How to build a community?
Community Meeting
9th of December 2024
Cocoa House
Hundipea
On Monday, December 9th 2024, at around 11:20 a community meeting was held in the so-called Cocoa House, a former factory building on the site of the future Hundipea district. There were quite a lot of visitors, and there was even some freshly boiled tea and kringel. And in a place that in the future will serve as a space for Hundipea’s community activities, among other uses, we held a critical meeting on community building activities by Hundipea and other large-scale projects, and came to conclusions about the un-affordability of housing and consequent inequities these kinds of housing developments result in.
To make it very short, Hundipea is a futuristic vision of the “first comprehensive, climate-neutral and human-friendly district in Estonia, with 16,000 people in the future” [1]. It is also a private limited company (OÜ) founded in 2019 by like-minded individuals coming together to transform the existing brownfield land and unused factories and warehouses into a climate-neutral urban area.
It is also a place that seems to have all the answers when it comes to climate-neutrality and ‘smart solutions’, and it also makes big promises of community and a better neighbourhood, of Hundipea “being born with the help of [...] residents of the neighbouring areas” [2], claims to be “putting people and the environment at the centre” [3], and to be “accessible and available [for] everyone” [4], as a “district [...] where both people and nature can thrive” [5] in a “15-minute city” [6].
Looking at how Hundipea is described in the press, only positive points are mentioned. It is coined by TalTech University as a “neigbourhood [...] better for the people” [7]; quoting Markus Hääl, CEO of Hundipea, it is named a “diverse and dense urban space” [8], where “community involvement and constant information exchange” [9] is given importance, and where “the formation of an elitist area is avoided” [10]. Other articles describe Hundipea as putting an “emphasis on working together, [on] community” [11] and mention how “the local community will be involved in developing activities and strategies to better understand the wishes and concerns of the current residents of the area” [12]; they also mention Hundipea’s “community-built spaces” [13] and “community gardens” [14].
All these great promises and incantations should be taken with a (big) pinch of salt, not just because anyone having ‘all the answers’ should, I think, as a rule make you very skeptical; but more so because Paljassaare is already a neighbourhood with a population of about 700 people, living in different forms of housing.
The current residents of the peninsula include the residents of the apartment buildings on Laevastiku, the residents of the social housing (Paljassaare Sotsiaalmaja) on Paljassaare tee and some people also living in other social service facilities belonging to this ‘social village’; the population also inlcudes the residents of the private houses on Paljassaare tee and some people living permanently in Paljassaare’s garage city.
“In Paljassaare there is only like 700 people living. They are not really communicating even with each other. So, the main task is to build a community” [15]
This is the phrase that stood out the most from my interview with Maarja Matteus, the community and creative manager of Hundipea, who I was able to interview on questions of neighbourhood and community building efforts.
I asked myself how Hundipea wants to build this community, and I was able to find out more through an interview with Hundipea’s community and creative manager. The list of activities organised by Hundipea reads like the who is who or rather the what is what of community building measures. Hundipea is staying in continuous contact with the neighbours of the future district in order to build trust; the community manager communicates directly with the residents of the social housing, hangs posters there, talks to people and invites them to events and neighbourhood meetings. They are also in contact with the residents of Laevastiku and are informing the future neighbours at Tööstuse tee, all the way on the other side of the area that Hundipea will occupy at some point, about the plans for the district and current events. So far there is an active community of around 25 people who share their ideas at the quarterly meetings at Hundipea.
These community meetings and spaces are thought up and decided upon by Hundipea. It’s not buttom-up at all, but top-down: The people can decide to get involved, but within a very set framework, set by the developers.
As a counterexample I want to first mention the neighbourhood associations that exist all over Tallinn. These “neighbourhood associations are NGOs driven by citizen initiative” [16], whose work depends on the “neighbourhood’s environment” [17]. A neighbourhood association is “(ideally one of many) citizens’ associations that focuses on improving the local living environment” [18], on “bring[ing] together people with different interests” [19], who take decisions “follow[ing] the principles of deliberative democracy” [20]. As Johanna Holvandus concludes: “NGOs and their activity are seen as a means of creating social cohesion and social responsibility both in state and city development documents” [21].
