Barcelona PDF
Barcelona PDF
Barcelona PDF
Acknowledgements
This thesis wouldnt have been possible without the help and patience of my tutor at
Imperial College London - Tanaka Business School, Dr. Lars Frederiksen. He was the
one to introduce me to the systems integration concept during my year at the Civil
Engineering Department at Imperial College and the person that proposed this work
linking engineering, urbanism and business management. I am really grateful to him
because of his disinterested help that continued even after I left Imperial College.
I would also like to thank my tutor at ETSCCPB in Barcelona, lvar Garola Crespo,
who accepted helping me in a project that had already been started in London; he
encouraged me to finish the challenging analysis of cases and showed interest in this
work.
I am also extremely grateful to all the people that have spent some of their time helping
me to acquire a thorough understanding of the cases I was studying. Especially to
Miquel Barcel and Ramn Sagarra, from 22@Barcelona,SA.; Erik Freudenthal
from GlausEtt at Hammarby Sjostad, Sweden and Bjrn Cederquist from Stockholm
Municipality; Michael Payton at LDA related to the Gallions Park case and Abigail
Raymond & Laurienne Tibbles form Ashfords Future in Ashford, Kent, UK. This
work wouldnt be the same without all the information you have provided to me on your
interviews, phone calls and e-mails. It is really encouraging to find people who enjoy
their jobs and like to explain the projects they are working in.
My final words of thanks are of course for my parents Llus and Glria - and friends.
They have been suffering my busy times and my bad temper when something went
wrong or when I didnt see something clear. Thank you for your support during all this
time. Without you, this work would have never been done.
Thank you all.
Acknowledgements
II
Abstract
Title: Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
Author: Llus Codorniu Torguet
Tutors: Dr. Lars Frederiksen (Tanaka Business School, Imperial College, London)
lvar Garola Crespo (ETSECCPB, UPC, Barcelona)
Abstract
This thesis develops an in-depth study of the systems approach applied to the provision
of urban infrastructure solutions. The aim of this study is to provide a wider vision of
the current application of systems integration in urban planning understood both as an
organisational tool in infrastructure provision and as a strategic business activity for
firms involved in these kinds of processes. It is sought to develop a typology of cases
from the analysis of four large-scale projects that venture into innovation related to
infrastructure provision. The object of this study is analysing the different conceptions
when it comes to the application of the systems approach and recognising the main
barriers for its development. A strong emphasis is given to the recognition of the roles
played by the different firms involved in infrastructure planning in each case and to the
assessment of the possible required changes in business models; as well as to the new
capabilities these firms have to develop to make innovation possible.
This work starts with the definitions of four important business concepts (business
models, firm capabilities, value chain and competitive advantage) that are essential to
the development of the analysis of the urban innovative processes experimenting with
systems integration. The next section constitutes an introduction to systems integration
both as a design tool and as a business strategic activity for firms. Integrated solutions
are defined as the combination of products and systems with services in order to
specify, deliver, finance, maintain, support and operate a system throughout its life
cycle. The conceptual introduction concludes with the application of these theories to
the urban environment.
The core of this thesis focuses in the analysis of four cases experimenting with systems
integration in the urban environment: 22@ Barcelona in Spain; Hammarby Sjostad in
Stockholm, Sweden; and Gallions Park (London) & Ashford both in the UK. These four
case studies have been chosen because of their systems innovative approach in the
treatment of the urban infrastructure systems (mainly in the energy, waste and water &
sewage systems). The methodology used to develop this analysis has centred on gaining
understanding of the design processes and the integrated solutions obtained, as well as
studying the different kinds of firms involved in these processes, the role they play,
their business models, the capabilities needed to carry out their functions and the
identification of the possible appearance of new cooperation structures between local
administrations and firms in order to achieve the innovative goals.
To conclude, the integrated processes followed in the different case studies and the
methods related to integrated design are compared (amongst them and with the
conventional method) to develop a typology of cases. Finally, after the discussion of the
lessons learnt from these experiences, conclusions are reached about the adequacy of
the application of the systems approach in the urban environment; which also enables us
to evaluate the success of these methods till now.
III
Resum
Ttol: Integraci de Solucions dInfraestructura Urbana
Autor: Llus Codorniu Torguet
Tutors: Dr. Lars Frederiksen (Tanaka Business School, Imperial College, London)
lvar Garola Crespo (ETSECCPB, UPC, Barcelona)
Resum
En aquesta tesina es realitza un estudi daprofundiment en la teoria de sistemes aplicada
a la provisi de solucions dinfraestructura urbana. Per fer-ho, es pretn donar una
mplia visi de lactual aplicaci de la integraci de sistemes en lentorn urb entesa
com a eina dorganitzaci en la planificaci dinfraestructures i tamb com a activitat
estratgica de negoci de les empreses implicades en aquest procs. Es tracta de
desenvolupar una tipologia de casos a partir de lanlisi de quatre projectes a gran escala
que comparteixen laposta per la innovaci en la planificaci dinfraestructures.
Lobjectiu daquest estudi s analitzar les diferents concepcions a lhora daplicar
aquesta teoria i reconixer els principals problemes per al seu desenvolupament. En
aquesta anlisi es dna un fort mfasi en identificar el rol de les empreses implicades en
la planificaci dinfraestructures i en avaluar els possibles canvis de model de negoci
que es puguin requerir; aix com les noves capacitats (experincia i coneixements) que
hagin de desenvolupar aquestes empreses per fer que aquesta innovaci sigui possible.
Aquest treball sinicia amb la definici de quatre conceptes del mn empresarial que
sn essencials per al desenvolupament de lanlisi dels processos urbans experimentant
amb la integraci de sistemes: model de negoci, capacitats duna empresa, cadena de
valor i avantatge competitiu. El segent captol constitueix una introducci a la
integraci de sistemes en els seus dos vessants descrits anteriorment i es defineix el
concepte de soluci integral com aquella combinaci de sistemes i productes amb
serveis per tal de proporcionar, produir, mantenir, finanar i operar un sistema al llarg
de tota la seva vida til. Es conclou la introducci conceptual exposant les possibilitats
daplicaci daquests teories en lentorn urb, objecte destudi.
El cos central daquesta tesina es centra en lanlisi de quatre casos que actualment
estan experimentant amb la integraci de sistemes a lentorn urb: 22@ Barcelona a
Espanya; Hammarby Sjostad a Estocolm, Sucia; i Gallions Park (Londres) i Ashford al
Regne Unit. Aquests casos han estat escollits donada la seva innovadora aproximaci en
el tractament dels diferents sistemes urbans (principalment lenergia, laigua i els
residus). La metodologia utilitzada per al desenvolupament daquesta anlisi de casos
sha centrat en laprofundiment i comprensi dels processos integrals de disseny i les
solucions integrals obtingudes, aix com en lestudi dels diferents tipus dempreses
involucrades en aquests processos, el rol que hi juguen, els seus models de negoci, les
capacitats necessries per al desenvolupament de les seves noves funcions i la
identificaci de la possible aparici de noves estructures de cooperaci entre
administracions i empreses per a aconseguir aquesta finalitat.
Finalment, es comparen les metodologies i els processos dintegraci de sistemes
seguits en els diferents casos destudi (entre ells i amb el mtode convencional) per a
lelaboraci duna tipologia de casos. Els resultats obtinguts al llarg de tot el procs
destudi han perms extreure conclusions sobre ladequaci de laplicaci de la teoria de
sistemes en la planificaci urbana i permeten avaluar els xits obtinguts fins ara.
