Showing posts with label urban renewal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label urban renewal. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 26, 2011

Kaohsiung: Taiwan's eco-city leader?

In this blog, I have stated that Taichung's efforts to become an eco-city are an essential component of its future identity. The title of Taiwan's greenest city is a valuable asset to attract residents, investment, and the clean energy industries that Taiwan's central government will aggressively promote in the next decade. While Taichung contemplates its steps towards green development, Taiwan's other cities are not idly standing by.

Kaohsiung, Taiwan's second largest city, has emerged as both a domestic and international example of eco-city development. Due to its strategic location during the Japanese occupation of Taiwan, Kaohsiung was targeted as a center of industry in the mid-20th century. In the post-WWII era, Kaohsiung was the industrial engine fueling the "Taiwan Miracle." By the 1990s, Kaohsiung had over 6000 factories and rapid industrialization/urbanization had exacted a heavy toll on its citizenry. Kaohsiung's cancer rates soared, its rivers were pronounced "dead,"and landfills blighted the urban landscape.

Since reaching the peak of its polluted image in the late 20th century, Kaohsiung has undergone a remarkable transformation in a short period of time. In this post, I want to introduce Kaohsiung's efforts on several fronts that make it an unlikely eco-city leader of Taiwan.

A City on the Rise

This past December, I attended the first U.S.-Taiwan Clean Energy Forum in Kaohsiung, hosted by the American Institute in Taiwan and the Kaohsiung City government. As the host city, Kaohsiung's efforts to showcase its transition to a low-carbon and environmentally sustainable metropolis were displayed front and center. The following video clip from National Geographic's Megacities TV program introduces some of the measures Kaohsiung has adopted in changing its status from rampant polluter to dedicated reformer:



Kaohsiung's transformation is reflected in its ascent up the Mercer quality of living rankings. In a recent Mercer survey, Kaohsiung broke into the top 100 cities worldwide for quality of living and achieved 13th place in Asia. Kaohsiung also earned 13th place in Asia under Mercer's eco-city category, beating out Taipei for #1 in Taiwan. Commonwealth Magazine's 2009 profile of Kaohsiung, From Soot and Smoke to the Sweet Life, pronounced the city first in Taiwan in environmental protection.

Air Pollution and Carbon Dioxide Emissions

Kaohsiung's reliance on heavy industry led the city to become home to some of Taiwan's worst air quality. In addition to grey skies resembling those of Beijing, Kaohsiung emerged as not only the highest per capita CO2 emitter out of Taiwan's large cities, but also one of the world's worst. As of 2005, Kaohsiung emitted over 4x as much CO2 per person than Taipei, and over twice the Taiwan national average.

Kaohsiung's air quality has shown marked improvement in recent years. This past summer, Kaohsiung was the first Taiwanese city to initiate a trial run of the EPA's air pollution quota control system. Kaohsiung City's latest Pollution Standard Index (PSI) hit a record low, more than three times less than its figure when measurements first began in 1994.

Reducing Kaohsiung's high-level of CO2 emissions has proven a more complex task than cleaning up its skies. To curb its high levels of per capita CO2 emissions, Kaohsiung has first laid out a series of ambitious reduction goals. The city government aims to reduce CO2 emissions to 30% below 2005 levels by 2020, 50% by 2030, and 80% by 2050. In order to achieve the near term CO2 reduction goal by 2020, the government is leaning heavily on clean technology deployment to cover 50% of its target. Other major cuts will come through the residential and commercial sector (15%), industry (12%), and there is still a 10% shortfall yet to be accounted for.

China Steel Corporation

Heavy industry comprises 68% of Kaohsiung's CO2 emissions, dwarfing emissions from the next closest source (commercial/residential sector at 23%). Beginning in 2009, Kaohsiung has levied a carbon tax on heavy industry. All corporations emitting over 10,000 tons of CO2 per annum are subject to the tax, which is expected to generate NT $2.8 billion each year for the city coffers.

Responding to the government's policies and their own economic incentives, Kaohsiung's industrial heavyweights have been actively cutting their emissions. China Steel Corporation (CSC), Taiwan's largest steel producer, is alone responsible for over 40% of Kaohsiung City's CO2 emissions. CSC has slashed CO2 emissions by 20% by upgrading its technology and efficiency. Through the use of steam-electric cogeneration, CSC's Kaohsiung plant provides 2/3 of the electricity needed to run its operations. CSC has also been able to sell surplus steam to its industrial neighbors. Steam sales earned CSC $NT 600 million in 2006 while reducing the fuel needs for adjacent petroleum and chemical plants.

