Helsinki-Tallinn Archipelago

A call for a global network of city arcologies

2009-07-01T05:01:00.001-07:00

by AgaTino Rizzo*

....the article (link) is really interesting, but as architect, engineer, and planner I'm a bit skeptical about Soleri's model.

Arcology is a comprehensive device which need to be created by a top-down authority....need to have 100% consensus...in one word is not that democratic. Risking to be a bit polemic, I would say: better to have sprawl than a dictatorship...because that's the kind of project.

As architect I'm really fascinated by these pure and organic forms, but the reality is much complex and I don't see many chances for Soleri's project to be successful. Yet we can't address a problem so complex (namely, change our way of live) in such simplistic terms.

read more: http://www.presstletter.com/articolo.asp?articolo=2249

UF-Mashup #5: P2P CONTEST "Let's complete Anders's project" (this week "Expecting visitors")

2009-06-09T02:40:00.000-07:00

by Anders Simonsen*

"Let's complete Anders's project" is a P2P contest aimed to complete Anders Simonsen's research on mass culture, consume, and decadence in post-socialist countries in Europe.

New topics will be created in the discussion board of the UF-Facebook. In this space you can copy/paste texts and links created by you or quotations from an available (for publishing) source. In alternative, you can post your work to "cityleft (at) altervista (dot) org". The aim is to complete Anders's research.

UF-Toolbox #6: Helsinki-Tallinn Region - tracing networks in an archipelago of islands

2009-06-09T02:37:00.000-07:00

by Bauhaus Kolleg IX

What's about the northern periphery of Europe?

How post-communist countries handled the transition from a collective economy to a liberal one?

What imply transnational dynamics between consolidated and fast-developing countries over cities?

What socio-spatial patterns can we recognize in this particular side of Europe and how Europeanisation is influencing young-small democracies in the Baltic Sea?

As planners, what future scenarios can we propose beside the increasing fragmentation of cities?

read more: http://www.presstletter.com/articolo.asp?articolo=2067

p2p art contest

2009-05-21T02:43:00.001-07:00

Take part to the p2p art-contest!!!
check it out at this linK:
http://www.presstletter.com/articolo.asp?articolo=2053

UF-Mashup #2: P2P CONTEST "A plane yellow burger"

2009-05-09T15:28:00.001-07:00

"Let's complete Anders's project" is a P2P contest aimed to complete Anders Simonsen's research on mass culture, consume, and decadence in post-socialist countries in Europe (see: http://www.presstletter.com/articolo.asp?articolo=2044).

New topics will be created in the discussion board of the UF-Facebook. In this space you can copy/paste texts and links created by you or quotations from an available (for publishing) source. The pictures area available on GMap support for a closer look. The aim is to complete Anders's research.

This will be one of the first experiments in P2P media-art research. I hope you will be proud to take part on it and, therefore, invite other friend to do so. Once the series of pictures will be entirely published, UF-Community will evaluate democratically each proposal which, together with the pictures, will be published in the first issue of UF-Mag, available online as well as in paperback.

--
Cityleft - Openshare Urbanism
http://www.cityleft.altervista.org/

UF-Toolbox #3: Metropolis?

2009-04-26T11:20:00.001-07:00

by ATR

At the Laituri workspace in Helsinki is currently going on "Metropolitan Horizons", an exhibition organized by the Centre for Urban and Regional Studies – Helsinki University of Technology.

In this frame, a palette of analyses and ideas are shown to allow a debate on European metropolises scenarios today and in the next future....

--
Cityleft - Urbanism 3.0
http://www.cityleft.altervista.org/

Urban Fiction Toolbox #2: How Peer Production And The Economic P2P Model Can Subvert The World Of Physical Production

2009-04-26T11:19:00.001-07:00

by

How does the peer to peer paradigm, which combines the input of open and free raw material (knowledge, software, designs), with participatory production processes and commons (i.e. universally available output), affect the world of urbanism?
read more: http://www.presstletter.com/articolo.asp?articolo=2016
--
Cityleft - Urbanism 3.0
http://www.cityleft.altervista.org/

Urban Fiction Toolbox #1: Urbanism 3.0

2009-04-26T11:17:00.001-07:00

by ATR

There is no doubt that the ongoing financial crisis will have a negative impact on spending on urban research. Alternatively, the current impasse of real-estate may present an opportunity for urbanists (scholars as well as practitioners) to contemplate and develop new practices that would enrich urban studies and empower local communities. In this article we present the examples of two Urban Art Interventions (UAIs) that were part of two different research projects carried out in the Helsinki-Tallinn region over the past four years... read more: http://www.presstletter.com/articolo.asp?articolo=2013
--
Cityleft - Urbanism 3.0
http://www.cityleft.altervista.org/

City…form north-Europe -> an Urban Fiction

2009-04-05T05:50:00.000-07:00

by AgaTino Rizzo

After three months “City…from north-Europe” change skin to become a more complete and independent column dealing with urban culture, architecture, and public space not only in “north-Europe”. Therefore we changed the name in "an Urban Fiction".

Our early issues are still valid: support the making of the PresS/Tletter an international platform, provide a new “oblique” point of view in the current practice of urbanism, for instance.

In UF, however, we will focus also in emergent urban lifestyles, new technologies, new political horizons, and we will try to stimulate a trans-disciplinary debate on urban research.

We are working to structure UF around at least three issues:

UF-Kosovo: focus on an emergent European country;
UF-City: urban research and practices;
UF-Toolbox: new practical, theoretical, and political horizons after the current financial crisis.