IV
Index
Index
Acknowledgements ...........................................................................................................I
Abstract............................................................................................................... III
Resum. ................................................................................................................IV
Index ................................................................................................................ V
List of Tables. ................................................................................................... VII
List of Figures.................................................................................................................IX
1. Preface and objectives ..................................................................................................1
2. Important business concepts for the understanding of systems integration .................5
2.1. Business Model ..................................................................................................... 5
2.2. Firm capabilities .................................................................................................... 6
2.3. Value chain ............................................................................................................ 7
2.4. Competitive Advantage ......................................................................................... 7
3. Introduction to the systems approach .........................................................................10
3.1. The systems approach.......................................................................................... 10
3.2. Systems integration ............................................................................................. 10
3.2.1. Background................................................................................................... 10
3.2.2. Systems integration in design and as a firms strategic business activity .... 11
3.2.3. The two faces of systems integration ........................................................... 12
3.2.4. Firms as system integrators .......................................................................... 13
3.3. A systems integration approach in the urban environment. ................................ 21
3.3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 21
3.3.2. Infrastructure Systems, innovation and sustainability.................................. 21
3.3.3. Integrated urban system modelling............................................................... 22
3.3.4. Managing integrated urban solutions ........................................................... 24
4. Case studies ................................................................................................................26
4.1 Barcelona 22@, the innovation district (Spain) ................................................... 27
4.1.1. Description of the project ............................................................................. 27
4.1.2. Integrating urban infrastructure solutions..................................................... 30
4.1.3. Barriers and enablers .................................................................................... 34
4.1.4. Firms and public partners involved in the project ........................................ 35
4.1.5 Case Analysis ................................................................................................ 41
4.2. Hammarby Sjostad, Stockholm (Sweden)........................................................... 47
4.2.1. Description of the project ............................................................................. 47
4.2.2. Integrating urban infrastructure solutions..................................................... 50
4.2.3. Barriers and enablers .................................................................................... 53
4.2.4. Firms and public partners involved in the project ........................................ 55
4.2.5 Case analysis ................................................................................................. 60
4.3 Gallions Park, Thames Gateway, London (UK)................................................... 66
4.3.1. Description of the project ............................................................................. 66
4.3.2. Integrating urban infrastructure solutions..................................................... 67
4.3.3. Barriers and enablers .................................................................................... 70
4.3.4. Firms/public partners involved..................................................................... 71
4.3.5 Case Analysis ................................................................................................ 77
4.4 Ashford, Kent (UK).............................................................................................. 84
4.4.1. Description of the project ............................................................................. 84
4.4.2 Integrating urban infrastructure solutions...................................................... 86
4.4.3. Barriers and enablers .................................................................................... 89
Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
Index
4.4.4. Firms and public partners involved .............................................................. 90
4.4.5. Case Analysis ............................................................................................... 97
5. The business of infrasystems operating firms ..........................................................102
5.1. Firms, natural monopolies and competition ...................................................... 102
5.2 Background in infrasystems service provider firms in Europe .......................... 102
5.3. Why innovation is important ............................................................................. 105
6. Typology of cases.....................................................................................................107
6.1. Review of cases ................................................................................................. 107
6.2. Comparing case studies ..................................................................................... 108
6.2.1 Systems Integration in design...................................................................... 109
6.2.2. Systems integration as a firms strategic business activity ........................ 113
6.2.3. Developing a typology of cases.................................................................. 118
7. Conclusions ..............................................................................................................120
8. Bibliography .............................................................................................................125
9. Glossary. .......................................................................................................131
Appendix. .............................................................................................................135
VI
List of Tables
List of Tables
Table 1.
Table 2.
Table 3.
Table 4.
Table 5.
Table 6.
Table 7.
Table 8.
Table 9.
Table 10.
Table 11.
Table 12.
Table 13.
VII
List of Tables
VIII
List of Figures
List of Figures
Figure 1.
Figure 2.
Figure 3.
Figure 4.
Figure 5.
Figure 6.
Figure 7.
Figure 8.
Figure 9.
Figure 10.
Figure 11.
Figure 12.
Figure 13.
Figure 14.
Figure 15.
Figure 16.
Figure 17.
Figure 18.
Figure 19.
Figure 20.
Figure 21.
Figure 22.
Figure 23.
Figure 24.
Figure 25.
Figure 26.
Figure 27.
IX
List of Abbreviations
List of Abbreviations
AIWMS
AIWS
AMP
CA
CABE
CHP
CCHP
CEO
CLG
CNBQ
COPS
DH
DH&C
EKSDC
ESCO
GADF
GLA
GOSE
HCA
IRM
IT
ITN
LCA
LCCA
LDA
LDF
LNG
LTS
MUSCO
OFWAT
OS
PEI
PERI
PFI
PGM
PMU
PPP
PQQ
R&D
RDA
RES
SEA
SEEDA
SI
SME
SPC
SSE
XI
List of Abbreviations
UGAP
UK
US
XII
Assess when the two types of systems integration (in design and as a strategic
business activity) go together and which are the specific circumstances in which
this happens.
Set out clearly the role played by firms through systems integration innovation
processes and identify the capabilities they need and the different Business
Models produced to deliver integrated solutions for urban planning. This will be
Identify the main problems (barriers) and enablers of these processes and of
firms venturing into integrated solutions for urban infrastructure change.
To finish with the introduction to this thesis, it is important to point out that a glossary
has been included at the end of this work for the better understanding of the content of
these pages. The glossary includes those words that could be difficult to understand and
that are important for the reader to get a full comprehension of what has been developed
in this thesis. The words included in the glossary are set in alphabetical order and are
marked throughout the text with the (*) mark.
Articulate the value proposition, i.e. the value created for users by the offering
based on the technology.
Identify a market segment, i.e. the users to whom the technology is useful and
for what purpose, and specify the revenue generation mechanisms for the firm.
Define the structure of the value chain within the firm required to create and
distribute the offering, and determine the complementary assets* needed to
support the firms position in this chain.
Estimate the cost structure and profit potential of producing the offering,
given the value proposition and value chain structure chosen.
Describe the position of the firm within the value network linking suppliers
and customers, including identification of potential complementors and
competitors
Formulate the competitive strategy by which the innovating firm will gain and
hold advantage over rivals (competitive advantage).
The initial Business Model may be a hypothesis for how to deliver value to the
costumer and it may develop through a process of sequential adaptation to new
information and possibilities. When technological change requires it, new business
models have to be developed. Identifying and executing a new or different business
The Five Force Analysis identifies five forces and then asks for a determination of the
level of that force in the specific industry. The five forces are:
3.2.1. Background
Systems integration, as an instrument to integrate tools and components to fulfil an
objective, rapidly developed in the 1940s and 1950s in the military arena, and then
10
11
12
13
14
15
Suppliers have to identify customers business needs and then develop the capabilities
to offer products and services that link uniquely well to a customers priorities. A close
proximity to the customer allows the solution provider to anticipate needs and work
jointly in projects to develop and configure new technology, products and services to a
customers needs. Therefore, these firms are increasing their capabilities to integrate
equipment sourced from external manufacturers.
Adopting a customer-centric thinking means that firms have to rethink how value is
created from the perspective of their customers; viewing the value chain through the
eyes of the customer. This involves gaining a detailed understanding of the activities a
customer performs in using and operating a product through its life cycle, from sale to
decommissioning*.
