Hamburg is considered particularly green for a large city. Mathematically, the Hanseatic city has 14.3 square meters of public green space per resident. The Senate's self-imposed goal is 13 square meters. But anyone who lives in a densely built-up area quickly notices in the summer: what matters is not how much green a city has overall. Because trees in the Altes Land or in the city park do not cool heated streets in Eimsbüttel or Altona. And the infiltration areas in the neighboring district do not prevent flooding on your own doorstep. The “Green Compass 2035+”, a new technical concept from the environmental authority, wants to change exactly that.
Environment Senator Katharina Fegebank (Greens) has just presented the concept. She called Hamburg's green open spaces a “central lever for the city's future viability”. “Hamburg is characterized like hardly any other major city by the many green open spaces in the middle of a busy metropolis - this was central to city planning over a hundred years ago and should remain so,” she said. The new specialist concept has created “the technical basis for coordinated and targeted open space development for the coming decade”. According to Fegebank, it serves “as a strategic guide” so that Hamburg remains a green city.
The Green Compass wants to help urban planners take a different look at the city than in previous decades. It was created in collaboration between authorities, the Berlin planning office urban catalyst and the landscape architect Antje Stokman. Until now, the main question in the Hanseatic city has been how much green the city has overall. In the future, the question should be asked more: What specific problem is there in which place? Is there a lack of shade or a lack of places where people can sit, play or take a break in everyday life? Can rainwater seep away on site? Do plants and animals find food and refuge there?
The so-called Hamburg formula translates these questions into three guideline values: 13, 30 and 300. Hamburg has already achieved 13 square meters of public parking space per resident. In the future, the number will serve as a guideline to ensure that the city does not fall below this threshold even with further growth. In the long term, at least 30 percent of the urban area should be covered by treetops. It is currently 26.2 percent. As many Hamburg residents as possible should be able to reach a publicly accessible green space within a maximum distance of 300 meters as the crow flies. Currently it is at least 82 percent. But that means that around one in five Hamburg residents have to go further until they reach a green area.
In order to make the different problems visible, the compass divides Hamburg into eleven living environments. In the “busy pavement” around Jungfernstieg, Mönckebergstrasse, Rathausmarkt, Speicherstadt and Hafencity, Hamburg's representative side encounters a tangible problem: the open space consists primarily of stone, asphalt and concrete bank edges. In summer the areas heat up considerably and rainwater can hardly seep away. At the same time, the spaces are mainly used during business hours; they remain empty in the evenings and Sundays.
The experts therefore not only suggest additional trees and green facades. Publicly accessible roof gardens on department stores, office buildings or parking garages could also create new places where people sit, walk or spend their free time. The often built-up canals and canals are seen as having potential beyond gastronomy: terraces, floating platforms or other waterside offerings should make the banks more accessible and at the same time create opportunities to stay in a cooler place.
The situation looks different in the “lively neighborhoods” of Ottensen, St. Pauli, the Schanzen and Karolinenviertel or around the Lange Reihe. What's missing here isn't so much life as space. Streets are already the most important public spaces. Cafés, restaurants, shops and residents compete for every meter. At the same time, there is little greenery and high heat stress. The concept therefore focuses on the street itself. Individual parking spaces, extra-wide lanes or other sealed areas could give way to trees, flower beds and seating. Where there is no space for this, city planners suggest green facades. Temporarily redesigned street sections or areas co-designed by residents also play a role in the pictures of the future drawn.
The “green neighborhood islands” in Eilbek or Barmbek, for example, already have parks, canals and individual green spaces. According to the authors of the “Green Compass”, these offers are often not enough to cover the needs of densely populated neighborhoods. The pressure to use the few open spaces is increasing. At the same time, many streets continue to be heavily influenced by car traffic. Parks should therefore be better connected, canal banks improved and additional green spaces integrated into street spaces. Where possible, new “street parks” should even be created. Schoolyards could be more open to all residents.
There is space and greenery in the “Quiet Garden Mosaic” in Duvenstedt, Rissen or Niendorf. But the experts complain about sealed areas, gravel gardens and low biodiversity. They are relying on more trees, hedges and flowering plants in private gardens, possibly shared garden areas and better paths for pedestrians and cyclists. The city should inspire private garden owners to increase biodiversity in their greenery.
The experts describe the large settlements in Mümmelmannsberg, Steilshoop and Osdorfer Born as “archipelagos on a green carpet”. There is a lot of green between the high-rise buildings. However, it is often unclear which areas are public and which belong to residential complexes. Many paths also end in the district instead of connecting it with the surrounding area. Clearer structures, better connections and meeting points should change that.
The “productive clusters” of commercial areas are dominated by halls, parking spaces and asphalt areas. Shade and places to stay are rare. Green roofs, more trees, areas for rainwater and new path connections are therefore among the central suggestions.
The “Rauen Hafenwelten” at Hansahafen or Reiherstieg, on the other hand, are not intended to become a local recreation area. The port remains a port. What is planned are viewing points, individual new accesses to the water and better paths between places that are already accessible.
The “wide cultural landscapes” of the Altes Land and the Vier- und Marschlande are also not about new parks. Agriculture, nature conservation and recreation should be more closely linked. Farm shops, learning places and self-harvesting gardens could make the landscape more tangible for visitors without changing its actual function.
The Green Compass therefore does not primarily describe new parks, but rather new tasks for existing urban spaces. Streets should offer more shade, roofs should be greener, commercial areas should retain less heat and green spaces should be easier to access. The large parks remain important. However, the authors see the future issues of open space planning in many places that have hardly been the focus so far.
Editor Julia Witte known as Vedder works in the Hamburg editorial team of WELT and WELT AM SONNTAG. She has been reporting on Hamburg politics since 2011. One of her main focuses is environmental policy.
