EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND INTERREG IIIC, West Zone Regional Framework Operation HANSE PASSAGE Plan the City with the Port PCP Project Leader Partner City of Le Havre PLAN THE CITY WITH THE PORT (France) Strategies for Redeveloping City-Port Linking Spaces Partners Port of Amsterdam (Netherlands) GUIDE OF GOOD PRACTICES BIS, Bremerhaven (Germany) BEAN, Bremerhaven (Germany) City of Delfzijl (Netherlands) City of Gdansk (Poland) Le Havre, South Districts © AIVP/IACP Riga Free Port Authority (Latvia) International Association Cities and Ports (France) EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND INTERREG IIIC, West Zone Regional Framework Operation HANSE PASSAGE PCP Project (PLAN THE CITY WITH THE PORT) PLAN THE CITY WITH THE PORT LE HAVRE (France) AMSTERDAM (Netherlands) BREMERHAVEN (Germany) DELFZIJL (Netherlands) GDANSK (Poland) RIGA (Latvia) INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION CITIES AND PORTS (France) With also the support of: - Direction Générale de l’Urbanisme, de l’Habitat et de la Construction (DGUHC), Ministère de l'Écologie, du Développement et de l'Aménagement durables- MEDAD (France) - The "Région Haute-Normandie" (France) European project carried out within the Regional Framework Operation HANSE PASSAGE Overall Management City of Le Havre Partners Port of Amsterdam BIS - Bremerhavener Gesellschaft für Investitionsforderung & Stadtentwicklung MBH. - Bremerhaven BEAN - Bremerhavener Entwicklungsgesellschaft Alter-/Neuer Hafen mbH & Co.KG - Bremerhaven City of Delfzijl Municipality of Gdansk Riga Free Port Authority Scientific Coordination International Association Cities and Ports External Expert Professor Jacques Charlier, Researcher FNRS and Scientific Director (2005-2007) of the CIEM (Centre Interuniversitaire d'Etude de la Mobilité), Brussels Ville du Havre November 2007 Plan the City with the Port, PCP Project 3 SUMMARY 1. Preface ................................................................................................................................p. 5 City of Le Havre 2. Introduction to the problematic: the multiform character of urban – port interfaces ................................................p. 7 Jacques Charlier 3. The stakes of the city / port (re-) developments Jacques Charlier 3.1 - At opposite ends of the spectrum: Bluefield /Greenfield operations on the waterfronts/docklands ..................................................................................p. 13 3.2 - (Re-) developments for mixed purposes ...............................................................p. 23 3.3 - Redevelopment operations for purely port ends ...................................................p. 34 4. Presentation of the city-port mixing problematic for each partners Gdansk ...........................................................................................................................p. 49 Bremerhaven .................................................................................................................p. 57 Riga ................................................................................................................................p. 69 Amsterdam .....................................................................................................................p. 79 Delfzijl ............................................................................................................................p. 91 Le Havre ........................................................................................................................p. 101 5. Synthesis of the work: recommendations and good practices ....................................p. 113 International Association Cities and Ports Integrating the spaces Integrating the urban dimension Integrating functions Integrating the environment Integrating societies 6. Appendix ............................................................................................................................p. 121 List of experts, contacts Guide of good practices 4 Plan the City with the Port, PCP Project Guide of good practices Plan the City with the Port, PCP Project 5 Preface City of Le Havre Like all the port cities in the world (Barcelona, Bilbao, London, Liverpool, Sydney, Marseille, …), the City of Le Havre is engaged in the recovery and regeneration of its interface with the port in order to develop there new residential and value added economic functions and above all to improve the living environment of the inhabitants and working population and thus to put into value the image of this territory and moreover, that of the whole of the conurbation. It is in this context that the City of Le Havre wished to associate with European networks of exchanges of experience and of capitalization of the benefits to be obtained on a European level such as SUDEST (Sustainable Development of Sea Towns in the framework of URBACT) or Hanse Passage for INTERREG III C. In the context of this last European programme, "HANSE PASSAGE", the City of Le Havre has been at the head of a network of port cities called "Plan the City with the Port" since 2005. The partners in the "PCP" project are: the City of Gdansk in Poland, the City of Bremerhaven in Germany (BIS - Bremerhavener Gesellschaft für Investitionsforderung & Stadtentwicklung MBH; and BEAN - Bremerhaven Entwicklungsges Alter/Neuer Hafen), the Port of Riga in Latvia, the Port of Amsterdam and the City of Delfzijl in the Netherlands, as well as IACP, the International Association of Cities and Ports. Following meetings in Gdansk, Bremerhaven, Riga, and Amsterdam, the final seminar of the project in Le Havre, on 24th and 25th May 2007, was opened to the world and was attended by 282 participants coming from 26 countries. The Guide of Good Practices that is in your hands was drawn up gradually through the meetings and discussions of the group; it has been published so that this experience may be shared by an even wider group of partners. Good and instructive reading to you all. Deputy to the Mayor of Le Havre in charge of International Relations. Guide of good practices 6 Plan the City with the Port, PCP Project Guide of good practices Plan the City with the Port, PCP Project 7 Introduction: the multiform character of urban – port interfaces A guide to good practices at the interfaces between cities and ports cannot be undertaken without an as clear as possible definition of the subject under study. One essential point is that it is not a question of a line, of a clearly defined frontier on a map or plan that will mark, even more than a boundary, the break between two different worlds with totally different ways of functioning. It is rather more a question of a surface, naturally stretched out lengthwise but that has a certain depth and which is not always homogeneous. It would be utopia to pretend that there is one unique answer, in terms of functional and urban handling of these transitional areas, and it would be an error to think that these are not in inter-relationship with, on the one hand, the port, and on the other the city. The policies for the development of the interfaces thus widely stretch beyond these half port / half city areas and should be carried out in a holistic perspective. Better still, certain factors are related to the foreland, that is to say the spaces beyond the jetties of the port, and others to the hinterland, well beyond the limits of the city, of the conglomeration or of the metropolis. Unique places but perceived differently Certainly there are physically bigger or smaller city-port interfaces, but the ports are more generally themselves interface areas between otherwise much larger scaled maritime and continental spaces than the umland of continental cities that is much smaller. "Think globally but act locally" is therefore one of the specificities of ports as against other cities. In a figurative sense, there are winds of greater force and strength that make them places where modernity is also often introduced more rapidly and more significantly than elsewhere. Hence the very special difficulty in the development of these port areas in general and in particular of their urban-port interfaces. This requires particular competencies on the part of the stakeholders of the development who must remain open to a wide range of factors, some of which come from the maritime and port sphere and others from the regional and urban spheres, but which, as regards many of them, interact beyond the normal field of intervention of the port or the urban developer. A major difficulty stems from the different temporal and spatial scales of the one and the other and to their relative overall ignorance of the workings of port communities. The difference of the spatial scales has already been underlined above, but it is also necessary to pin down that of the temporal scales. For the ports, long periods of time are a constant in their development, whilst the medium or short term are more the rule in the urban sphere where the results of policies are expected at a closer horizon, whether it is a question of implementing economic and social policies, the effects of which can be measured on the scale of a term of office, or of the construction of installations for which a more rapid achievement and profitability are required. Another difficulty stems from the recent character of the convergence of the vision that the ports are nowadays having towards the urban – port interfaces. Up to recently, port developers were generally looking seawards and were most often looking for deep-waters, and urban developers