Nevertheless, there has not been much research on the typology of the capabilities that
firms leading CoPS* develop to integrate and coordinate the work of external sources
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Recently, some of such tools and models (with varying levels of integration) have
emerged to help analysis of urban systems at scales ranging from individual
components of housing and infrastructure to the global level.
Despite the large number of decision support tools and models in production, there are
still relatively few that integrate water, waste, energy and socioeconomic systems
(especially at finer spatial scales, such as housing developments or suburbs). Tools with
clear methods of assessing the sustainability of these systems relative to specific goals,
under certain policy scenarios or different human behavioural patterns, are even rarer.
Integrated modelling and assessment nestled in a cycle can help to achieve appropriate
management, especially when the goal of this management is to achieve sustainable
development.
24
25
4. Case studies
4. Case studies
After the previous explanation of concepts and introduction to the systems integration
theories, this chapter introduces the four case studies on which a further analysis will be
based. These four cases have been chosen because of their innovation whether in the
integrated design process or in the role the firms involved play in the provision of
integrated solutions, for their innovative business models and their particular
capabilities (or even for the implication in both).
The four cases have been studied following the same structure to facilitate the
comparison. Each case study starts with the description of the project, explaining which
its main features are and also including the way in which it is funded, its aims and
expectations and outcomes to date. A special chapter has been dedicated to the
integrated solutions obtained and the way they have been integrated, outlining the most
outstanding innovations. Then, the barriers and enablers of these innovative processes
have also been analysed, followed by a chapter dedicated to the firms involved in the
process and their roles in each project.
Each case ends with a final case analysis studying the different partnership structures
appearing and the capabilities of firms involved in the process. As it has already been
explained before, the main capabilities we are trying to identify in firms moving into the
provision of integrated solutions are:
- Systems integration: Systems integration refers to the capability to design and
integrate internally or externally developed components product hardware, software
and services- into a functioning system, while coordinating the activities of internal or
external manufacturers of components, subsystems or products. (Prencipe et al., 2003)
- Operational services: Firms with the capability of the provision of services to
maintain, renovate and operate products.
- Business consultancy: firms that offer advice to customers on how to plan, design,
build, finance, maintain and operate systems.
- Financing: firms with the capability of providing vendor financing* and asset*
management services.
The case analysis ends with an analysis of the business models of the main firms
produced to deliver integrated solutions. This structure will be very helpful for the
comparison of case studies on chapter 6 and for the subsequent development of a
typology of cases.
26
authority: Barcelona
City
Outline
The 22@ project is a regeneration project of 200 ha in Poblenou, an industrial area in
Barcelona (Spain) that aims to turn this neighbourhood into a world reference
innovation district. Poblenou was a manufacturing quarter created some 200 years ago
because of the boom of the textile industry in Catalonia and became obsolete around 50
years ago when industrial activities were still setting there despite now being a quarter
in the centre of the city.
At the very beginning, this project was driven by a number of professionals from the
private sector that considered that Poblenou, as a former industrial zone and currently
quite degraded, should be refurbished to give momentum to the development of the city.
This group of professionals called themselves Cercle Digital (Digital Circle) and
promoted a compact and varied model of city. They proposed to promote the area for
the concentration of technological and knowledge firms.
According to the 22@ plan, the district will be refurbished by changing the old land-use
regulation that established that this zone should only be used for industrial purposes to
the new classification of cohabitation of non-polluting urban activities. To fulfil this
purpose, the PGM (Pla General Metropolit or Metropolitan General Plan) of the zone
in which 22@ quarter is located has had to be changed to allow these new land uses.
This is a urban plan modifying the Pla General (General Plan).
27
28
29
30
However, to implement the new services, planners have had to face an important
problem regarding the cohabitation of the new service nets with the old ones still
providing services to those blocks pending to refurbish. In order to solve the problem of
the collapsed space under the sidewalks, an integrated design solution has been reached
when considering installing the new nets under the carriageway, equidistant to the
different blocks and placing them all together in galleries that connect the underground
floors of the buildings. Therefore, every building in the block can intercept the gallery at
one point and take the different services into the building. This solution is suitable for
those services using cables (energy, telecommunications), but not for those using
pipes (water, for example, because it generates thrust and has several mechanical
problems that make it not suitable to be in the same place with other services).
Infrastructure networks
These are the main infrastructure changes and improvements described in the plan:
- Electricity: Thanks to the agreements signed previously with the energy company
allowing for the renovation of the entire network, renovations are underway and a new
substation has been constructed to supply the whole area.
- Centralised climate control: In Barcelona, the local authority requested the renovation
of the heating and cooling distribution network in line with the city's Sustainable
Development Policy. The implementation of sustainable solutions proved to be a
challenge. The 22@Barcelona Centralised Climate Control Project uses the Districlima
technology, which is a heat and cooling centralized system that produces heat (heating
and hot water) and cool for the Forum building and 22@ areas. This infrastructure saves
20% in energy consumption and is already being used in several European countries.
This system uses the waste treated in the solid waste treatment plant in the nearby Bess
31
32
33
In the case of the service providers, innovation is also related in some way to
sustainability. When these companies innovate (or we want them to innovate), its most
of the times because we seek an optimisation of resources. In this case, sustainability
has been inherent to the process because creating infrastructures as sustainable as
possible has always been a main objective of the plan: it aims to reduce the ecological
footprint of the territory and improve its economical sustainability. During the
refurbishment, recycled materials have been used and other sustainable activities (such
as using tyres in the pavements) that had been learnt along the years have also been
applied.
One example may be the Centralised Climate Control, which also integrates solar
thermal plates in the roofs that absorb the heat and recirculates it to the plant. When the
galleries to put the services are built, the impact that works have on the streets is also
being reduced, because this way its not necessary to open the sidewalk to repair a
service (this could be probably seen as civil sustainability rather than energetic
sustainability). Finally, the politics into the attraction of the companies of @ activities
can also be seen as sustainable as it promotes an economical activity to sustain the
territory.
34
35
System
Infrastructure solutions
Firms involved
- Renovation of electrical
network
- Centralised climate
control
- Improvement of gas
supply network
- Fecsa-Endesa
- ENVAC
Waste
- 4 pneumatic waste
collection stations.
- Selective waste collection
green point and cleaning
park.
- AGBAR (Aiges de
Barcelona)
- CLABSA (sewerage)
Telecommunications
- Telefonica
- Localret (representing
alternative operators to
Telefonica)
- Hierarchy roadway
network
- Parking spaces
- Renewed traffic control
systems
- New cycle lanes
- New tube station
- 22@Barcelona,S.A.
- Institut Municipal
dinformtica.
Energy
Mobility
Table 1.
- Districlima
- Gas Natural
- Ros Roca
Analysis of the role that firms and public partners play in the process
For the analysis of the roles played by firms involved in this process, a review of what
each firm does and of the direct implication of the firm in the project has been
summarised as follows:
36
37
Barcelona Regional:
General Profile:
Barcelona Regional is the Catalan Agency of Urban and Infrastructure Development
which is partly of public ownership. It provides technical services for reflection,
consultation and action in the areas of infrastructure and urban development in the
metropolitan area of Barcelona.