Energy

Due to the municipality's high rate of sunshine, Kaohsiung is ripe for the development of solar energy. In February 2010, Asia's largest high-concentration photovoltaic (HCPV) solar power plant began operation in Lujhu, Greater Kaohsiung. Built with a US $8.34 million investment from the Institute of Nuclear Energy Research, the 1 MW facility has the potential to be scaled up to 10 MW. In March 2010, Suntech announced that it will build a 4.7 MW solar plant in Young'an, Greater Kaohsiung. The solar power facility will be Taiwan's largest and double Taiwan's installed solar capacity to nearly 10 MW. Kaohsiung also leads Taiwan in the installation of solar water heaters; combined central and local government subsidies on solar water heaters add up to NT $7500.

In a symbolic form of energy generation, Kaohsiung has harnessed methane gas from a former landfill underneath the Metropolitan Park to supply electricity to 4,600 households. Beginning operation in 2000, the Hsichingpu methane plant reduces 5,000 tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year and is expected to generate electricity for a 20 year life span.

141 panels comprise Asia's largest HCPV facility

In addition to promoting higher amounts of clean energy installed capacity, Kaohsiung also aims to become a manufacturer, exporter, and investment hub for clean energy and technology. Kaohsiung government agencies will invest over NT $37 billion in a "Green Energy Industry Plan," hoping to spur the city's green energy industrial value to NT$1.158 trillion by 2015. The Kaohsiung Science Park has been tagged as a "green energy cluster" and designated for promoting LED, biotech, telecom, and solar enterprises. Kaohsiung also plans to build a solar energy industry zone as part of a major land reclamation project along the harbor. The strategic location adjacent to Kaohsiung's port will foster the city's burgeoning solar manufacturing industry.

Transportation

One of the main pillars of Kaohsiung's green development strategy has been a reformation of its transportation system. In 2006, the city achieved a paltry 4.3% share for public transportation usage. Motorbikes are ubiquitous; in a country where there is nearly one motorbike for every two people, Kaohsiung has 766 motorbikes for every 1000 city residents. In order to combat its low rate of public transportation use, the government has employed a "give first, take later" strategy. The city has engaged in a comprehensive effort to deliver new pubic transportation options while upgrading and enhancing the efficiency of existing services. Once a culture of public transportation ridership is firmly established, the government will begin to instill policies to discourage private transportation.

The aspect of Kaohsiung's transportation upgrade that has drawn the most attention has been its MRT system. Opening in March 2008, the Kaohsiung MRT is Taiwan's second urban subway system. The KMRT is currently comprised of 2 lines running along a horizontal-vertical axis, encompassing 36 stations and 42.7 km of track. The results of the KMRT have been a mixed bag: the ultra-modern system is steadily losing money as ridership lags far behind expectations. Officials had predicted that ridership would reach nearly 560,000 passengers per day by the end of 2010, a far cry from this year's actual figure of 127,000. The KMRT needs approximately 380,000 riders per day to become profitable. Despite poor initial ridership figures, the city government is doubling down on the MRT and pressing ahead with plans to expand light rail connections to the existing system.

At its current rate of approximately 10% annual growth, KMRT ridership would exceed its profitability threshold early in the next decade

Drawing far less attention than the MRT system have been significant efforts to improve the city bus system. Kaohsiung has expanded access by adding hundreds of busses to the road, doubling MRT shuttle bus connectivity, and acquiring 100 low-floor busses for wheelchair passengers. Kaohsiung has also promoted alternative fuels as a means to improve fuel efficiency in the city's municipal fleet. Kaohsiung is the second city (after Kyoto, Japan) to require its entire public bus fleet to be use a biofuel-gasoline blend. In 2006, the Kaohsiung City government unveiled a test project to convert all of its garbage trucks to run on biodiesel. Kaohsiung has also released six hydrogen busses, a number that the city looks to increase in the near future.

To get citizens out of their cars and off their motorbikes, Kaohsiung has instituted Taiwan's first urban bike rental program. The government's City Public Bike (C-Bike) program includes 4,500 bikes at 50 rental locations. Bike rentals through the program aren't free, but the government offers subsidies to encourage citizens to utilize the city's 150+ km of bike paths (first in Taiwan). Kaohsiung's efforts have led CNN to name it the third most bike friendly city in Asia. For the majority of citizens who will continue to rely on private transportation, the city has offered generous incentives for cleaner vehicles. The Kaohsiung government is offering a NT $25,000 subsidy to buy electric motorbikes and a NT $10,000 subsidy for the purchase of LPG vehicles. The financial incentives are aimed at removing an estimated 300,000 old motorbikes from the road and are in addition to existing central government subsidies.