Today we have an incredible opportunity to re-think cities and development. The crisis shows even to the most proud architect the limits on conceiving cities as space to be filled (a brutal masculine practice). Therefore we should call for a social involvement. It will be a shift from a scientific professionalism to a fuzzy social practice. That’s the last chance to make urban researchers and practitioners useful for the world.

I hope UF will be able to go beyond cities, perhaps investigating what’s going on in a more than ever forgotten country-side, and pointless rhetoric.

The aim of this space is to create tools capable to affect the most urgent global emergencies: social segregation and economic polarization.

You find UF at this link: http://www.presstletter.com/storico.asp?s=An+Urban+Fiction

* UF is also in facebook (link)

Archipelago City. A trans-national metropolis in the Baltic Sea

2009-03-01T05:43:00.001-08:00

by Bauhaus Kolleg IX*

In 2007/2008, the Border Cities Kolleg, facilitated by the Germany-based Bauhaus Dessau Foundation [1], brought together an international group of young planners, architects, artists and urbanists to explore the complex dynamics of trans-national urbanism in the Baltic Sea Region. Within this framework our group came together to consider the cities of Helsinki and Tallinn as a case of self-made trans-national metropolis in EU. Our research tested the notion of an integrated regional identity formation as desired by region makers to determine whether this model, or alternate emergent forms better describe the situation of the Helsinki-Tallinn-Region (HTR). The cross border effects as well as historical pre-conditions manifest in the urban fabric of Tallinn appeared to us as an archipelago of ‘islands’, each with different economic, social, and cultural milieus; segregations overlooked or under considered by city planners and administrators. The model of the archipelago also created an inverse space between these hegemonic ‘islands’ where new inputs can enrich HTR’s diversity. These latter hypotheses were tested in Tallinn through a series of public interventions in May 2008, concluding with a discussion between city planners, architects, art critics and general public. The outcome led to following proposals developed within our program as a series of experimental urban scenarios dealing with Tallinn’s urban structure seen as an archipelago of islands, a social segregation process and new strategies to enable both stakeholders and inhabitants to influence the future of HTR.

Start: a Development Strategy for the Urban Landscape
The project ARCHIPELAGO CITY draws on the structural potentials of the city itself for future urban development [2]. The project uses landscape elements for a determined process-oriented development strategy, tightly linked to the upcoming contemporary planning issue of landscape urbanism theorized especially in North America and more often already successfully practiced in Europe. The project begins with an analysis of the urban fabric looking for specific demands regarding topics such as population density, typological supply of open spaces, hierarchization and stigmatization and structural issues. From this a map of zones with very specific combinations of problems was elaborated as a base on which to develop structural planning process addressing different issues in certain zones. As the most underprivileged urban islands identified through this elaboration fall together with the most stigmatized districts, the qualification of these urban areas to prevent segregation processes within the city seems the most necessary. The proposes of the project, exploring the possibilities of open space programs for urban qualification, uses three scales already existing in the city fabric as points to intervene – big areas with importance on city scale, inner qualification of urban islands, punctual interventions using also temporary strategies in an ever changing cityscape. On the city scale big potentials are stated for the open lands between the two islands of Lasname leading to the cliffs and the abandoned quarry next to it and the abandoned part of extreme natural beauty west of Kopli beach. Both would be in direct neighbourhood to densely populated areas such as Lasnamae, Mustamae and Vaike Oismae and bear the potentials of real improvement for life conditions in these districts when sensitively developed into recreational areas than building plots. From an inner qualification of urban islands with landscape elements should especially benefit areas with weak structures and a lack of identity such as Kopli and Tallinn’s inner areas. Punctual programmatic interventions would use transformation processes in industrial areas to create stepping stones between open space facilities and would temporarily use abandoned spaces indoor and outdoor to widen urban programs and serve as breeding grounds for future inventions. In three zooms into Lasnamae, Kopli and the Harbour area a possible step by step development process using landscape as leading element are sketched out. On an abstract level one can read the proposed new structure of the city as an archipelago of distinctive characteristic islands intersected with big bands and dots of natural or recreational areas and stepping stones of public open space between several units.

Two case of studies

Harbour (Sadama)
Based on the archipelago model of the city structure, the project focused on a singular fragment of the urban form, the Tallinn Harbour (Sadama). A zone where the cross-border effects plays out physically and transitions are taking place due to past and current happenings. The Sadama currently a topic of discourse is undergoing transformations, due to growing economies, dynamicities and requirements of a more open water front development. Presently the welcome gate to the city via the sea for 2 million passengers yearly who are greeted by spas, cheap shopping malls, industrial land, parking lots against the silhouette of a beautiful old city. [//] Over the course of the last years the gaining importance of this piece of the city remains in the custody of multiple owners each with their own agenda for the course of development. The idea of potential development is seen more as a marketing strategy than one of solving the city’s need of an operational shoreline, remaining a brown field between the city and the coast. In this project we explored the possibility of reconnecting a single fragment back to daily city life experimenting with the feasibility of having non-hierarchal structure and not taking into the preconceived notion of a master plan. To see development along lines of different ownership criteria, needs and relation to the city centre, under the light of changing social, political and economic conditions. It is an attempt to extend and re-configure the relationship between the city, the harbour and its user. Dividing the factors making the space into Ownership differences, Un-used spaces, Existing infrastructural lines and Centres of Activity, we decided not to look at them in isolation but overlapped them to give us a probable solution. Putting these elements on the same plane in an abstract manner lead to a possible redefinition of the space by generating a new fabric for the area in question, leaving our interventions to specific points. With effective and strategic development in certain zones of the harbour such as: green spaces for daily usages, public harbour activities along the shore, informal and formal cultural spaces and possible area for mixed housing usages, provided a partial solution to probable rehabilitation of the shore front.