Role in 22@:
Barcelona Regional has been in charge of developing the PEI (Special Infrastructure
Plan) for the 22@ area. Therefore, this urban planning consulting firm has designed the
whole infrastructure system of the area.
b) Energy companies
- FECSA ENDESA
38
39
40
With the Envac solution the collection and transportation of waste is fully automated,
safe and environmentally advantageous. The installation of an Envac system leads to a
drastic reduction of road transportation of waste, improved hygiene and enhanced
occupational health and safety standards. The Envac waste collection system supports
source separation. (Envac Official Website)
Role in 22@:
Envac is in charge of an existing and a new-built pneumatic waste collection stations. It
has planned and installed the system and is in charge of operating and maintaining the
waste collection system.
Districlima
General Profile:
The SUEZ Group entity "Elyo Iberica" was awarded the contract of the cooling and
heating network system in Barcelona as part of a joint venture* with its partners Aguas
de Barcelona and Axima (SUEZ Energie Services). Districlima was founded at the end
of the works with Elyo Iberica, Aguas de Barcelona and public entities (Town Hall of
Barcelona, and the local and national energy agencies).
Role in 22@:
Districlima was created in a partnership structure between Elyo Iberica (Suez), Agbar,
Tersa, and the Spanish government (IDAE on behalf of Ministerio de Economia y
Comercio) and local administrations (Insitut Catal de Comer). In this process, Axima
(SUEZ Energie Services) carried out the installation works set out in the specifications,
such as the heating production plant, storage tanks and an underground distribution
network. Aguas de Barcelona (Agbar) was designing and constructing the network
extensions and Elyo Iberica was responsible for the sale, technical operation and
management of the service. The local authority financed the first phase of the project
(2003). Districlima will be providing subsequent investments in the near future (mainly
additional equipment and network extensions).
41
42
43
Operational
Services
Business
Consultancy
Financing
X
22ArrobaBCN,S.A.
Barcelona Regional
FECSA- ENDESA
Gas Natural
AGBAR
Ros Roca
ENVAC
Districlima
Table 2.
44
45
46
Outline
Hammarby Sjostad is one of the vastest projects of development of the municipality of
Stockholm as it occupies 200Ha. The initial idea was drawn around 1990, when
Stockholm applied for the Summer Olympics 2004, and the municipality wanted to
expand the inner city of Stockholm with a focus on water, while converting at the same
time an old industrial and harbour area into a modern sustainable neighbourhood.
For this project, the City of Stockholm imposed strict environmental requirements on
buildings, water, waste and energy infrastructure, technical installations and the traffic
environment. The main reason for the creation of this environmental program was that
Hammarby was planned to support Stockholms request for hosting the 2004 Olympic
Games and the Stockholm City Council was looking very closely at Sydney, which got
the Olympics for 2000 partly because of their environmental program. Hence, a specific
environmental program was drawn up for this project with the aim of halving the total
Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
47
Funding
The City of Stockholm pays for all the public investments (such as infrastructure, roads
or parks). The total sum is very roughly estimated to 5 billion Swedish
Crowns and the money comes mostly from Stockholm tax payers. The Local Investment
Program (1998-2002) by the Swedish government also provided subsidies to projects
that were aimed at energy and resource efficient technologies. From the 635 million
Swedish Crowns that were allocated to Stockholm, Hammarby Sjostad shared the
48
Outcomes
The role of the Masterplan in ensuring a strong network of streets and public spaces,
and a rounded and sustainable mix of uses, including community uses is particularly
impressive. Today, about 75% of the project area is already complete and 10.000 people
live in the area. The result obtained in the different sectors can be reviewed as follows
(Energie cits, March 2008):
-
Energy: Renewable Energy Sources (RES), biogas products and reuse of waste
heat coupled with efficient energy consumption in buildings. 23.000 Tn of sludge
treated and 3.500.000 m3 of biogas produced. District heating is supplied to all
Hammarby from two main sources: energy recovery from waste incineration and
energy recovery from wastewater treatment process. The Combined Heat and
Power (CHP) plant provides 70% of the heat requirements of the development; the
other 30% comes from heat recovered from waste water.
49
Water & sewage*: water as clean and efficient as possible - both input and output
with the aid of new technology for water saving and sewage* treatment (a new
wastewater treatment plant has been built in the area).
Waste: thoroughly sorted in practical systems, with material and energy recycling
maximised wherever possible. Original waste collection system: individual
households dispose of their solid waste into a vacuum-based underground
collection system that allows for separating the waste into organic, recyclable and
other forms. Combustible garbage is processed and returned to the community as
electricity and hot water.
Economic: 8.000 jobs have been created and waste collection costs have been
reduced.
Critics
The cost of high-valued infrastructure solutions for the building of a sustainable
neighbourhood has resulted in high rents for residents (even though prices of apartments
on sale stay similar to those in the inner city, they have higher than average monthly
management fees). Critics of the scheme point to its exclusivity and failure to address
Stockholms problems of segregation. Residents are described as belonging to an
economically homogenous group, incomes are on average higher than in the KatarinaSofia city district to which Hammarby Sjstad belongs (CABE, 2005).
50
51
Key points
Energy
52
Water &
sewage*
Waste
Table 3.
Hammarby recognises that environmental performance is not just about design; the
development also needs to influence how people use places. An environmental centre
has been established at the centre of Hammarby to promote understanding of how
residents can help in achieving the citys environmental aspirations.
53
54
Energy
Infrastructure solutions
Firms involved
- District
Heating
& - Fortum
Cooling
- Solar cells, solar panels
& full cells.
- Use of biofuel in nature
and combustible waste
for electricity generation.
55
Waste
Table 4.
- 3-level waste
management.
- Building-based
separating at source.
- Block-based recycling
rooms
- Hazardous waste
collection point
- Automated waste
disposal system
- Test wastewater
treatment plant.
- Biogas extracted from
sewage* sludge
- Store water treatment
- Green roofs
- Stockholm Vatten
- ENVAC
Analysis of the role that firms and public partners play in the process
For the analysis of the roles played by firms involved in this process, a review of what
each firm does and the direct implication of the firm in this project has been
summarised as follows:
a) Public Administrations
- Municipality of Stockholm
Role in Hammarby: The main role of the Municipality of Stockholm in Hammarby
Sjostad has been leading the master planning process and developing the public areas
(preparing the land, infrastructure, roads and parks). The Stockholm Municipality was
the land owner of the Hammarby Sjstad area.
- Stockholm Business Region:
General Profile:
It is the official "Investment Promotion Agency" for the Stockholm region. Together
with the subsidiary, Stockholm Visitors Board, it promotes the Stockholm region
internationally as one of Europes leading locations for business. The company provides
business and economic data, assistance, contacts and solutions for foreign business
entities that are considering setting up business in Stockholm.
56
57
58
Figure 12. The mobile and stationary ENVAC waste collection pneumatic
systems.
(Source: ENVAC, 2008)
59
Role in Hammarby:
In Hammarby Sjostad, Sweco, applying their concept for sustainable urban
development, participated in the planning and design of buildings, parks, streets and
wharves, and also in traffic, land, geotechnical, waste management, water and sewage*
and gas systems.
- NCC
General Profile:
NCC is one of the leading construction and property development companies in the
Nordic region.
Role in Hammarby:
NCC Construction Sverige has been commissioned by Riksbyggen to build 137
apartments at Hammarby Sjstad in Stockholm.
- Skanska
General Profile:
Skanska is a leading international project development and construction company; one
of the worlds leading construction groups with expertise in construction, development
of commercial and residential projects and public-private partnerships (PPP*).
