|
Case Studies The Karolinenviertel Case in Hamburg - St. Pauli
Balance of power within the partnerships
The recommendations passed by the redevelopment advisory board to the District Assembly most of the time relate to area specific or project related procedures. Since the influence of the advisory board is locally clearly limited, it can happen that conflicts in the objectives between the decisions of the advisory board and the district interests occur by decisions of other political expert committees on higher level. It goes without saying that entire city interests play an important role as well. The formalised structures and protagonists on local and entire city level have certainly more power than the advisory board on neighbourhood level.
A recen example is the controversial discussion in the Karolinenviertel about the planning of a ‘centre for the music economy’ in St. Pauli. The advisory board did not approve the necessary development of an open space in the neighbourhood but the politicians on the district-level voted for the development and ignored the recommendation of the advisory board. The basic interest in the realisation of this project was valued higher than the interest of the advisory board of the conservation of the open space.
In general the district or expert authorities can pull all decisions towards them and can prohibit or promote envisaged measures with respect to their programmatic and precedent objectives, independently from the decisions in the neighbourhood. However, the local government politicians in the redevelopment area are closely confronted with the events and predominant opinions in the neighbourhood. The fact that the inhabitants are also potential voters, who can influence political decisions, probably plays a significant role.
Regarding the question how power is balanced or split between the partners, only a subjective impression can be expressed. From the point of view of the editors the redevelopment advisory board formally has no, respectively only partial power since it does not have any instruments or binding decision authority at its disposal. Informal, however, the council is very influential.
Analysis of partnerships of STEG as area-manager in the Karolinenviertel with other protagonists
Characteristics of co-operation Stakeholder
Key Partners |
Aims |
Type of partnership |
Initiative |
Leadership |
Power |
| A |
Ministry for Construction and Traffic Affairs (BBV) |
·1 formulation of city-wide interests
·2 improvement of the situation in the neighbourhood
·3 Conversion of political orders and decisions
|
institutionalised
(contracting) |
Ministry / STEG |
Ministry |
Ministry |
| B |
Other ministries, e.g.
·1 Social Affairs
·2 Economic Affairs
·3 Environment
|
·4 Use of sectoral resources
·5 Realisation of sectoral aims
|
project related and eventually institutionalised (contracting) |
STEG |
Ministry |
Ministry |
| C |
Public facilities
·1 Children and youths facilities, schools
·2 employment representatives
|
·3 Use of sectoral resources
·4 Realisation of sectoral aims
|
project oriented / informal |
STEG |
STEG |
STEG |
| D |
Local Authority / District Authorities
|
·1 Conservation of neighbourhood interests against central control
·2 Realisation of aims on the District-level |
institutionalised |
STEG / Local Authority |
STEG |
STEG / Local Authority |
| E |
Redevelopment Advisory Board
(inhabitants, entrepreneurs, owner, politicians, social facilities |
·3 Inclusion of the local protagonists
·4 Representation of interests
|
institutionalised |
STEG / Area committee |
STEG |
STEG /Area committee |
| F |
Private proprietors |
·1 Generating investments
|
project related |
STEG / owners |
STEG |
STEG / owners / Ministry / Local Authority |
| G |
Entrepreneurs |
·2 Investments, turnover, generating or safeguarding of jobs
|
project related |
STEG / entrepreneurs |
STEG |
STEG |
| H |
Lobbyists
(clubs, association, etc.) |
·3 commitment
|
project related + institutionalised |
STEG / lobbyists |
STEG |
STEG / Lobbyists |
Analysis of protagonist structures by practical examples
| Characteristics of co-operation
Project examples |
Aims |
Main key partners
(Ranking) |
Initiative
(Ranking) |
Contribution |
‘money’ |
‘brain’ |
Sustainability of the results |
Sprungschanze /Etage 21
(start-up facilities) |
Support + promotion of entrepreneurship |
·4 Ministry ·5 STEG ·6 investor |
·7 STEG
|
·8 Ministry ·9 STEG ·10 Investor |
x
x
x |
X |
Yes |
| Sternquadrant
(Conversion of former industrial space into apartments and commercial space) |
creation of apartments and commercial space |
·1 Ministry
·2 investor
·3 STEG
|
·4 owner/ Investor
|
·5 Ministry
·6 Investor
·7 STEG
|
x
x |
X |
Yes |
| Health centre
(Conversion of former harbour-hospital into an integrated health-care centre) |
conservation of social infrastructure |
·1 Ministry
·2 STEG
·3 lobbyists
|
·4 lobbyists
·5 neighbourhood
|
·8 Ministry
·9 STEG
·10 lobbyists
|
x |
x
x |
Yes |
| modernisation projects for private owners |
conservation of apartments |
·1 Ministry
·2 Investor
·3 STEG
|
·4 owner / investor
·5 STEG
|
·11 Ministry
·12 Investor
·13 STEG
|
x
x |
x |
Yes |
| Schanzenkieker
(Improvement of cleaning-structures of streets and public spaces) |
improvement of living surroundings |
·1 Ministry
·2 Local Authority
·3 STEG
|
·4 STEG
·5 area committee
|
·6 Ministry
·7 Local Authority
·8 STEG
|
x
x
x |
x |
Yes |
| Standpunkt.Schanze
(Business-Network of shop-keepers) |
support business community |
·1 Ministry
·2 entrepreneurs
·3 STEG
|
·4 STEG
·5 entrepreneurs
|
·6 Ministry
·7 entrepreneur
·8 STEG
|
x |
x
x |
Open |
| KOOP Schanze
(Network of social infrastructure) |
conservation of social infrastructure |
·9 Ministry
·10 lobbyist
·11 STEG
|
·12 Ministry
|
·13 Ministry
·14 lobbyist
·15 STEG
|
x |
x
x |
Open |
3.6. Partnerships in the Karolinenviertel IV. Strategies and structures of the regeneration-process
|