Railway
The project OF ISLANDS AND BORDERS is a strategy for development and protection of areas in Tallinn using the city’s own characteristics. It essentially consists in assuming the “archipelago” structure as an existing quality of the city and taking its advantages to make urban planning, using its elements to work for the city, instead of against. The city’s train station area is the chosen case of study, where big transformations are suppose to take place in few years. This scenario leads to a rapid changing of the railway as an essential way of transportation for the city, and with it, the main train station and the area around it, where the pressure for development is going to be bigger than it is already starting to be now. Next to the train station, we find the Balti Jaam popular market and four small blocks of mixed area. Due to the lack of space, there will be no other option to the transnational space than invading and transforming Kalamaja´s urban fabric. To prepare Kalamaja for this transnational challenge, this project chooses to strength these two in-between areas – the Balti Jaam market and the four blocks, making of them two new islands and using them as buffer zones. These two buffer zones will block the natural way of development and push them into a big and empty rail yard area, where the new transnational space is now going to take place.

Transit. This Too Shall Pass
This project concerns two case studies of urban transformation: Makasiinit in Helsinki and Baltijaam market in Tallinn. These are spaces of transition, emerging in the 1990s during a period of rupture and shifting value in urban form. Located near rail stations, the post-industrial landscape offered great potential for experimentation and appropriation. The Makasiinit district in Helsinki was a warehouse area occupied by cultural producers as a production, exhibition and community space. Markets,concerts and other informal activities became increasingly popular here. The Baltijaam Market in Tallinn is home to an informal market, established in the transitional period following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Here various low priced goods and produce are available through market stalls and indoor spaces. Although located within different contexts, and operating with different patterns and users, several commonalities exist. Both areas grew out of local initiative, desire and necessity, and became important sites to enact culture and negotiate transitions. Now new desires and initiatives -if not necessities- have led to new visions for these places. In the case of Makasiinit, attempts by local users to challenge, and propose a new trajectory were unsuccessful to alter official plans, and users have now relocated to a new site. The future of the Baltijaam market is undetermined, but if the experience of Makasiinit is any indication, the shift promises to be very abrupt and distinct from current use patterns. Within these transitions, there is a significant loss of complexity and vitality in these places, one that cannot be easily replicated. This ongoing project seeks to bring together different perspectives of local users, planners and developers, to make the complexity and potential of both sites visible.

Plug&Plan. A New Model For Urban Centers
How long Tallinn will manage its urban growth without a proper dialogue among its stakeholders, is the question that those involved in planning are posing in the last few years. The regime of deregulation started at the eve of the Estonian’s independency has created several opportunities for economic and urban developments. However, this process is leading to a negative impact on the social structure as well as in the urban structure of Tallinn in terms of public space. From this starting point a project, metaphorically named PLUG&PLAN [3], has been developed. PLUG & PLAN consists of a network of Urban Centers (UCs) located in strategic areas around the city. PLUG&PLAN use this already existing ‘energy’ to enable residents to work together with local stakeholders in order to produce that open and shared knowledge essential in a mature metropolis (PLAN). PLUG&PLAN’s UCs are bound, temporary and easy to install. Bound because each UC addresses the problems of the area where it is located on. Temporary because at the beginning of the process a deadline is fixed beyond which the UCs are moved elsewhere. Easy to install because each UC is an inflated structure with a flexible topology which can fit in almost every urban situation. So far, PLUG&PLAN is a project of dialogue aimed to produce open, shared and updated knowledge still missing element in an otherwise competitive and equitable Finnish-Estonian trans-national region.

* this article has been published extensively in Maja (Estonian Architectural Review) n°4-2008 : “Local planning strategies in the frame work of european spatial policy” by Tomas Jonsson, Sukanya Krishnamurthy, Reinhard Micheller, Agatino Rizzo, Ricardo Santacruz, Filipe Santos de Souza.

Forthcoming Italian version in «Urbanistica», edited by Agatino Rizzo

[1] See: http://www.eu-urbanism-bordercities.de/

[2] http://www.rmicheller.net/archipelagocity.html

[3] http://www.cityleft.altervista.org/neworld/plug.htm

Graffiti is Dead... Long Live Graffiti!

2009-02-19T11:22:00.001-08:00

by Michail Galanakis*

Art or vandalism? Creative expressions or signs of psychotic behaviour? The phenomenon of street art – graffiti, tagging, stencil – challenges our rights to public space. Depending on our social and ontological position, graffiti may be perceived as a creative outlet for those people whose oppressed imagination translates via spray-paint into a “voice.” Or it may be perceived as the visual littering of our public spaces, our walls, our cities. Manolis Andriotakis (2005) presents an equally littering source that has been normalised to the extreme: commercial advertisement.

The activities of bigger and smaller corporate capital, the high-rise of multinationals, the fortified civic buildings, the monstrous squares with surveillance cameras and constant policing, all these are the ideal occurrences of public space, while the modest drawings of a youngster are criminal acts, and decrease our freedom. The fact that there are whole areas inaccessible to citizens, and that our activities are monitored, is not oppressive. Oppressive is the youngster with the spray paint or the marker at hand. (Andriotakis 2005)[1]

We can contemplate on the legitimised and normalised docility that urbanites have to live with and the fact that clean and orderly public spaces still pervade the popular discussion on public participation and the right to the city. In doing so, we blindly disregard the colonisation of our cities by advertisements, pacifying consumerism, and soulless accumulation of wealth.

