The rehabilitation of urban environments by giving old buildings new functions is an old practice, but policies meant for encouraging rehabilitation trace their American origins back to the 1960s with the growing criticism of urban renewal plans and the rise of historic preservation values. In the U.S., historic rehabilitation has proven to be a way of revitalizing cities which have faced deindustrialization, disinvestment and shrinking tax revenues. Built heritage is especially vulnerable in these places because of the willingness of city governors to attract investment and development at any costs. This willingness of local authorities to let developers run amock in their cities might prove to be a bad strategy in the long run, even though it can bring capital back into the city fairly quick. In a climate of toughening regional and global competition over tourism and the location of business headquarters, the images and cultures of cities have gained an increasing importance. Careful and well planned redevelopment of the built environment has an crucial role to play in the re-imaging of industrial cities. Not including the new jobs and other direct economic benefits of rehabilitation, historic structures carry a large part of a city’s character and identity, ingredients desperately sought after when cities need to get an edge and show why they are worth visiting or relocating to. This paper has argued that successful rehabilitation not only makes use of the historic built environment, but also that it has the potential of renegotiating and redefining the history of a city (or at least parts of it). In this way rehabilitation can prove to have great public benefits in making new spaces available for public access and civic intercourse. City governors should not just look at quick economic benefits. A city where the urban fabric has been destroyed through profit-oriented and shortsighted development runs the risk of having gone into a dead end. A more prosperous future for the population, not just the developers, might instead be found in democratically planned and financially scaled down solutions in which the built environment is systematically reused. American developers and cities have proven to be successful in making rehabilitation financially successful for the property owner. Considerably less interest have been shown for the public benefits of these projects, often making them into isolated enclaves lacking legitimacy among the public and causing conflicts within the neighborhood. Developers are repeatedly accused of gentrification, displacement and for ignoring the public need for affordable housing. Despite the unclear public benefits these projects are often heavily subsidized on federal, state as well as city level. After having dealt with the growing general importance of cultural policies for cities, U.S. policies on historic rehabilitation are discussed and two large redevelopment projects in Baltimore and Durham presented. After that a Swedish case of inner city redevelopment through rehabilitation is presented, showing a contrast in both national policy and local practice. Swedish redevelopment has not been subsidized in the same generous manner as in many states of the U.S., and it has been more integrated into urban planning. In the Swedish case the city governors were not interested in preserving the built environment, but due to disinvestment new construction did not occur. In the 1970s, there was a consensus between leading politicians and local developers that preservation values would not be allowed to stand in the way of development. Until the early 1980s there was also a lack of local public support for preserving industrial buildings, as in many deindustrialized cities where industry has come to symbolize unemployment and stigmatization. The unique environment of the Industrial Landscape was finally preserved not through the actions of local government, but of architectural historians and curators representing government authority. Development of the historic district needed close monitoring at a national level since the developer had a very strong influence on local politics. In Swedish preservation policies local authorities have the possibility to landmark and protect environments much in the same way as in many U.S. cities with preservation commissions. If an urban plan seems to interfer with preservation goals, however, national authorities have the possibility of intervening in a similar way to that of state preservation offices in the U.S. In the 1990s development within the Industrial Landscape went into a more mature and democratically influenced phase in which goals of public access and attractiveness became increasingly important. The lesson from Sweden shows that redevelopment through rehabilitation can be affordable and that it does not need a whole lot of public subsidy. It also shows that the historical and aesthetic values need to be stressed in order for the development project to win the public support that is needed in a democratically lead community. The political leadership in this city, paralyzed by economic crisis, was heavily influnced by the developer, who was a large property owner in the city. But through monitoring, academic research and participation in public debate by preservation professionals, the table was turned and the preservation of the Industrial Landscape gained more and more support from the city in the 1980s. Instead of giving subsidies to the developer, the government located a national museum of labor to the district at a time in which economic support was badly needed. This showed that successful rehabilitation was possible here and that it would have considerable public benefits. Finally, it is also argued that the historical experiences of the national preservation movements have influenced the way rehabilitation is carried out. In Sweden, historic preservation has largely been a task for national government, whereas in the U.S. it has to a large extent been organized through national and local non-profit organizations buying up properties and lobbying for preservation causes. In this way historic preservation has been more integrated in Swedish urban politics, whereas in the U.S. preservationists have been identified as just one interest among others.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:hgo-831 |
| Date | January 2007 |
| Creators | Legnér, Mattias |
| Publisher | Högskolan på Gotland, Institutionen för kultur, energi och miljö, Baltimore, MD, USA : Johns Hopkins Institute of Policy Studies |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Report, info:eu-repo/semantics/report, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0027 seconds