In October 2010, the city government released the Greater Kaohsiung Transport Policy White Paper. The document highlights several measures to expand the future scope and efficacy of the city's public transportation system. The city will deploy more hydrogen busses, solar powered bus stops and EV charging stations. Accompanying future MRT expansion, more effort will be made to integrate the city's MRT, LRT, BRT and shuttle bus systems. Kaohsiung's efforts to overhaul its public transportation system are already demonstrating results. According to the Kaohsiung City Transportation Bureau, the city has improved its public transportation share to 10.8% in 2010, and its monthly record high (12.5%) is approaching the government's' short-term goal of 15% usage. It is clear that the government's efforts to improve Kaohsiung's transportation system are gaining traction: in a July 2010 survey, 82% of Kaohsiung residents reported satisfaction with the city's overall transportation infrastructure.

Green Buildings

Not to be outdone by Taiwan's first zero-carbon building in Tainan and the space-age Taiwan Tower planned in Taichung, Kaohsiung can also point to its own signature green building: the World Games Stadium. The 55,000 seat stadium opened in 2009. Over 8,800 solar panels on the roof can supply up to 75% of the building's power needs during operation. When the stadium is empty, the solar power generated is fed into the grid and is sufficient to power 80% of the surrounding neighborhood. The stadium was designed by Japanese architect Toyo Ito (who is also commissioned with the design of the Taichung Metropolitan Opera House).

Emergent Architect's Kaohsiung Pop Music Center Design

Kaohsiung also has other groundbreaking green building projects in the works. Sun and Associates have proposed an enormous wave-shaped multi-use cruise ship terminal for Kaohsiung's port. The roof of the structure will be lined entirely with solar panels and is adjacent to a large park. Further developing futuristic plans for Kaohsiung's port is Emergent Architect's proposal for the Kaohsiung Pop Music Center. The music center would be comprised of two buildings, one above and one below ground. The music center would contain a 12,000 seat amphitheater and its outer walls, or "skin," would be lined with thin-film solar technology.

Waste and Water

Far from the sexiest topic in city planning, sewage treatment is nonetheless an essential component of a modern city. In many ways, the development and modernization of Kaohsiung's sewage system has paralleled the city's environmental rise. Kaohsiung's sewage systems began their planning stages in the 1970s. From 1979 to 2001, the city government invested upwards of NT $12 billion in sewage treatment infrastructure. Sewage connectivity has improved rapidly: in 1995, only 1.1% of Kaohsiung households were connected to the municipal sewage system. As of November 2010, this number has increased to over 61% and is projected to reach 90% by 2016.

Water resources are another crucial but often overlooked aspect of a city. The southern regions of Taiwan receive 90% of their annual rainfall during the rainy season and only 10% over the rest of the year. Climate change is only likely to worsen this ratio. In recent years, Kaohsiung has acted to improve the quality of the city's tap water and taken steps to diversify its water sources. Kaohsiung has a water demand of 1.55 million tons per day with no central reservoir to rely upon. As a result, the city has turned to water recycling as a means to improve its water security. Kaohsiung's first industrial wastewater reclamation plant will be opened in the Nanzih Export Processing Zone. The plant will cost NT $100 million and will serve the water hungry high-tech companies in the Nanzih District. The plant will start operation in January 2011, producing 1,800 tons of water per day. The plant is scheduled to be expanded to a capacity of 100,000 tons of water per day, an upgrade that will generate up to NT $10 billion in profits.

Water recycling is also of central importance to Kaohsiung's industrial sector. Despite boasting a water recycling rate of 97.6%, China Steel's Kaohsiung plant still requires 165,000 tons of water each day (55% of the entire city's industrial water needs). CSC has installed an industrial wastewater recycling plant that will reuse up to 13,500 additional tons of water each day.

In the future, the city of Kaohsiung may need to expand its water resource options beyond recycling. Seawater desalinization is far more expensive than wastewater treatment, but offers additional security in times of water scarcity. The city government has discussed the construction of a seawater desalinization plant that could produce 50,000-200,000 tons of water per day.

Urban Regeneration and Green Space

One of the most important components to Kaohsiung's rebirth was the cleanup and transformation of the Love River. Cutting through the heart of the city, the Love River became a primary runoff destination for Kaohsiung's pollution. Since 1979, the city government has been instrumental in the Love River's rejuvenation by improving sewage connectivity and treatment, reforestation, and adding bike paths and public art spaces along the riverbanks. Once entirely devoid of marine life, the river now boasts over 50 aquatic species. The Love River has even become a showcase for the city's commitment to renewable energy. The Kaohsiung City government launched 5 solar powered tour boats in September 2010 to replace diesel fuel models and will incorporate 10 more solar boats by 2012. Following the success of the Love River's restoration, the government has also taken action to clean up and revitalize the city's two other major waterways, the Cianjhen River and Houjin Creek.