An interesting interpretation of street art is that the “author,” slave to the primordial instinct to territorialise, leaves his mark, pretty much like a dog. It is interesting how discourses about street art essentialise the masculine nature of urban guerrilla art-fare. “Those youngsters” are almost magically stereotyped as young men. Norman Mailer (1974) [2] in an essay he wrote on New York graffiti, talks of his informants; young men in the ghettos of the big city who wanted to break loose from the socio-spatial restrictions imposed on them by colouring the metallic carcass of subway trains. Mailer talks of a long gone era when graffiti and tagging were “shouts” from the ghetto sub-cultures.

Nowadays, street art in its variety can be seen as an artistic form of urban activism. It can also be seen as a “shout” against the individualism normalised and internalised, against the anonymity and alienation of public space and the public sphere. When only the legitimised rights of the state authorities and market interests define public space, a can of spray-paint, a sticker or a stencil, may be one way of protesting. These expressions litter our clean cityscape, they constitute visual noise and worth punitive measures and zero tolerance, for they are the voices of our dormant conscience, our child-like curiosity and our desire to open up closures. These “voices” may get expelled to virtual space, they may be hunted down for they offend our rights to be peacefully muted and passive; they nevertheless insist on reminding us what public space shouldn’t be: claimable by all (to turn on its head a statement by Erving Goffman) [3].

Helsinki 01.01.2009

* Doctor of Arts (Taik)

References
[1] Andriotakis, M. (2005). City Scethes [ΣχÎδια ΠÏŒλης ]. Athens: Nefelh. (in Greek)
[2] Mailer, N. (1974). The Faith of Graffiti. New York: Praeger. Also check: http://thefaithofgraffiti.blogspot.com/
[3] Goffman, E. (1972). Relations in Public. Microstudies of the Public Order. New York: Harper Torchbooks. Goffman writes: “[…] public in the sense of being non-claimable.” (Goffman 1972, p.51)

Photo by Michail Galanakis Helsinki, 2009. Photo by Michail Galanakis

Lisbon, 2008. Photo by Michail Galanakis Athens, 2007.

Athens. Photo by Dimitris Theodosis - Menegos, P. & Theodosis, D. (2007). The Street Art in Athens. [ΤοιχοδρομÎ¯ες. Το Street Art στην ΑθÎ®να. Vol.1]. Athens: OΞΥ. (in Greek)

Eindhoven, 2008. Photo by Michail Galanakis

Helsinki, 2009. Photo by Michail Galanakis

City…from North-Europe

2009-01-12T03:39:00.001-08:00

by AgaTino Rizzo

This is a new "box" of contents which in the frame of this website will try to open a window on the North-European city. At the same time, this new column wants to achieve quite ambitious targets. continue...

islands lost at sea

2009-01-04T09:11:00.001-08:00

Ferries are important devices in the Baltic Sea Region. Short-range cruises as well as cargoes in the last years have strengthen trans-nationals networks, providing workplaces for thousand people, being vectors for innovation, building identity in the Baltic region.

Cities should learn a lot from those devices. Perhaps, metropolises should fear a bit these mini-cities and, and because of that, they should try to establish partnerships to provide physical and social benefits for the urban space.

Many advantages could be achieved by moving further urban developments in these devices: competitiveness, preservation by urban-sprawl-developments of natural areas, a dynamic identity fitting the actual social needs, and a better involvement of private investors in social issues.

A new platform has been developed to investigate this non-urban phenomenon. It is avalaible at this URL: http://www.cityleft.altervista.org/ferry/ferry.htm

Intervention activities

2008-05-10T08:22:00.001-07:00

Between Tallinn and Helsinki, a number of bonds are being formed, or enhanced, with the desire to establish an integrated region. but how much has this idea of a region played out in the reality of local inhabitants? Through our interventions we want to find out how much have these ideas relate to the desires and practices of local actors in this region. How do these visions relate, or conflict? what are the implications of either? are there other possibilities?

Metaphorically referring to the alco-tourism phenomenon, all projects feature alco-crates and carts in various combinations and forms. The economic relation is transformed into a social relation to explore this issue.

Our activities:

day 1: Kiosk:

A central base created out of crates as a portable platform, arranged along the lines of flow of people between the terminals at the harbor.

Intent: an understanding of the in between space as a space of relation set up in the the common space used by ferry passengers traveling to and from the city, we will find out what visions there are for such 'in between' spaces, and what kind of relations exist and are desired between the people of Tallinn and Helsinki.

Here we will test the notion of tallinn urban form as an archipelago of islands and in-between spaces. Postcards of the city in this spatial form will be available, encouraging people to understand the various parts of the city in different ways. there will also be a collection of desires of city development, redistributed as labels on water bottles. anyone who contributes a vision will receive another persons vision in exchange.

Gateway: addressing the concept of islands in Tallinn as centripical forces, a gateway made of beer crates will be setup in Tammsaare park between 'old' and 'new' towns. Populations of each 'town' will be tallied, and local users will be questioned about the different character of each space, and others in the city.

Day 2: Tallinn in transition

Visiting three different sites of urban and social transformation in Tallinn, these sites are:

Rottermann district, Balti Jaami Market, Uus Maailm Community.

We will bring elements of each site to the other, to understand the
differences and similiarities. Here we will also collect local users desires, to relate local perspectives to municipal and regional perspectives.

We can consider larger regional implications of development, and whether there are opportunities for regional strategies to address these concerns.

Events of the day will end in a dinner, discussion and video projection at the Uus Maailm district, on the corner of Suur-Amerika and Koidu tee.

Discussion:
what are the quality of these developments, what pressures are driving these, in particular, are there regional pressures? how do these relate to local desires and practices?

how do these transformations relate to developments in Helsinki? are there any useful comparisons and strategies to explore?