By combining our expertise and financial strength, we develop offices, homes and
public-private partnership projects. We create sustainable solutions and aim to be a
leader in quality, green construction, work safety and business ethics. Of course, we
also aim to maximize the potential of Skanska with regard to returns. (Skanska Official
Website).
Role in Hammarby:
Swedish contractor* Skanska is one of the several developers* building homes in
Hammarby Sjstad. Skanska is in charge of building some lower residential buildings, a
12 floors office building and a 17 floors hotel. Bjrn Ljungdahl, the companys district
manager for Stockholm, declared to Building magazine in the article Swedens green
utopia (Lane, 2007), that building homes at Hammarby is not more demanding than
elsewhere in Sweden because having the infrastructure in place makes construction
much easier for the company because they are able to use the same house type at
Hammarby as elsewhere.
60
61
Capabilities analysis of companies related to the design and operation of the whole
system
Based on the role played by the firms involved in the Hammarby Sjostad project, this is
the result of the analysis which lists the different capabilities required for firm to carry
out their corresponding duties in the project:
- Stockholm Business Region:
Business Consultancy and financing: The Company provides business and economic
data, assistance, contacts and solutions for foreign business entities that are
considering setting up business in Stockholm.
- Fortum
Systems integration: It designs and integrates internally and externally supplied
components in a finished product (both the energy and district cooling & heating
networks and energy as a product itself). Fortum is a vertically integrated firm (as
most energy companies are), because it combines within the firm the successive
stages in the flow of productive activities to provide energy to the customers (from
generation to distribution and sale of electricity and heat). It is also an integrator of
external supplied products when it comes to designing and building the energy
stations and the network.
Operational services: Maintenance and operation of Fortums four major thermal
power plants, which supply Hammarby Sjstad with district heating and district
cooling from treated wastewater and biofuels, managing the district heating system
and maintaining the network.
- Stockholm Water Company (Stockholm Vatten)
Systems integration: It designs and integrates basically externally supplied
components in a finished product (the water network) to produce and deliver drinking
water of high quality.
Operational services: Maintenance and operation of the facilities needed for the water
and sewing systems such as Sjstadsverket, the experimental wastewater treatment
plant and spearhead-projects for new wastewater treatment techniques or the pump
station for wastewater.
- Stockholm Waste Management Administration
Operational services: It manages the pneumatic waste collection system together with
Envac.
- ENVAC
Systems integration: It is involved in the waste collection system from the planning
phase to the installation. It designs and integrates internal and external components to
deliver a turnkey* installation, where ENVAC (the supplier) is responsible for the
62
Operational
Services
Business
Consultancy
Financing
X
X
SWECO
NCC
Skanska
X
Table 5.
63
64
- SWECO
Sweco acts as a pure consultant in this process. Its business model is based on the
provision of services (in this case the design of the urban area and the infrastructure
systems). The Government outsources to Sweco the technical design because it doesnt
have the necessary capabilities (technical skills) to do it by itself. Sweco can be located
in the design phase of the development of the system, at the beginning of the value
chain and its main capability is business consultancy.
- Skanska
Skanska, as a leading international project development and construction company, has
responsibility for acquiring and developing land and makes money out of building
commercial and residential projects and public-private partnerships (PPP*).
65
Outline
Gallions Park is a 1.23 ha brownfield site located in Beckton, in the Borough of
Newham (Thames Gateway, London) and at the eastern end of the Royal Albert Dock
Basin. This project aims to deliver one of Londons first zero carbon developments
since the Mayors Energy Strategy was released in 2003. The Code for Sustainable
Homes and the Governments CO2 reduction targets suppose a hidden revolution for the
energy industry and home owners.
There are three key numbers in the targets of the Mayors Energy Strategy: reduce by
60% emissions coming from the built environment by 2050; achieving a 20% reduction
of emissions through onsite renewables and the requirement of new housing to be zero
carbon from 2016. None of these targets or economic benefits will be achieved unless
action is taken on the ground to implement decentralised energy systems in London.
Somehow, being one of the first zero carbon sites, Gallions Park is meant to prove that
it is possible to meet the targets of the London Mayors Energy Strategy and to
demonstrate that this strategy is not a utopia but can come true. In order to make this
happen, a feasibility study was undertaken by ARUP to assess how a low or zero carbon
development could be delivered on this site. The conclusions of this study (which are
explained in more detail in further chapters) enabled the masterplanners of the project to
reach a more sustainable development with a systems approach.
Resulting from this integrated design process, Gallions Park is a 260 residential unit
development that includes several earth-friendly features to reduce energy demand by
up to 40 percent compared to 2006 Building Regulations. A key element of the zerocarbon strategy is that electricity will be generated on site by a combined heat and
power plant (CHP) to generate electricity and provide hot water for heating. This plant
Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
66
67
68
With this method of lower carbon intensity of heat and power production, we can reach
till a 30% reduction in emissions of CO2. Apart from this obvious reduction in
emissions, CHP also means a most significant difference for customers. Instead of
having traditional heating equipment at home, a small heat exchanger and metering unit
69
All homes will feature energy efficient lights, fittings and appliances. It is expected that
residents will benefit from savings by using these resources efficiently. However, there
are no restrictions in terms of energy or water used.
Recycling and composting will be made easy at One Gallions through the provision of
on-site waste segregation and composting facilities. As part of a sustainable approach to
resource management, support and guidance will be offered to residents to help reduce
the amount of waste sent to landfill. Measures will also be implemented to reduce
construction waste.
The homes will be specified with water efficient appliances and fittings, such as
showers and taps, with the aim to significantly reduce domestic water consumption.
Rainwater will be harvested and used within the landscape for irrigation and amenity.
Areas of roof and hard landscaping will be designed to attenuate rainfall.
70
Infrastructure solutions
Energy
Waste
Biomass CHP
Talbot air turbine
Photovoltaic panels
- Local waste
collection system
- On-site waste
segregation and
composting facilities.
Firms involved
- London ESCO*
71
Table 6.
Analysis of the role that firms and public partners play in the process
For the analysis of the roles played by firms involved in this process, a review of what
each firm does and the direct implication of the firm in the project has been summarised
as follows:
a) Public Administrations
- London Development Agency (LDA):
General Profile:
LDA is one of the nine Regional Development Agencies (RDAs), set up by the English
Government to transform England's regions through sustainable economic development.
As a functional body of the Greater London Authority (GLA), they have a key role to
display clear leadership on climate change by implementing practical steps to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and consequently help to achieve targets for carbon dioxide
reduction.
In order to support this vision for the city, they produce the Economic Development
Strategy for London, which focuses on four priorities: places and infrastructure,
supporting people, encouraging business and promoting London. Regarding the places
and infrastructure theme, which is the one directly related to our case, LDA is investing
in some important developments, such as the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games,
making great efforts to regenerate the Lower Lea Valley and the wider Thames
Gateway.
To help LDA deliver these goals, they work with partners from industry, and the public
and voluntary sectors. LDA adds value through playing the role of 'broker' or 'coordinator' of economic development activity. They leverage* resources from others in
the public, private, voluntary and community sectors and guide the activities of our
partners with economic evidence and best practice learning.