Kaohsiung's Love River

A major priority of recent Kaohsiung government administrations has been the expansion of green space. At Kaohsiung's industrialized nadir, green space accounted for only 5% of the city's area (nearly 3x less than Taipei on a per capita basis). Kaohsiung now provides its citizens with over 750 hectares of parks and fields, double Taipei's per capita rate. Unique amongst Kaohsiung's green space is its "wetland ecological corridor." Kaohsiung contains eight wetlands that form a semi-connected pathway running from north to south through the city. Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu signed a declaration to preserve the cities wetlands in 2007. The 50 million square meters of wetland area have witnessed the return of many bird species and help absorb storm-water runoff and sequester CO2. Furthermore, the accesibility of the wetland parks bestow them with the important role of incubating environmental education and awareness for future generations.

Similarly to the urban development projects in London and Hamburg mentioned in a previous post, the Kaohsiung City government envisions a revitalized old port area as crucial to the city's rejuvenation. The city solicited urban design ideas through its "Ideas for Action" competition (open to those aged 40 and younger), spurring innovative eco-city projects focused on sustainable urban development. However, in contrast to the urban development corporation model, the city has employed a bottom-up approach to incentivize urban redevelopment and green space. Commonwealth Magazine reports that,

"the city instituted the "Vacant Land Beautification Project," which in effect stated, "The city government will impose heavy fines on owners of vacant land that falls into disrepair," Chen says. To encourage the greening of Kaohsiung, the city offered reductions or exemptions on property taxes as well as an increase on permitted plot ratios to landowners that agreed to beautify their vacant land. In three years the city succeeded in the greening of 230 hectares of previously disused land, greatly increasing the area of green space and parkland in the city."

The success of the government in this approach is testament to the fact that proper incentives can be just as effective as centralized planning in urban beautification and redevelopment.

Additional Efforts

Food:

To reduce demand-side pressure on CO2 emissions, the Kaohsiung government has encouraged citizens to adopt a vegetarian diet 1 day each week. Meat consumption has been identified as a significant cause of CO2 emissions; 1 kg of beef production is estimated to be equivalent to a 160 mile drive in a car. Many schools and universities in Kaohsiung have complied by offering exclusively vegetarian cafeteria choices one day a week, while 33 schools have opted for 2 days each week.

Climate Change:

Kaohsiung has made strenuous efforts to abide by the UN's +2 degrees C goal but also accepts that some degree of climate change is inevitable. To combat climate change's impact on the city, the Kaohsiung government city has established a climate change adaptation fund.

Low-Carbon Communities:

The Kaohsiung government is pursuing a strategy of designated "eco-model" zones to serve as pilot projects for low-carbon retrofitting. During his presentation at the Clean Energy Forum, Dr. Mu-sheng Lee (the Director General of the Kaohsiung Environmental Protection Bureau) noted Kaohsiung's planning draws inspiration from the cradle to cradle (C2C) design concept and utilizes case studies of Stockholm's Hammarby model, New York City's PlaNYC, and Kitakyushu, Japan's ecotown. The designated zones will be evaluated on their efficacy across several sectors including electricity management, recycling, and zero carbon transportation. The eco-model zones encompass both industrial and residential areas and their successful measures are expected be scaled up to the entire city.

International Engagement:

Kaohsiung has been a willing participant in the international dialogue on sustainable cities. Kaohsiung became the first Taiwanese member of the International Council for Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI) in 2005 (Taipei and Taichung have since joined). Comprised of over 1200 local government members focused on sustainable development and environmental protection, ICLEI provides an international framework for urban innovation and cooperation. Kaohsiung recently participated in ICLEI's 2010 Resilient Cities Congress in Bonn, Germany and has lobbied for the creation of a permanent ICLEI office in Kaohsiung.

Future Challenges

Despite the admirable progress of Kaohsiung, its goal of becoming an eco-city is far from realized. Kaohsiung City is still Taiwan's heaviest carbon polluter by a wide margin: the city is responsible for roughly 1/3 of Taiwan's total emissions. In order to significantly reduce CO2 emissions, Kaohsiung will have to undergo a painful diversification of its economy away from its traditional heavy industrial base. Such a shift may already be underway as a byproduct of the global financial crisis. Kaohsiung's export-oriented economy took a dramatic hit in 2009 and some loss of its industrial prowess may not return to pre-crisis levels. Increased competition from Chinese ports and local emphasis on environmental quality will naturally erode support for heavy industry. Kaohsiung Mayor Chen has identified clean technology and tourism as sectors to replace lost industrial revenue for the city, but there will be growing pains.