Day 3: harbour activation

A series of activities that explore the harbour area as a site of relation between Tallinn and Helsinki.

A beach party and performance in the city centre harbour area will address the relation of the city and the sea.

discussion: what are local desires for harbour development? how do these compare to official plans and regional development projects?

Tallsinki football!!! playing with the idea of ferry as a site of relation, how can this travel be reimagined? what are the goals? who wins? who loses? what are the rules????

Tunnel vision: much discussion has been had about a tunnel between tallinn and helsinki, but what are it's local effects? is it only a distribution access, or are there other ideas? come for dinner and discussion at the proposed site of the tunnel in Viimsi! (please contact us to confirm your attendance and transportation)

flyer for intervention

2008-05-05T09:19:00.001-07:00

The Tallinn Intervention Program!

BauKoHT

2008-05-03T00:32:00.000-07:00

Bauhaus+Kolleg+Helsinki-Tallinn intervention team:

Agatino Rizzo (urban planner)

Reinhardt Micheller (landscape architect)

Ricardo Santacruz (architect)

Tomas Jonsson (artist)

MAKING OF THE KIOSK

2008-04-25T09:10:00.001-07:00

INTERVENTION ON FRIDAY:

MAKING OF THE KIOSK:

see: http://bp1.blogger.com/_lN5QVyvoGbc/SBwVW_Rg3QI/AAAAAAAAAAU/HciqrwUuFlQ/s1600-h/Picture+086.jpg

KIOSK:
- As shown above

AFTER WE HAVE GONE:

- Will have tape on the ground and flags
- TAPE: will have to check for other colors that are available

FLAGS: will be on posts:
- Need: bamboo
- Material for flags (has to be water proof)

MATERIALS NEEDED:

- Cable binders
- Scissors
- Have to ask for tools (UUS MAA)
- Hire a car?
- Crates are coming to?

GATE WAY

MATERIALS NEEDED:

- Sheets – of the selected colour
- Cable binders
- Possibility of bamboo
- Wires
- Boards?

FOR THE BOARDS:
- Arrange the crates one on top of the other
- Fix a board to them in front of it
- Easy, no need for wood work

WORST CASE SCENARIO:

- Windy
- Raining
- …

MAKING OF THE TABLE:

MATERIALS NEEDED:

- Pieces of board 2m * 0.8m- have to find a wood workshop
- A hardware store in Tallinn
- Cloth to cover the table – selected colour
- Have to find cutlery…. Cooking items, spoons, plates, take knives, cutting boards
- Stove: Tom, a store to buy this or borrow it?

INTERVENTION ON SATURDAY:

IN-BETWEEN INTERVENTION: PAIRS

The moving of characteristics between: Rotterman and Russian Market

Location decision:
- Rotterman Quarter: contemporary style but missing the local flare.
- To question the difference in polarity of the 2 places
- Idea Is to induce local flare into this strict geometry
- Formation of a kiosk to sell vegetables!
- Get desires of the shop owners of the place

ITEMS SOLD:
- Vegetables
- Random items on sale at the Russian Market (have to make an inventory the day before about the items that have to be sold)

BAD SCENARIO:
- Things not sold
- No response

AT THE RUSSIAN MARKET:

- Also have a kiosk
- But sell high end shoe boxes
- Right next to a kiosk that sells shoes!

The point:
- To emphasize the difference in public space that exist
- Top down initiatives vs. bottom up

DINNER:
- Will the conclusion event for the day.
- Will be specific activity, not in relation with the rest
- The common platform would be they are all sites in transition

TOPIC:
- The need of the local vs. the want of the government
- Can also have a walk to the old prison?

INTERVENTION ON SUNDAY:

TOPIC:
- Shoreline development
- Helsinki-Tallinn connection

BREAKFAST:
- At the abandoned area between harbor and old town

BEACHLIFE:
- At the abandoned area between harbor and old town

MATERIALS NEEDED:

- Towels, perhaps lend by a hotel
- A lot of students who bring their towels and picnic and so on
- 12 crates for a beach bar
- some drinks to celebrate

FOOTBALL:
- At the abandoned area between harbor and old town

MATERIALS NEEDED:

- Around 28 crates for gates
- Bamboo sticks
- Banners with Helsinki and Tallinn on it
- Something to draw the lines onto the ground
- A ball with a ship on it

DINNER:
- at the abandoned area between harbor and old town or at the tunnel site

TUNNEL INTERVENTION:
- at the tunnel site

MATERIALS NEEDED:

- projector
- electricity suply
- The crates and the map-banner as a screen

2008-04-25T09:06:00.001-07:00

attached the status quo of the interventions

interventions so far...

2008-04-21T09:55:00.001-07:00

INTERVENTIONS:

Using the archipelago model, we can consider more fluid, responsive connections that include localized nodes, rather than over arching extra territorial models. By understanding the Tallinn-Helsinki connections in this way provides us with an opportunity to consider other connections, as well as contradictions within the dominant ordering. The shift to these regional branding exercises open up certain connections but also exclude others. Where are these exclusions? Are these desirable? Can these be (or should they) be maintained? Are there other, emergent forms that can come from this? How else can this region be understood? What dynamics would this entail?

- Are there other narratives, ways of understanding this cross-border region?

In contrast to larger regional development initiatives that are top down, we will continue our exploration of local actors positions on regional development processes and implications.

UNIFYING COMPONENT:
Drawing on the common alco-tourism phenomenon, all projects will utilize alco-crates and carts in various combinations and forms.