In another example, from Vienna, Austria, the Seestadt [lake city] Aspern, the first residents of this development, that plans to house 25.000 people by 2030, described themselves as a “community of destiny” [22], in which they helped each other with handywork and lending each other tools etc. The local community is now organized in many local initiatives such as that for the neighbourhood budget and the community garden associations [23].
The provision of social infrastructure is the responsibility of the municipality that can pass on this duty to private construction projects. Hundipea is therefore required to build enough kindergardens and schools according to the number of people that will live in Hundipea at its completion. This is the only stipulation that Hundipea has to adhere to when it comes to planning actions that directly affect the people who live there and in the surrounding neighbourhood.
“As of 2013 there are in total 195,145 (100%) residences in Tallinn of which 4143 (2%) are owned by the state of the local government (Statistical Yearbook of Tallinn, 2013). This means that any planning action is greatly influenced by private owners.” [24]
According to the community manager of Hundipea, 10 percent of the housing units in Hundipea will be affordable and rented out directly by Hundipea to e.g. firemen and teachers working in the area. How this will be done exactly remains to be seen, but it is also not happening without the bigger picture in mind: How can a 15-minute-city possibly function if the teachers and firemen and other people employed in vital fields have to commute to do so?
The Generation Block in Helsinki, Finland, combines affordable housing, student housing and owner-occupied housing, while also providing communal spaces. This project aligns with government housing policies to prevent homelessness, which is part of a national objective gaining special significance in the context of “evictions skyrocketing” [25] in Helsinki. Another example of a different approach is a project from Berlin, the Dragonerareal, where, since the development is owned by a state-owned housing association, half of the to be built flats need to be affordable housing. And while this seems like a lot compared to private developments, a study on the area showed that 80 percent of affordable housing would have been needed [26] (Šustr).
“[it is] somewhat inevitable that quality spaces such as Tallinn waterfronts will be exploited as efficiently as possible” and, “the land owner’s first thought is certainly not going to be [...] a playground or social housing”
[27]
I am convinced that this statement can stand alone, since the number of projects exploiting plots in special and alluring locations is immense and this development can be observed all over the world.
Hundipea
exists
only
as
a
promise
Private developments will first of all serve private interests. And public space is in a lot of these examples used as poster child for new developments that do indeed offer vast public spaces and green environments for everyone to use. But that also mostly offer housing to the affluent. Even with ticking all the right boxes of community interventions, what people really need is access to affordable housing and the security of affordable rents and long-term secure rental contracts. Gentrification does not just mean displacement, it means building districts that people may be able to walk through and to some extent enjoy but never live in.
We can not expect private developers to take care of this if there are no regulations for affordable housing, but community can only exist if people are actually able to frequent the same spaces. And the state has to get involved with regulations, because private ownership through past decisions can not be reversed, but political involvement now is possible. I wrote this short manifesto with the observations made during this research in mind and with the demand and hope for a better understanding of people’s needs and more citizen-friendly city politics in mind.
1. Community can only be built with an equitable right to the city in mind
2. Community participation cannot be an afterthought, it must be at the centre of any spatial planning
3. A community has to be built by the people who form part of it – people have agency and they will organize themselves
4. Community needs space – indoor space for meeting and spending time (together) should be provided
5. Affordable housing has to be the norm, and people should live together in the same spaces no matter their income
6. There has to be regulation through the state/municipality, especially with private developments
7. The space at resident’s disposal must be more than the public space available to anyone
8. Temporary solutions are still solutions – a lot can be gained from trying things out
9. Encouraging community ownership is integral for its long-term resilience
How to
build
a community ?