Another major challenge will be the success of the municipality's public transportation system. The Kaohsiung MRT is years away from profitability, and will lean heavily on government subsidies for the foreseeable future. The KMRT is not the only transportation initiative experiencing financial difficulties: the C-Bike program lost NT $500,000 a month in 2009. Statistics showed that bike rental rates were 7x higher on weekends, indicating that the C-Bike rentals have been utilized for leisure rather than a viable transportation alternative for commuters. While still in the first phase of adding options for residents, the government will have to more aggressively disincentize the use of private transporation, especially scooters, a move that is unlikely to be popular.

There is also the new challenge of the Kaohsiung City and Kaohsiung County merger. In Taiwan's Municipal Upgrades, Commonwealth Magazine observes:

"the new municipality will encompass an area running from sea level to 3,000 meters up in the mountains, inhabited by ethnic Han Chinese, Hakkas and several indigenous groups – a diverse and complex jurisdiction running the gamut from bustling urban downtown Kaohsiung to aboriginal villages such as Namasia (formerly Sanmin Township). The bureaucratic organization of Kaohsiung City is far bigger than that of Kaohsiung County, and its developmental model has been urbanization. Now it has suddenly acquired a vast agricultural hinterland, so the handling of the extreme disparities between the two following the merger of city and county can be expected to be fraught with difficulties."

The new Greater Kaohsiung government will be challenged to expand MRT and shuttle bus service into the former county, ensure equal environmental safeguards, and expand its eco-city vision to encompass a much larger area.

Conclusion

It is undeniable that Kaohsiung's transition to a path of sustainable development has reinvented the city. In one of the most poignant moments of the Megacities: Kaohsiung video, a Kaohsiung resident states:

"高雄轉型最重要的意義是高雄市民心態的大幅轉變. 以前沒有人願意承認自己來自高雄. 現在“高雄”這兩個字有了新嶄的意義. 我們都認為這才是這個城市最驚人的轉變, 是大聲說出我們是高雄人."

"The most crucial significance of Kaohsiung's transformation is that Kaohsiung's citizens have changed their minds greatly. In the past, nobody was willing to say that they were from Kaohsiung. Now the word Kaohsiung has new meaning, we all think that is the most amazing change of the city, that is to proclaim we are Kaohsiung people."

The transformation of Kaohsiung into a healthier, wealthier, and more environmentally stable metropolis is certainly something for its past and present residents to be proud of. Additionally, Kaohsiung's reinvention and the mayor's emphasis on clean technology will be a vehicle to attract Taiwan's future innovators and creators. Kaohsiung's series of initiatives are sure to encounter difficulties but the city leadership has laid out a bold vision of the future: Kaohsiung will be an international paragon of eco-city development.

Sunday, December 5, 2010

The Urban Development Corporation Model (part one)

Many cities across the world are increasingly focused on providing their citizens with a more livable future. However, the task they face in greening their cities is a difficult one. Sustainable development projects need to attract both government support and private financing. Concurrently, enacting a sustainable vision requires the incorporation of renewable energy sources, green buildings, green space, and improved infrastructure and public transportation (only to mention a few). In order for a city to carry-out such a demanding and multi-faceted endeavor, it must have an efficient organizational structure allowing various components to coalesce into an effective framework.

One type of organization well-suited to implement sustainable development projects is the urban development corporation (UDC). Part one of this post will examine both the evolution of the UDC model and its application to urban development projects in the U.K., Germany and Taiwan. Part two of this post will discuss the potential application of the UDC model in Taichung and its ability to cultivate Taichung's eco-city ambitions.

What is an Urban Development Corporation?

UDCs are publicly-accountable organizations vested with enough power by the government to assume primary control over a targeted area's planning future. While UDCs have operated with different characteristics in several countries, they generally adhere to a simplistic formula for success. UDCs are bestowed with planning and land development powers from the government and are supervised by a government-approved board of management. UDCs fund their development projects through a mixture of government funding and land sales. While significantly supported by the government, UDCs remain semi-autonomous and employ a corporate management structure. The fusion of government-backing and corporate management promotes both long-term stability and efficiency, thus attracting private investment.

UDCs are also curators of a certain urban image. In some cases, this quality lends itself to UDCs being powerful tools for championing sustainable development. When attracting private investment and developing the land, UDCs can impose higher standards in environmental quality and low-carbon design than would normally be utilized. The level of standards a UDC requires determines the distinct urban atmosphere created by its regeneration projects.

Evolution of Urban Development Corporations

UDCs have existed in countries across the globe, ranging from Malaysia to Jamaica. In this post however, I will utilize UDC evolution in the U.S. and U.K. to illustrate their commonalities and gradual transformation as a reaction to past successes and failures.