LOCATIONS AND ACTIONS:

FERRY:

During travel to Helsinki for presentation at Goethe Institute, engage in collage activity, combining maps / images collected from various region making promotions and general maps of both regions. Participants will be drawn from ferry travelers. Results will be displayed at Goethe institute.

CENTRAL KIOSK:
A central base created out of crates as a portable platform, arranged along the lines of flow of people between the terminals at the harbor.

Need permission for the kiosk.
Purpose:
- Central point of contact, information and collection
- The common element among the interventions would be the trolleys/crated that would be pushed along with us.
- Colour co-ordination
- Visibility
- Tourist maps of our vision of Tallinn will be distributed – Tallinn as islands
- Post cards with other shops for alcohol in Tallinn (encouraging more travel through city)
- Stories drop off point, and collection
- Bottle exchanges-if possible
- Breakfast timing and locations: flyers/posters advertising the picnic of the breakfast at the specific locations.

IN-BETWEEN TOUR:
Collecting stories about sites in transition. There are 4 places that have been chosen.
Will also have stories collected at the central kiosk.
Possibility of starting with breakfast at the beginning?
- Start at the harbor central kiosk
- Rotterman square – talk by Andres / Linnalabor
- Next point will be the prison area – about future developments
- Russian Market – talk about future developments and buy items for the pot-luck dinner at the next pit-stop
- UUS Maalim - would be last stop, for dinner and talks. There would be a movie projection on the facing property. Chairs would be arranged along the side walk, for viewing (films: about other spaces / zones of exclusion development (ex: in Copenhagen / Malmo (Maxime's film); Helsinki, etc. 3 films max) informal discussion to follow.
-
OLD AND NEW TOWN: PARK INTERVENTION
This is done to address the concept of islands in Tallinn as centripical forces. There will be a gateway made of beer crates setup at the centre between old and new towns. Display Boards will be setup on either sides, and a population count will take place.
- Will be visible intervention
- Fun
- Deal with the island concept
- Need permission for the gateway at the park

HARBOR IN-BETWEEN
A tour focusing on significant sites of regional development processes, both current and projected
The places of interest are
- The alcohol shops of harbour area (discuss current relations)
- New harbor (port of Muugu, new transportation / shipping hub)
- Tunnel area (discuss issues of connection between cities)

The tour will conclude at the 'mock bridge' sculpture on the way to Pirita with a discussion about future developments on the coast of Tallinn, in the context of other cities along the BSR?

ISLANDS
Address the island fabric of Tallinn. Have markers on the road showing for ex.
ENTERING GLOBAL VILLAGE
Written on the roads. These would have the same colour scheme, to have a kind of similarity with the general proceedings. These can be markers present even without us participating in the action.

PANEL DISCUSSION ON THE 20TH MAY 2008, TALLINN
Topic of discussion:
Comprehensive Urban Planning ... still in discussion

2008-04-20T11:38:00.001-07:00

revised project proposals, for discussion

Using the archipelago model, we can consider more
fluid, responsive connections that include localized
nodes, rather than over arching extra territorial
models. By understanding the Tallinn-Helsinki
connections in this way provides us with an
opportunity to consider other connections, as well as
contradictions within the dominant ordering. The shift
to these regional branding exercises open up certain
connections but also exclude others. Where are these
exclusions? Are these desirable? Can these be (or
should they) be maintained? Are there other, emergent
forms that can come from this? How else can this
region be understood? What dynamics would this entail?

-are there other narratives, ways of understanding
this cross-border region?

In contrast to larger regional development initiatives
that are top down, we will continue our exploration of
local actors positions on regional development
processes and implications.

Intervention:

We will create a mobile / flexible structure utilizing
well known elements from the alco-tourism phenomenon.
Alcohol crates stacked on push carts will be set up in
various configurations, dependant on the site and
intervention.

Types of configuration

Table: suitable for dining (breakfast / dinner)

Kiosk / counter space:

Projection station / theatre seating

Locations:

Interventions will be set up in zones of confluence
(local / regional actors) and transition (spatial
restructuring)

1. Park space between old town new town:

-intention: to engage with local actors about new
development patterns, and determine how regional
formation strategies play a role in this. (ex:
demographic shifts, different uses, regional
investment, uneven development)

activity: set up a border between old and new towns,
ask people their intentions in crossing over.

Questions about accessibility, what is missing, what
would they like?

Other idea: counter space

Intention: Set up kiosk, similar to tourist kiosks in
or around old town, sell stock that is not typically
found in this environment, but that could serve the
needs / desires of local inhabitants (ex: groceries,
general store, etc etc

Format: kiosk, individual discussion (have survey
online that invites people to suggest what they would
like us to stock)

2. field between harbor and old town

intention: engage with people crossing field.

There would be a display of the future scenario of the
harbor area. The participating public would be asked
to consider harbor development, and offer their
perspectives, considering current and future
projections of the space. Given current uses of
harbor, what do they see as desirable / undesirable?

Using metaphor of alcohol, have them write messages to
Finns / tallinners (to be deposited in mini bottles)
that will then be exchanged with others through the
course of the activity.

Ask about harbor development plans, what they would
like to see in this regard (drawing / mental mapping
idea) develop the tour / event around the information
collected.

3. uus maailm community

This space is currently experiencing
contestation between local desires and larger real
estate reconfigurations. This pattern is being similar
issues have been addressed by other groups, such as in
Finland, where after several years of protests, the
area was cleared to make way for larger scale
developments, such as the Chiasma building. By
bringing representatives from these two contexts
together for discussion, we can consider larger
regional implications of development, and whether
there are opportunities for regional strategies to
address these concerns.

Activity: (during day) tour of neighborhood, gaining
insight about housing and development patterns.