Role in Gallions Park:
The role of LDA is helping to deliver the Mayor of London's vision and priorities for
London. Its role in Gallions Park has been promoting the project and investing in the
development for the provision of sustainable infrastructure solutions (by selling the land
72
73
ESCO
joint
London ESCO Limited designs, finances, builds, operates, replaces and maintains the
assets* required to provide sustainable energy solutions, including local decentralized
energy systems for both new and existing developments while still being competitive
with conventional energy sources. It also manages energy services. The company deals
with climate change by developing local decentralized energy solutions to Londons
power, heating and cooling needs. They are actively seeking to invest in sites across the
capital to develop projects and create commercially viable Energy Service Companies
(ESCOs*). Investment in sustainable energy technology aims to reduce carbon dioxide
and other greenhouse gas emissions, which are contributing to climate change.
To meet these objectives, the London ESCO develops decentralized energy systems for
London, targeting low carbon sources to achieve CO2 emission reductions. Its main
technology is the Combined Heat and Power (CHP) that has been previously explained,
heat-led co-generation and tri-generation (CCHP) schemes delivering community
heating/cooling and power for mixed use new build and refurbished developments.
Local distribution networks have been created to supply the heat, power and sometimes
cooling to connected customers.
The money saved through reduced energy bills is leveraged to offset the cost of
financing, installing, operating, and maintaining the energy efficiency measures. The
ESCO is paid through reduced energy bills, typically sharing the energy cost savings
over a predetermined length of time, after which all of the energy savings revert to the
facility owner. London ESCO contracts are typically for 20 to 30 years to enable such
74
75
76
77
78
Operational
Services
LDA
London ESCo
Business
Consultancy
X
Drivers Jonas
Financing
X
X
ARUP
Crest Nicholson BioReginal Quintain
Southern Housing Group
Table 7.
X
X
79
80
81
Current practice in new developments is for individual sites to procure a mixed group of
companies to provide all the services needed to meet the Code for Sustainable Homes,
including grey water, potable water, telecoms, electricity, heating and cooling. However
separate tendering can make it difficult to cost effectively reduce carbon emissions for a
number of reasons:
- Services are generally let on a 25-40 year exclusive contract, which may create new
problems by locking in homeowners who have no right to switch electricity suppliers
for decades risking both unhappy customers and a reduction in the value of property.
- Optimal generation from the site will require several different technologies to work
together, which can be difficult if providers are competing to maximise profits. A
procurement model which aligns suppliers interests from the beginning may result in a
more integrated energy system that benefits the site as a whole.
Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
82
Therefore, the market solution to these issues appears to be the ESCo*, whether that is
an independent player or a subsidiary of an established utility which incorporates all the
elements of a vertically integrated utility. Separating ownership and management of
generation assets* enables services to be consolidated across sites, providing economies
of scale* and reducing administration for the providers of new housing while allowing
for local branding where this can increase community buy-in. The role of the ESCo*
can also be broadened for it to become the billing agency for other products such as
water, telecoms or development service charges. In Gallions Park, how these other
products will be tackled with hasnt been decided yet.
Promoters of housing and multi-use developments are already looking for a single
solution for the provision of an increasing range of services from electricity and heat to
telecoms, water and waste management (a horizontally integrated structure). To date, no
company meets that need. Given the changing market associated with new housing
developments, energy companies must embrace the more flexible ESCo* model or risk
losing access to new housing business growth (Jones, 2008).
83
Contract value: 1
infrastructure (1,13
approx.)
billion overall
billion Euros
Outline
Ashford is situated in South East England, between London and the Channel Tunnel. In
the 1960s, Ashford was identified as an expanded town to accommodate London
overspill and then as a growth area in the Kent Structure Plan. It has the fastest growing
population in Kent, growing from 79,000 to 105,000 between 1971 and 2002.
Nowadays, in Ashford, a key priority is to respond to national proposals for sustainable
growth, which are contained in the Sustainable Communities Plan and regional planning
guidance, which propose 31,000 new homes and 29,000 additional jobs in the city by
2031. The Greater Ashford Development Project (GADF) is the masterplan that has
been developed to guide the sustainable growth of Ashford the immediate surrounds
(that have been proposed as the expanded urban area) for the next thirty years.
Funding
The English government already allocated 55 to 60 million (around 65 million Euros)
additional public investment in the three years to March 2006 to push prime growth at
Ashford. At the same time, the Council also joined with key development stakeholders*
to form the Ashfords Future Partnership. With support from a range of consultants, the
Partnership had to produce a masterplan and delivery plans to guide the project.
84
It is expected that, by following these principles, Ashford will have the tools to develop
in a sustainable manner and will be capable of absorbing the expected growth in the
most efficient way possible.
Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
85
86
Water
87
Environmental water: the need to maintain healthy wildlife and ecology in Ashford,
the River Stour and its tributaries.
Mains water: this water is taken from the environment by water utilities, treated and
piped to customers. After use, customers usually pay a water utility to take away
wastewater, often loaded with sewage* and other waste, and treat it before
discharging the water back into the environment. The large scale of water
movement, infrastructure and public interest means that the system is highly
regulated. It has been privatised in England and Wales since 1989.
Non-mains water: many water users, such as industry and agriculture, abstract and
discharge water directly from the environment. Although the quantities of water are
often much less than mains water, the timing, location and quality of such activities
can have a dramatic impact on the other water demands. The diverse and dispersed
uses often make non-mains water demand difficult to identify, monitor and regulate.
Flood risk and drainage water excess water in unwanted places can be a threat to
homes, businesses and land through water logging and flooding. If removed, this
water may be lost to the other water demands. Drainage responsibilities are
dispersed and can affect both flood risk and the chemical and biological quality of
receiving watercourses.
Integrated water management helps to promote working partnerships between the many
organisations with different responsibilities for managing water and it also allows
options to be explored. Each may not individually be the best solution, but in
combination with others may deliver many benefits for water supply, water quality,
flood risk and wildlife.
Infrastructure Networks
The infrastructure requirements to support growth in Ashford include:
88
89
Infrastructure solutions
Energy
Waste
- EDF Energy
- British Gas
- Waste collection
- Ashford Borough
Council
- Kent County Council
- Waste disposal
- New wastewater treatment
systems
(sand
and
nitrifying filters).
Firms involved
- Southern Water
the
- Mid Kent Water (now
South East Water)
- Cable network
- British Telecom
Analysis of the role that firms and public partners play in the process
For the analysis of the roles played by firms involved in this process, a review of what
each firm does and the direct implication of the firm in the project has been summarised
as follows:
a) Public Administrations
- Ashford Borough Council
In Ashford, the public sector is the promoter of these systems-integrated urban planning
solutions. In order to achieve its goals, the Ashford Council has constructed the
following delivery structure:
90
Delivery Co-ordination Team: It is the core team - a technical team whose members
are employed by the Borough Council, but answerable to the Delivery Board. The team
is managed by a managing director employed by the South East England Development
Agency (SEEDA), but also accountable for the Board. The team formulates policies and
proposals for the approval of the Board and coordinates implementation of the delivery
plans with partners. It forms the link between partners, the community and other
stakeholders*, challenging and inspiring to get the best outcomes. It will also have a
performance management role.
Delivery Managers Group: responsible for providing strategic advice to the Delivery
Board and chaired by the managing director of the Delivery Co-ordination Team.
Masterplanning Group: chaired by the Homes and Communities Agency (before
English Partnerships). It is accountable to the Board and responsible for the day to day
management of the masterplanning process. It is responsible for commissioning
consultants and draws on staff from the Delivery Co-ordination Team and the partners.
- Ashfords Future Company
The Ashfords Future Company has been established by the Ashford's Future
Partnership Board to support the delivery of housing and economic growth in Ashford.