One of the first UDCs was the New York State Urban Development Corporation. Founded in 1968, the NY State UDC aimed to combat urban decay and provide affordable inner-city housing in New York City.In order to achieve its goals of urban regeneration, the UDC was granted a series of significant powers that have since been key features of future UDCs. Its powers included: eminent domain, predominance over local zoning regulations, and the ability to issue its own bonds for financing purposes and tax abatements for private developers. Despite some successes, the NY State UDC left a divisive track record as it encountered serious resistance to some of its inner-city regeneration efforts. Local residents regarded the UDCs activities as a misallocation of government resources and the construction of low-income housing in middle class neighborhoods engendered the opposite intended effect of white flight. After flirting with bankruptcy in the mid 1970s, the NY State UDC shifted its mission away from controversial inner-city redevelopment. Renamed the Empire State Development Corporation in 1995, the UDC continues to operate with a focus on private sector development.

As the the NY State UDC began to turn away from its inner-city development goals, UDCs also emerged in the U.K. Under the U.K. Local Government, Planning and Land Act of 1980, UDCs were founded and granted powers similar to those in the U.S: eminent domain (known as compulsory purchase) in addition to significant control over urban planning and infrastructure improvement. The law stipulated that UDCs would be run by a board that answered to the Secretary of State for the Environment and their activity was to be financed by government funding and land sales. However, the U.K.'s UDCs had less autonomy than the NY State UDC. The UDCs of the U.K. were intended to carry out planning for a targeted area over a specific amount of time. Once their planning goals were achieved, the UDCs devolved their power back to local authorities. Thus by 1998, all UDCs created by the 1980 U.K. legislation had ceased activities.

Despite checks on their jurisdiction and length of operation, the first generation of U.K. UDCs left a mixed legacy similar to their U.S. counterpart. Local residents accused the UDCs of indifference to local needs and disapproved of the way funds were spent. As a result, the U.K.'s 2003 Sustainable Communities Plan included a second wave of UDCs that dedicated greater attention and resources to local concerns and community improvement. The new plan called for more formalized integration of local members into the UDCs decision-making framework. Most significantly, the U.K.'s second generation of UDCs possessed substantially weakened plan-making powers. On the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation(LTGDC) website, it pointedly states that the corporation: "has no powers to prepare statutory planning polices and no direct powers regarding planning enforcement."

The softer planning powers of the U.K.'s second generation UDCs indicate an important transformation from urban redevelopment to urban retrofitting. The U.K.'s modern UDCs place an increased emphasis on preserving and strengthening the pre-existing communities targeted for development rather than displacing and rebuilding over them. The new UDCs in the U.K. are more responsive to community desires and operate in greater accordance with the principles of sustainable development. In order to build lasting eco-cities, communities must be included as partners. Without their consent and active engagement, an urban development project will be all hardware (roads, powerlines, buildings) and no software (education, public health, social initiatives). Despite the importance of increased community inclusion, it remains to be seen whether the "gentler" UDCs of the 2000s will equal the efficacy of their more monolithic predecessors.

Three Case Studies

This section will take a closer look at one UDC that has run to completion and two that are currently in operation. Each case study's examination will reveal the development goals, organizational structure and urban vision that are unique to each.

London Docklands

Controversial and successful, the London Docklands urban regeneration project is an excellent case study of what the powers of a broadly-empowered urban development corporation can achieve, but not without its drawbacks.

The post-LDDC London docklands

The London Docklands Development Corporation (LDDC) was a UDC established by the UK government in 1981. The LDDC was tasked with regenerating the London docks, an area that had fallen into serious disrepair. Over 100,000 jobs had been lost from 1978-1981, bringing the unemployment rate in the docklands to 17.8%. The docks had also experienced a 20% population decline in the previous decade and 60% of its area was deemed vacant, derelict, or under-used. Previous regeneration efforts led by the London Boroughs, Greater London Council, and the Docklands Joint Committee had failed to stem the tide of urban decay and unemployment. Thus, the U.K. government created UDCs and embraced entrepreneurial solutions to facilitate urban regeneration.

The LDDC was granted powers of land acquisition (including compulsory purchase), planning primacy in the area, enhancing infrastructure, and channeling government resources. At its onset, the LDDC was overseen by an eleven member board appointed by the Secretary of State for the Environment and led by a three member executive board. While not incorporated formally in its leadership structure, the LDDC consulted an Urban Design Advisory Group composed of architects and planners on informal design issues. The LDDC also sought more formalized advice on regional design from the Royal Fine Art Commission.