(evening) slide show / video screening onto abandoned
house in uus maailm district (currently waiting for
real estate to increase). Setting up a street theatre,
having people sit on the boxes on the street in
between. (pillows will also be provided). Afterwards
have discussion over drinks to follow in backyard
(either of house or otherwise)

Alternative ideas can be explored, depending on
clearance requirements

4. The dining

At the kiosk/ central point there would be
flyers/posters advertising the picnic of the
breakfast/dinner. Posters giving a specific time and
date and place of intervention, would be displayed.
The choice of participation is up to the public.

Intervention: at the designated time and place, there
would be coffee and snacks provided, If they choice to
join us. If not then they can organize their own.

The idea is also to have some kind of common feature
in these picnics as well. So even if are not present,
walking through the city one can see these picnics.

____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.

http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

toward a project

2008-04-19T06:55:00.001-07:00

Thinking about future project I would say:

1. If islands is the mechanism in which this region works, we must consider it and, in a way, preserve as a value;

2. If we accept the 1. the project splits in two branches:

2.1 at the regional scale the project will act in the inverspace. This project will be soft and will regard relations, connections, synergies of each island in regard to the whole. the question would be: how the project can invent a flexible structure in order to activate different islands configurations depending on a specific issue (entertainment, culture, environmental protection, etc.)?

2.2 at the urban scale the project will deal with micro-phenomena which are within the island (uuss maa is an example). in other words, in which way is it possible to stimulate direct involvement of people, institutions, associations in each island in order to strength their own (or a possible) common identity?

3. This double-scale intervention will involve a double-scale participation:

3.1 at the regional scale with decision makers, institutions, NGO's

3.2 at the urban scale with inhabitants, associations, local NGO's

4. It might be possible to shift next cultural interventions in activities which will involve participatory tasks as I suggest in 3.1 and 3.2. In this way the outcome from the cultural intervention workshop will be that local knowledge which will allow us to match our mission (thinking this region as a flexible whole in order to enhance better standards, social re-distribution, and regional coherence).

5. Finally, I believe that regional scale, in the future, need a step forward which would regard Estonian (and maybe Finnish) Countryside. The question in this case would be: how countryside deals with Tallinn and other cities? It is possible to embed this feature in a more complex regional plan? What change in Tallinn archipelago if we consider countryside? Can countryside be that system which will allow relations between Tallinn, Parnu, Tartu, and Narva in a more complex archipelago? Can Countryside be that link which will allow a better integration between Helsinki and Tallinn?

Tino

questions...

2008-04-17T10:13:00.001-07:00

Points of interest:

This is the main question that has to be answered and how the interventions are going to inform these questions raised.
- Spatial developments
- Transformations, gentrifications, declinations, the in-between spaces
- Working with the in-between
- Multiple urban nodes in the islands
- 'Network' islands

How are we going to intervene in the urban landscape? What is the position that is taken by us? Strengthening the inverse space, islands, how to connect the physical fragmentation? How these bottom up strategies can re-invent existing usages. The first idea is the formation of a Spatial Concept, which is the visual expression of the desired structure. For example:
- Centralization or decentralization
- The future of the city
- Formation and change
- Dealing with fragmentation

So with these options where exactly do we intervene such that it informs a future scenario or project? If the spatial concept is clear then the intervention can easily implement this desire. The bottom up involvement should inform the hypothesis that is made. The scenarios that are possible are:
- Is the archipelago activity a good thing
- Connections of the islands
- Networks between these fragmented spaces

Tallinn can be looked at probably in the below stated ways:
- Historic city center- pedestrian city
- The harbor development
- Residential development
- Outer periphery

Can each of these functions independently, creating or strengthening island fabric or is it possible to form an integrated metropolis? If there is physical interaction between the fragments, then there is possibility of intergration. Or the opposite happens then the city becomes a mosaic of sub-cultures or sub-cities. So where do these urban spatial model lead to?
- Physical structures and landscapes
- Create recreational networks
- Center vs. periphery
- Formation of a non-physical space
- Sustainability?

Each of the interventions has to have causality, an effect to inform. To define the disposition of the intervention, to reason the intention behind it.

INTERVENTIONS:

Harbor Tour:

With the increasing number of competitions that are held on the cost, is there a possibility of exhibiting these competitions as a part of the tour? The plans for the coastline are continuously changed how can these be depicted. Can this be integrated into the tour?

Bordering of the old town:

As stated before there is no point over doing what has been done before. If instead we play with the fact of the loss and not try an educate. If creation of a counter space in the Old city, for example a fruit and vegetable store, as regular day activity is introduced, relates to the loss of the old city as a part of the city fabric for the residents.

In between tour:

This really may have possibility, if we could engage with them. If that is not a possibility what is the relevance of the tour? How can we see the potentials of the in-between through a tour? is there a way that we can combine the dining into this? Moving dinners through the in-between? To quantify the space usage. The re-programming of the in-between spaces through temporary reactivation of spaces, this can be tested.

Su

How to get involved

2008-04-15T09:48:00.001-07:00

coming soon

Links

2008-04-14T09:10:00.000-07:00

Cityleft

presS/Tletter

Archiblog

Bauhaus Kolleg

Linnalabor

Moks

Urbanistika

Uus Maailm

Alko-Haul

2008-04-13T11:02:00.000-07:00

Topic: consumption patterns, customs

Purpose: making aware, showing people other parts of city

Location: harbour, in front of terminals

Audience: tourists Timeframe: Friday

Intervention: Using peoples ‘bad’ habits to show them the city. Distributing postcards with announcements. For example: pointing out the cheapest Alko-store in town – in Lasnamae or Mustamae; or the most authentic pub – in Kopli; Small talk about targets, customs, locations, ...

