4.6   Kanten/The Edge scale/networks

ASSESSMENT OF KANTEN BRIEF & USS PROPOSITIONS
   1. Beyond walls 
       A. Protection (2.5m) Adaptation (3m)
       B. Nature-based solution
       E/F. Vejle’s resilient and storm surge strategy (protection/adaptation)

 

The project was NbS due to the brief (and thus beyond the immediate sea wall), but the brief was set so that there needed to be 2.5m protection and 3m protection required. While this does make sense in the short term, and as assessed above, remaining in Fjordbyen/bottom of the river valley would mean upgrading all the hard infrastructure to secure min 2.8m by 2050 or 3.4m by 2100 (based on medium scenario 4.5 at our current trajectory). There is a limit on how many truly innovative and different solutions Vejle can conjure given this 2.5-3m level, which is not surprising that most of the entries (FIND OUT) had a glorified stepped dyke system.

Figure 68. (Left) Vejle Municipality’s idea of an edge for the Kanten competition. Edge as a zone. The edge should be considered as a zone that extends off the concrete coastline. (Right) The security line is indicated by the green lines for the Fjordbyen. Seeing the protection system to envelop the fjordbyen (the dark green represents a hard edge condition and light green a soft edge)
 

For example, on the beach zone, if the road gets elevated, then the beach houses will no longer have their view of the water (which is the point and they will be upset by this), which means they can either move elsewhere or have to be refurbished to be on stilts… (adaptable, relocatable buildings)

If the platforms are fixed, they will emerge. It would be better if they were more adaptable to change with the rising sea level. Floating platforms. Where do these platforms lead? Are they connected to any existing tracks? What is the overall experience.

Some of these rock pools need to be designed to have regular water come in and out (otherwise it will stink and nothing will grow). These pools need to be connected to the big body of water

No one seemed to have thought much about the entrance/exit of the river’s mouth to the fjord. As this is not in the brief (critical zone – site). But as our analysis from other scales, this is predominantly the place where the pollution from the hinterland gets dumps (along with other outlets on the hills). There should be some kind of last resort nature filtration of floating particles (if they cannot be caught up in the hinterlands and wetlands). This last “passageway” is an important one for the well-being of marine life in the fjord.

  • How do these retentions work? (master plan) what would be their function during dry times? If they are not connected to the main body of water, the water will smell and nothing will grow. A practical aspect of the design (idea great, concept, philosophy great, but literal ponds may not be possible).

  • NbS has a human benefit to it, and other than protection, what else is there?

  • LONG TERM: Going beyond walls doesn’t just mean implementing soft or hybrid measures. It also talks about thinking from long term perspectives. It is no doubtable that hard approaches are designed for a specific scenario based on not so distant future (it is also not necessarily designed for the long future because at the rate we are going, we may need walls higher than our current standards). The membrane project has taken this approach of showing long term perspectives of how the area would change and grow over time (as the sea level rises). However, what is currently understood as long term (i.e. 2100) may not be enough. We are still dealing with decisions made as early as the formation of Vejle (the decision to develop the city on the bottom of a river valley), and the development of waterfront of Vejle in the 2000s – which we could argue that they are only designed to last 50 years (which is shocking in itself) to undo these decisions would take a long time. There is a factor of uncertainty that prevents us from planning ahead of 2100 (within most of our life time except those born recently). Longer we wait on making a decision about our time beyond 2100, it might have to be an expensive and extensive process.

  • The masterplan  (the membrane) is currently at a conceptual abstract level, but there may be ways in which the Fjordbyen can be the “sponge” (retention pond) – allowing water to be held (i.e. from cloudburst and stormsurge events only – which means they won’t be wet all the time)

(It would have been interesting to push the wall further back and allow an adaptation zone (fjord byen)

Figure 69. (Left) Vejle Municipality’s idea of an edge for the Kanten competition. Edge as a zone. The edge should be considered as a zone that extends off the concrete coastline. (Right) The security line is indicated by the green lines for the Fjordbyen. Seeing the protection system to envelop the fjordbyen (the dark green represents a hard edge condition and light green a soft edge)
 

Figure 70. (Left) Vejle Municipality’s idea of an edge for the Kanten competition. Edge as a zone. The edge should be considered as a zone that extends off the concrete coastline. (Right) The security line is indicated by the green lines for the Fjordbyen. Seeing the protection system to envelop the fjordbyen (the dark green represents a hard edge condition and light green a soft edge)
 

PREVIOUS 

NEXT