91
92
93
94
- Alan Baxter
General Profile:
Alan Baxter & Associates is an engineering practice which range of work is now broad
and covers urban design, masterplanning, sustainability, conservation and civil and
structural engineering.
95
96
97
98
99
Ashford Future
Systems
integration
X
Operational
Services
SEEDA
EDF Energy
British Gas
Southern Water
Business
Consultancy
Alan Baxter
WS Atkins
Table 9.
Financing
100
101
In Europe, public sector operation is the dominant mode in most countries except for
France, the UK, the Czech Republic, Spain and Hungary. In the privately operated
segment, however, water is highly concentrated in the hands of the two largest French
multinationals that hold around 70% of the world market
102
Since 1 July 2007 every household and industrial consumer of electric energy in the
European Union is entitled to freely choose its supplier. Nonetheless, a truly
competitive internal market for electricity has not yet been achieved due to various
reasons such as the market power of the former monopolists on the wholesale* level or
cross-border transmission constraints.
In Europe, three large companies (the French EDF and the Germans E.ON and RWE),
are emerging rapidly as dominant international companies with the resources to takeover and dominate European electricity markets. A second layer of companies, such as
Vattenfall (Sweden), ENEL (Italy), Endesa (Spain) or Tractebel/Suez (Belgium) still
remain as strong regional players. Others, such the Finnish energy company Fortum and
perhaps a Scottish power company may survive in small niches.
Most national governments are not leaning towards checking the activities of these
companies, which in most cases are seen as national champions because they capture
profits in foreign markets and bring them back to their home country. However, Spain is
the only country, apart from the UK, which has so far protected national pluralities in
front of international companies by, for instance, declining to approve the proposed
merger of Endesa and Iberdrola.
The companies which are expanding most successfully in the European market are
large, national-scale companies. There is a clear trend towards vertical unification (not
unbundling*) and mergers, not separation. For instance, Germany was dominated by
four major companies, which have been reduced by merger to two, an oligopoly
position which is being concentrated by mergers, rather than unbundled.
The UK electricity industry was privatized in 1990 by the public sales of shares on the
stock exchange. The industry was unbundled into generating companies. The
reasoning implicit in the regulation of the industry in the UK was that companies
involved in activities that would remain a monopoly (basically distribution and
transmission activities) should not be involved in competitive activities (generation and
retail supply). This had to ensure that those involved in competitive activities could gain
non-discriminatory access to the network.
There should also be some separation between companies involved in generation and
those involved in retail supply to final consumers. If generation and retail supply were
integrated, the wholesale* market would not be a primary price-setting forum as
integrated companies would be generating to supply their own consumers. This was the
basis for the effective ban on vertical integration which was finally lifted in 1998.
103
104
A main problem of infrastructure service providers is that some of them are natural
monopolies in some countries. Therefore, if the social cost wants to be minimized, there
105
106
6. _Tipology of cases
6. Typology of cases
6.1. Review of cases
Before going through the attempt of delivering a typology of cases, a brief summary of
the four cases reviewed in the previous chapters has been added in order to remind the
four different processes we are dealing with.
1. Barcelona 22@ (Catalunya, Spain)
Barcelona City Council wanted to promote a change of land use in a former industrial
area of the City (from industrial towards knowledge activities called @ activities) to
promote innovation. For this reason, it developed a new urban plan that modified the
existing General Metropolitan Plan and created the public enterprise 22 ARROBA BCN
S.A. to make sure the new local plan was carried out correctly. The infrastructure
planning to improve the zone and attract the new users of land has been undertaken by
the City Council in cooperation with the different companies that take part in the
improvement of the different networks.
2. Hammarby Sjostad (Stockholm, Sweden)
With the main idea of expanding the inner city of Stockholm converting an old
industrial and harbour area into a modern neighbourhood, the City of Stockholm
developed a program that outlined environmental integrated solutions for waste, energy
and water & sewage*. This programme was named after the project and it is known as
the Hammarby Sjostad eco-cycle or Hammarby-model, which is the result of a
unique planning process and intensive systems integration programming work.
The model was developed by Fortum, Stockholm Water Company and the Stockholm
Waste Management Administration using systems integration methodology. Other firms
involved in carrying out this project (both public and private) have been: ENVAC,
SWECO and the Stockholm Business Region.
3. Gallions Park (London, UK)
Gallions Park will be the first London zero-carbon development since the Mayors
Energy Strategy was released in 2003. Located in an old industrial area, it is part of a
regeneration project in the Royal Albert Dock. The first phase in the design process was
ARUPs feasibility study to demonstrate that a zero carbon development could be
delivered in that site. This study proved that a carbon-free development was both
technically and economically viable. The main sustainable innovation has been the use
of a Combined Heat and Power (CHP) plant that produces both heat and power in situ.
The CHP is managed by a partnership scheme between EDF Energy and LDA (with the
LCCA as the delivery vehicle for the project).
4. Ashford (Kent, UK)
Being one of the fastest growing cities in the South East of England, Ashford faces the
possible problem of uncontrolled growing. For this reason, the Ashford Borough
Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
107
6. _Tipology of cases
Council, in cooperation with the Regional Assembly (SEERA), has developed a new
urban plan in order to prepare the city for the achievement of this growth in a
sustainable way. The Council has joined with key development stakeholders* to form
the Ashfords Future Partnership that may enable the city to achieve sustainable growth
by applying an integrated planning by the masterplanners (GADF) and including several
growth studies and an Integrated Water Management Study developed by Black &
Veatch. The delivery structure reflects the integrated planning approach as it is formed
by several public and private partnerships: the Ashfords Future Delivery Board, the
Delivery Co-ordination Team (technical team), the Delivery Managers Group and the
Masterplanners Group (managers of the masterplanning process). This project is being
funded by the governmental agency SEEDA & English Partnerships on behalf of the
UK Government.
108
6. _Tipology of cases
by the city council and the utilities companies. Similarly has been done by the Spaniards
in Barcelona in the 22@ case while Ashford is a mix of both conceptions.
In Hammarby, combustible waste is cleverly sucked through a system of tubes, rather
than being taken away by polluting lorries and burned in a combined heat and power
plant to provide electricity and heat via the district heating system. There is a dedicated
wastewater treatment plant, which generates biogas from sewage* and uses it to power
local buses. Even warm wastewater is made to yield its energy, which is then used for
space heating.
But the UK, with councils having economical problems and privatised utilities not being
much efficient, is very different from Sweden or Spain, where there is only one water
and one electricity provider in every zone. Therefore, the development models must be
different for these places. The Swedes and the Spanish take the view that it is far
cheaper and more efficient to provide green heat and power centrally, rather than using
expensive bolt-on renewables. It also means the developers* of the individual apartment
blocks dont have to reinvent themselves as power generators but can concentrate on
building in much the same way they would on a more traditional development.
The following table summarises some important figures related to costs, dimensions and
state of the works for each of the four cases that can be useful for the current
comparison of cases in the next sections:
Overall
investmentii
()
Area
(Ha)
Barcelona
22@
Hammarby
Sjostad
Gallions
Park
12 billioniii
200
2 billion
200
(iv)
1,23
Ashford
1,08 billion
133,6
Infrastr.
inv. ()
180
million
432
million
Infr. Vs.
overall
inv. (%)
1,5
21,6
Infr.
