.dk/da/politik/velfaerd/.

Sørensen, C. TH. 1978. Parkpolitik i sogn og købstad. København: Christian Ejler’s Forlag.

Langkilde, Eywin. 1954. Etagehusenes haveanlæg. Fællesraadet for havekultur og landskabsgartneri 5. Frederiksberg: Fællesraadet for havekultur og landskabsgartneri.

Spirn, Anne Whiston. 1998. Language of Landscape. New Haven London: Yale University Press.

Lund, Annemarie. 2002. Danmarks havekunst III. Vol. 3. 3 vols.

Danmarks Havekunst. København: Arkitektens forlag.

The Danish government. 2018. ‘Ét Danmark uden parallelsamfund: ingen ghettoer i 2030’. Copenhagen: Økonomi- og Indenrigsministeriet.

———. n.d. ‘Historie - Danske Landskabsarkitekter Danske Landskabsarkitekter’. Translated by Tine Gils. Danske Landskabsarkitekter. Accessed 16 May 2021. https://www. landskabsarkitekter.dk/historie/.

Madsen, Bent Lauge. 2016. ‘natursyn’. Leksikon. Den Store Danske.

20 May 2016. https://denstoredanske.lex.dk/natursyn.

Madsen, Henrik Havbæk, and Jesper Bech Pedersen. 2019.

‘Gellerupparkens lange vej fra ghetto til helt almindeligt bykvarter’. Århus Stiftstidende, 23 December 2019.

Opland Landskabsarkitekter. n.d. ‘Egedalsvænge’. Accessed 23 May 2021. https://www.opland.eu/projekter/egedalsvaenge/.

Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. n.d. ‘Welfare Noun’. Oxford Advanced Learner’s Dictionary. Accessed 22 May 2021. https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/ welfare?q=welfare.

The Danish government, Socialdemokratiet, Dansk Folkeparti, and Socialistiske Folkeparti. 2018. ‘Aftale mellem regeringen (Venstre, Liberal Alliance og Det Konservative Folkeparti) og Socialdemokratiet, Dansk Folkeparti og Socialistisk Folkeparti om: Initiativer på Boligområder, der modvirker parallelsamfund’.

Udsatte områder. 9 May 2018. https://xn--udsatteomrder-yfb.dk/ media/uyzeztll/aftaletekst-9-maj-2018_end-2.pdf.

‘Trygt og skønt boligområde - dialogredskab 2014’. 2014.

Københavns Kommune. 2014. https://kk.sites.itera.dk/apps/ kk_pub2/index.asp?mode=detalje&id=%201134.

Vandkunsten. 2019. ‘Nøjsomhed Helhedsplan’. Helhedsplan Rev.02.

Villadsen, Kristian Skovbakke, and Louise Kielgast. 2008.

‘Funktion følger form’. In Arkitektur der forandrer: fra ghetto til velfungerende byområde, 44–51. Copenhagen: Gads forlag.

179

By Katrine Lundemark and Anne Sofie Sørensen Summer 2021