Actors: Kollegues plus voluntary participants

Material: postcards with advertisement, location, description of transport, mail address for responds;

Involve: Linalabor, Uus Maailm people to select places and research traffic connections; Linalabor, Uus Maailm people, voluntary workshop members to distribute;

Expected outcome for us: deeper research of tourist destinations; getting the one or other mail-feedback afterwards;

Expected impact: engaging a few to explore the city, making a few aware of their customs;

Bad scenario: being driven away by private mall security; having no impact at all and people are absolutely not interested;

Plan B: giving up and getting drunk ourselves;

In Between Tour

2008-04-13T11:01:00.000-07:00

Topic: existence and potentials of the in-between

Purpose: making aware, showing people other parts of city

Location: tourists start from harbour, citizens start from Viru

Audience: tourists, citizens

Timeframe: Friday, Saturday

Intervention: Making a guided tour to special in-between areas (different types). Rothermann District, Uus Maailm, Russian Market, Prison for example. Questionings, discussion afterwards;

Actors: Kollegues plus Uus Maailm people Material: bicycle taxis (owned by Erko Valk, Uus Maailm)

Involve: Uus Maailm people to define routes, prepare bikes and guide trough Uus Maailm; local media to announce the tours in advance;

Expected outcome for us: getting outside perspectives of the in-between potentials;

Expected impact: engaging a few to explore the city, making them aware of the potentials of the in-between;

Bad scenario: bikes can’t be provided; no interest of people to do the tour;

Plan B: walking; kidnapping people and bringing them there;

Pseudo Squat

2008-04-13T11:00:00.000-07:00

Topic: real estate speculation

Purpose: making aware of potentials of existing building structures

Location: building at centre of Uus Maailm

Audience: neighbourhoud, citizens via print media

Timeframe: Saturday

Intervention: Convert the exterior of a special wooden house that is been let rotting down by its owners for speculation. Simulation of an outdoor café in front of the building with tables, chairs, serving coffee and cake, music, and so on. Covering windows with cardboard where people are shown – fake inhabitants.

Actors: Kollegues plus Uus Maailm people

Material: tables, plates, cardboard, food,

Involve: Uus Maailm people, local media;

Expected outcome for us: insight in neighbourhood opinions regarding real estate development;

Expected impact:supporting a social transformation of a neighbourhood instead of a capitalistic transformation, what serves the idea of qualifying in-between areas in a certain way;

Bad scenario: police make the intervention stop

Plan B: unnecessary, the better will be the article in the local newspaper; discussion next to proposed site;

Old Town Border

2008-04-13T10:59:00.001-07:00

Topic: islands and borders, artificiality of Old Town

Purpose: making aware

Location: Viru Gate, (... + North Gate, ... + West and South Gate)

Audience: tourists and citizens Timeframe: Saturday

Intervention: Declaring Old City Centre in a banner across the gate as an Open Air Museum. Having there a table. Actors well dressed. Stopping people. Announcing that they need a ticket to get in and in future therefore an entrance fee will be charged. Today ticket is free. Actors fix a badge or sticker to peoples chest.

Actors: Kollegues plus voluntary participants

Material: banners, badges / stickers, table, suits

Involve: Linalabor, Uus Maailm people, voluntary workshop members

Expected outcome for us: interesting statements, seeing who enters, uses Old Town, finding out if Old Town is not for locals;

Expected impact: starting a discussion, giving a new point of view

Bad scenario: too many people to manage intervention; not been taken seriously, being pushed away; not getting allowance or being cleaned up by police;

Plan B: breaking up; not asking for permission; being friendly and following polices order;

Contact us

2008-04-13T10:58:00.001-07:00

mail to: cityleft (àt) altervista (dot) org
write in the object line: "[Urban Fiction] - (object of the email)"

Cross-Border Football

2008-04-13T10:57:00.001-07:00

Topic: re-programming the in-between, interaction between different ethnical groups;

Purpose: making aware that a lot of private abandoned sites can be used public; enabling groups who do not normally interact to co-operate;

Location: abandoned area in front of the Admiral Basin, Harbour;

Audience: tourists, citizens

Timeframe: Sunday

Intervention: Making a football game with mixed groups of Finns, Russians, Estonians; For once they should play together instead against one another; Having a fixed time to begin; Drawing a football field into the wilderness; Announcing the game on Friday and Saturday to have participants; Mix the teams ethnically. Let’s play Heltal against Talsinki (we provide the shirts :-). Let’s play 6 against 6. If there are enough participants make a tournament.

Actors: Kollegues plus voluntary players

Material: chalk and a ball (perhaps use a water ball to minimize the risk of injury – speed on bad ground)

Involve:

Expected outcome for us: having fun and a nice end of the event, conversations and new connections;

Expected impact: making people wonder, engaging alternative use of open space, engaging interaction between different ethnical groups;

Bad scenario: it’s raining; unable to get enough interested participants;

Plan B: playing in swimsuit;

About

2008-04-13T10:07:00.000-07:00

In 2007 at Bauhaus Dessau Foundation was formed a research group aimed to deal with the increasing trans-national partnerships between Baltic cities across the Baltic Sea region.
The western (Copenhagen-Malmo), Central (Kaliningrad), and eastern (Helsinki-Tallinn) part of the BSR was studied by a group of about 15 people having different background (artists, social workers, architects, planners, landscape architects, sociologists).

The group dealing with the eastern side of the BSR developed a blog to host the debate concerning the use of Urban Art Interventions for planning purposes.

Today the blog has been re-structured to become a proper tool capable to collect feedback to update urban policies in Tallinn.