-
A Manifesto
Reflections
A Manifesto like this will always stay in the ‘let us hope for the better’, in a hope for the political agenda of cities to change; a manifesto like this includes a sentiment of wishing for a utopia. But, to come back to reality here: This manifesto was presented to a room not only of peers, and fellow students, to lecturers, all people very much interested in the city and in thinking about what people in cities need and how their lives can be bettered. The audience also included the CEO of Hundipea, the head of Greentech and the community manager of Hundipea, and after my first nervous taking notice of this, I realized that this manifesto can stand on its own, because it can be broken down to the simple demand for more state and municipality control over how properties within cities are sold, who they are sold to and what projects are planned for these plots. And, most importantly, how these projects serve the public and how they incIude the general public of a city, not just a preselected group. I also want to stress that criticising individual projects is necessary, but at the stage when they can be criticised it may be too late to change anything about them, it is the before that counts, the decision making and public planning processes. And it is not yet, but should be taken for granted that the municipalities and city governments are involved in the provision of housing for their citizens, which must mean the provision of affordable housing for those who need it. And it can never mean that private developments are left to decide by themselves who to include and who are allowed to claim community building efforts by ticking a few (correct) boxes, as you would to win in a game of bingo.
References:
[1] Tule aita rajada Eestisse kliimaneutraalne tulevikulinn, TalTech (12.04.2022), https://taltech.ee/uudised/tule-aita-rajada-eestisse-kliimaneutraalne-tulevikulinn.
[2] and [3] Hundipea, A bright district emerging, https://hundipea.ee/en/.
[4] Placard at site of Hundipea.
[5] and [6] Hundipea, A bright district emerging, https://hundipea.ee/en/.
[7] Taltech and Wolfscape are looking for green solutions, TalTech (09.02.2022), https://taltech.ee/en/news/taltech-and-wolfscape-are-looking-green-solutions.
[8], [9] and [10] Fotod: Hundipea asumisse istutati nurgakivi, Rohegeenius (26.05.2024), https://rohe.geenius.ee/rubriik/uudis/fotod-hundipea-asumisse-istutati-nurgakivi/.
[11] Hundipea endine tööstusmaastik avaneb rohelisteks jõuludeks, Rohegeenius (28.11.2023), https://rohe.geenius.ee/rubriik/uudis/hundipea-endine-toostusmaastik-avaneb-rohelisteks-jouludeks/.
[12], [13] and [14] Ivar Soopan, Eesti investorid arendavad Põhja-Tallinnas kliimaneutraalset asumit, Rogeneenius (14.09.2021), https://rohe.geenius.ee/rubriik/uudis/eesti-investorid-arendavad-pohja-tallinnas-kliimaneutraalset-asumit/.
[15] Maarja Matteus, community manager of Hundipea, interview on 26.11.2024.
[16] Johanna Holvandus, Collaborative Planning Practice in Tallinn, Estonia: the Role and Viewpoint of Neighbourhood Associations, University of Tartu (2014), https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339508432_Collaborative_Planning_Practice_in_Tallinn_Estonia_the_Role_and_Viewpoint_of_Neighbourhood_Associations, p. 22.
[17] and [18] Johanna Holvandus, p. 21.
[19] and [20] Johanna Holvandus, p. 22.
[21] Johanna Holvandus, p. 24.
[22] and [23] Martin Putschögl and Bernadette Redl, Funktioniert die Seestadt Aspern?, Der Standard, (18.04.2023), https://www.derstandard.at/story/2000145582989/funktioniert-die-seestadt-aspern.
[24] Johanna Holvandus, p. 16-17.
[25] Affordable Housing Activation, City: Helsinki. Generation Block, Helsinki, https://atlas.affordablehousingactivation.org/ciudad/helsinki/.
[26] Nicolas Šustr, Noch fünf Jahre bis zum Erstbezug, nd Journalismus von Links (18.07.2022).
[27] Johanna Hovandus and Ott Kadarik, Remarks on Kalarand, MAJA Estonian Architectural Review (2022).