In order to increase interest in an area bereft of private investment, the LDDC improved transportation links and initiated a tax-subsidized Enterprise Zone (EZ) in the Isle of Dogs. Its substantial powers allowed the LDDC tremendous influence over the character of the new urban development area. The LDDC did act to conserve aspects of the docklands; one of the most important decisions made was to not to completely fill-in the docks themselves (as some previous plans had called for). The LDDC also sought to uphold high standards in environment and design. An LDDC monograph notes:

"if permanent regeneration was to be achieved design and environmental standards would need to be raised to compete with those established elsewhere in the capital. Indeed, it is the LDDC's aim to surpass those design standards and to achieve a degree of excellence which set the area apart from neighbouring and competing districts"

The dockland's untouchable status left the LDDC in a balancing act. Investors had long avoided the area, thus imposing overly stringent building requirements would stifle the momentum for private investment before it ever began. Once value was demonstrated in the area, the LDDC was better able to insist upon certain architectural and design standards.

By the time the LDDC devolved all its remaining power to the London Boroughs in June 1998, it had been a quantifiable success. In investing £1.86 billion of public funds, the UDC encouraged over £7.2 billion in private investment to flow into the area. 24,000 new homes were constructed as home ownership increased from 5% to 45%. The project saw the addition of 25 million square ft. of new commercial and industrial space. Overall employment in the docklands more than tripled, with the unemployment rate falling to 7.2%. The LDDC contributed much to the area's infrastructure including links to the London Underground, 144 km of new roads, new pedestrian walkways and bicycle paths, and fostering the development of the London City Airport.

Despite its statistical achievements, the LDDC met with resistance from many local authorities and residents who felt that its focus excluded the local community of the docklands. Opponents decried that gentrification of the area forced original residents out and the industries that moved in (i.e. financial services) weren't suited for to the former dockworkers' skill-sets. The LDDC maintains that it was not a housing, education, or health authority (those powers remained with the London Boroughs), thus it had no official responsibility to oversee those social aspects of the area's development. Irrespective of their obligation, the LDDC did apportion £120 million for schools, health centers, job training, and various other social programs. Whether the amount of money and attention the LDDC provided local residents was sufficient is debatable. Because the LDDC didn't shy away from its "you have to break a few eggs to make an omelet" mentality, the result was a vibrant, revitalized London downtown.

Hamburg Hafencity

Hafencity Hamburg is an ambitious urban development project currently underway in Hamburg, Germany. The Hamburg Senate approved a masterplan to redesign a 157 hectare area in 2000, the culmination of nearly a decade of momentum for the project.

Hamburg Hafencity's urban development area

Similarly to the London docklands urban regeneration effort, Hamburg's Hafencity also aimed to redevelop a former commercial waterfront area that had fallen into disuse. Tasked with overseeing Hafencity Hamburg's urban development project is Hafencity Hamburg GmbH (HCH), a UDC founded in 1998. HCH is in charge of land acquisition and sales, property development, and attracting investment. The corporation is also responsible for the area's public infrastructure improvements (except for the subway), marketing and promotion.

Owned entirely by the city of Hamburg, HCH's organizational structure is made up of three parts: an executive board (CEO and Managing Director), a supervisory board comprised of members of the Hamburg Senate, and an advisory board made up of experts in related academic disciplines. HCH's leadership structure incorporates business, government, and academic decision-makers. As opposed to the more concentrated power of the LDDC, HCH operates with a more extensive system of checks and balances; HCH land sales must be agreed upon by members of the Land Commission (made up largely of the Hamburg parliament) and overall planning responsibilities still lie with the Urban Development Commission.

By aiming to become a European leader in urban development by 2020, Hafencity's vision goes beyond restoring an area's productivity. As a result, sustainability and innovative design are a key features of the Hafencity project. The HCH website states:

"the aim is...to set inter-national standards for conceptual and architectural quality. It is important, therefore, not only to attract powerful and financially strong investors, but also to find developers willing to cooperate in setting quality standards and in treading innovative paths."

Land isn't only sold to the highest bidder, but is subject to the corporation's preferences for sustainable development. The Hafencity project utilizes many former brownfield sites and has created the "Hafencity ecolabel" to ensure that certain standards of sustainable design are met and strived for. The ecolabel assesses buildings based on their energy efficiency, construction materials, public access, and overall contribution to health and well-being. HCH is confident that it will exceed its goal that 30% of the buildings in the Hafencity development will comply with the ecolabel's gold standard. For the remainder of the project, residential buildings will not be constructed unless they attain its gold rating.

The HCH has also emphasized sustainability in its transportation and energy needs. Hafencity places a high priority on public ease of movement and accessibility. To improve the flow of foot traffic, parking is primarily underground and buildings are spaced apart as opposed to being constructed in long blocks. Hafencity contains more kilometers of pedestrian and bicycle paths than roadways. Bicycle rental stations will be present in front of multiple subway and bus stations, integrating public and non-motorized transportation. HCH has also taken steps toward a low-carbon energy supply by setting CO2 emission restrictions on its heating sources, incentivizing geothermal, solar, biomass, and hydrogen energy projects. The green standards of the HCH are excellent and it has won several awards in architecture, engineering, and marketing.

Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport

While the focus thus far has been on the West, the recent plan to upgrade the Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport (TTIA) demonstrates that UDCs have also found backing in Taiwan. As the primary international gateway of Taiwan, the TTIA is in need of a facelift. The renovation, expansion, and transformation of TTIA into Asia's foremost logistics hub is at the crux of President Ma Ying-Jeou's i-Taiwan 12 projects, an ambitious public works plan directed at regaining Taiwan's economic momentum. Over the course of eight years, the plan will pour NT $3.99 trillion (US $133 billion) into twelve nation-wide infrastructure projects.

President Ma Ying-jeou (center) overlooks the plan for the Taoyuan Aerotropolis

The plan for the new Taoyuan Aerotropolis will renovate Terminal 1 and the two existing runways while simultaneously constructing a new Terminal 3 and a longer third runway. With completion projected for 2020, the new airport will be able to accommodate 75 million passengers a year, more than doubling the airport's current capacity. Concurrently, the Taipei MRT is constructing an express line to the airport, shuttling riders from downtown Taipei to TTIA in a brisk 35 minutes. The plan also calls for widespread development of the area surrounding the airport, fostering an international business hub. Land has been allocated for free trade zones, agri-business, financial services, aviation R&D, sustainable residential communities, and coastal recreation. The project aims to create 80,000 jobs out of 120,000 total in the i-Taiwan plan.

In order to successfully enact the sweeping vision of the Taoyuan Aerotropolis , dual urban development corporations have been tasked to oversee the project. According to the "fried-egg" model, the airport (the egg yolk) will be run by a central government urban development corporation, the Taoyuan International Airport Corporation (TIAC). The adjacent airport city (the egg white) will be run by the Taoyuan Aerotropolis Corporation (TAC) under control of the Taoyuan County government. Both UDCs are entirely publicly-owned and blend a mix of local and central government officials, businessmen, and academics into their corporate management structures.

Although the outcome of the Taoyuan Aerotropolis project is a decade away, its organization structure is encouraging. As a self-declared "window of Taiwan's economy," the TTIA renovation and expansion is a critically important project. Taiwan's government deserves respect for utilizing a new management framework instead of adopting a risk-averse "business as usual" approach. Furthermore, the fried-egg development model recognizes that the Taoyuan Aerotropolis project's goals are two-fold: reintroduce TTIA as a world-class airport and build the surrounding area into a global business hub. By utilizing two separate UDCs, both are able to focus on issues most important to their core constituencies. The Taiwanese central government is focused first and foremost on establishing TTIA's status as a crucial air hub at the center of East Asia's flight routes. Stimulating Taoyuan County's local economy by developing adjacent business zones is a secondary benefit. Inversely, the Taoyuan County government's primary concern is creating an environment where the increased international traffic will stay and spend money. It will also work to integrate the airport's economic successes to the greater county via improved transportation links etc.

Conclusion

Structurally, the examples of UDCs from the U.K., Germany, and Taiwan are similar. They employ corporate management strategies with boards appointed by or indirectly approved of by the government. They all effectively incorporate academics, architects, planners, businessmen, and government officials into a focused decision-making framework, succeeding in delivering tangible results.

In a thematic sense, however, the character of each UDC differs drastically. The overarching theme of the LDDC was the regenerative power of the market; it relied upon a laissez-faire development model to entice an inflow of cash to an area previously unattractive to investors.

In comparison to the LDDC, HCH's powers are more diffused, and its model focuses on a holistic "livability" approach to urban development. Although the HCH operates in a different era (green design and sustainable development were not prominent in the public discourse of 1980s), its focus on green building, non-motorized transport, design, and energy standards distinguishes its urban vision.

Lastly, the dual UDCs in charge of the Taoyuan Aerotropolis frame urban development as a regional and national economic stimulus. Taoyuan Airport is not located in the middle of a dense urban setting. Instead, the project hopes that its small business city will integrate with Taiwan's surrounding metro areas, mutually simulating growth. Transportation links, green building renovation, and R&D centers are all means through which the Taiwanese leadership seeks to reclaim Taiwan's international standing in world trade.

More to Come

Each of the case studies above has practices that would prove beneficial to any potential UDC operating in Taichung. In part two, I want to discuss the conditions in Taichung that warrant the use of the UDC model for urban planning. Furthermore, I will analyze a proposed UDC structure for Taichung City and evaluate its potential implementation.

Photo Credits: Boston.com, Skyscraper City, China Post