Inv./Ha
(/Ha)
0,9
million
2,16
million
% built
(2008)
50%
75%
0%
400
million
37
3 million
10%
109
6. _Tipology of cases
and disadvantages of systems integration respect to these other more conventional
methods is also included.
Systems Integrated planning in our case studies
The systems integrated approach in design is a topic to which this thesis is constantly
referring to because of its importance in the conception of these urban projects. In 22@
and Hammarby Sjostad, the integrated approach was taken into consideration from the
first moment when the firms managing the different systems and all the stakeholders*
sat in the same table to design large technical systems to provide integrated solutions for
their respective cities. Hammarby Sjostad even followed the Symbio city holistic
scheme which finally resulted in the Hammarby model. Therefore, this integrated
approach let the masterplanners work out integrated design solutions in cooperation
with utility firms and other stakeholders*.
For the design of One Gallions, a feasibility plan was commissioned to Arup in order to
assess the best way in which a zero-carbon development could be carried out. The IRM,
which is an integrated resource management tool, was used to meet this objective and
the results demonstrated the site was feasible (taking into consideration the synergies
between the different subsystems in the development). In this case, the integrated
approach was holistically applied to the design of the best way in which utilities should
be managed for the development.
Finally, in Ashford, a long process has also been followed in order to decide in which
way the city should grow. Several studies have also been developed (the integrated
water management study, AIWMS, amongst them) which also have a systemic view
and the objective of integrating the different systems and subsystems in the most
suitable way. Regarding the integrated management water study, it should be said that it
is more about integrated planning in the water system (taking into account the different
interrelated subsystems such as mains water, non-mains water, environmental water and
flood risk and drainage water) than integrating the different infrastructure systems as it
happens in other case studies.
Integrated planning has been possible thanks to the important figure of development
agencies or coordination local partnerships. This figure is exemplified in the different
cases by 22@BCN,S.A. (22@Barcelona), the partnership of the Stockholm
Municipality, Stockholm Vatten, Fortum and the Stockholm Business Region to
develop the Hammarby Model (Hammarby Sjostad), LDA (Gallions Park) or Ashford
Future (Ashford).
Conventional urban infrastructure planning
Conventional projects with no special emphasis in urban infrastructure dont require any
specific planning authority to decide how infrastructure is laid. Usually, urban planning
is done by developers and utility companies are responsible for laying services to
development sites. The market is highly regulated and there are specific rules on how to
deploy utilities and a normalised system to do it. In the design stage, developers contact
each company separately and they follow a standardised way of working due to the
industrialisation of processes. There isnt any development promoting agency
110
6. _Tipology of cases
coordinating or integrating the different systems because the planning process is less
complex and it doesnt demand any cooperation or coordination between firms.
This way, each company acts separately and gives service independently to each
infrasystem; there is no interrelation between companies managing different systems.
Systems work properly but synergies between the different systems are not exploited;
which means that the potential effectiveness that an integrated scheme would produce is
considerably reduced, and then it may be cheaper at first but proportionally more
expensive in the long run. On the other hand, innovation also requires both a special
technical and economical effort because of the novelty of all processes and it may result
expensive in the short-run though quite profitable when repeatable.
In spite of all this facts, it is extremely difficult to predict exactly how much more
effective or expensive may one method be respect to the other because these large-scale
capital intensive projects are only carried out one way (we cannot compare two identical
projects performed in two different ways) and hence, costs cannot be compared but only
esteemed. Moreover, the outcome resulting from each method is not the same. The
integrated solution, generally being a bit more expensive at first, may result in a more
efficient and operational final solution obtained, for which may be worth paying for.
The following table contains data related to extra costs and includes the main
advantages of the final integrated solutions obtained in each case.
Infrastructure
extra cost (%)
very small
2-4 %
Gallions Park
5-8 %
Ashford
(not known
yet)
Barcelona 22@
Hammarby
Sjostad
111
6. _Tipology of cases
Regarding costs, the only data that can be obtained from these processes is that at 22@
firms finally agreed to apply all the innovations planned because the amount of service
to be built and operated was big enough and the overexploitation cost was very small. In
Hammarby, the cost of the learning process and investment in new knowledge wasnt
much of a 2-4% extra, and in Gallions, the additional cost on the scheme was set
somewhere between 5 and 8% over traditional build costs. We still dont know about
the Ashford case (because the infrastructure planning is sill on course), but it can be
guessed that the integrated planning will lead to similar averaged extra costs.
As we can see from the table above, integrated planning has resulted in interesting more
effective outcomes for each case, which should be considered best value for money. In
22@ the needs for each service have been determined and an integrated solution has
been given, getting scale benefits, synergies and a diminished citizen impact. In
Hammarby, this planning process was unique and resulted in new and integrated
environmental solutions where the resources provided by one player were reutilised by
another. In Gallions, IRM provides a methodology to make more efficient the complex
process of masterplanning to achieve the best practicable outcome (a zero-carbon site).
And finally, Ashford, will achieve sustainable growth and, with its integrated water
management, helps to promote working partnerships between the many organisations
with different responsibilities for managing water (which may not individually be the
best solution, but in combination with others may deliver many benefits for water
supply, water quality, flood risk and wildlife).
Advantages and disadvantages of the different methods
As we have been observing throughout the whole report, the main advantage of systems
integration in design is that the resulting solutions are more efficient (even if this may
also mean that they are more expensive and complex). Therefore, systems integration
should only be applied in those cases where the complexity of the goals we want to
achieve require a planning method such as systems integration that takes into account
the interaction between the different subsystems to get the best possible solution. It
seems quite clear from what has been observed in our cases that the same outcome
wouldnt be possible by conventional methods.
The next table tries to summarise the main advantages and disadvantages of systems
integration in the design stages of infrastructure planning compared to the conventional
way of planning infrastructures in developments.
Advantages
Convention
al planning
Disadvantages
its
to
an
the
Less resource-efficiency in
operation.
Only valid for simple
solutions (doesnt take into
account possible synergies
with other systems).
112
6. _Tipology of cases
Systems
integration
113
6. _Tipology of cases
important (being usually demonstrated as administrational and economic support or
facilitating means for funding).
Obviously firms also have their R&D departments which work in researching other
ways of providing better products and services to enable firms operate with the most
profitable possible business model, but the effort they make in finding new solutions
will be much bigger when firms are in competition because is the way to maintain CA.
Systems integration activities as a business for firms
From the planning point of view, in most cases, it has been the municipality that wanted
to achieve the goal of improving services and offering innovation and finally it has been
achieved thanks to political pressure. This has also encouraged firms to provide a
certain service or to develop integrated solutions. In some cases, there has also been a
change in Business Models as a result of new code requirements (as in Gallions Park
with the London ESCo, where EDF Energy and developers* have to adapt to comply
with decentralised energy services).
From the point of view of systems integration in management, companies became more
efficient because of economies of scale*, but in the case of infrasystem service provider
companies in some countries such as Spain, this cant be true because they have no
competition, and a company only offers innovative services if it has to compete with
others. However, firms being the only company providing a service also have to
respond to the needs of its customers (in this case municipalities) and, in some cases,
these can demand the provision of certain services if they consider so (such as the
provision of integrated solutions).
Integrated solutions
Ditriclima
DH&C
Ros Roca and Envac provide turnkey* solutions that combine the
design, installation, maintenance and service of the pneumatic
waste collection system.
London ESCO
Table 13. Some examples of fully integrated solutions in our case studies.
In the technological market, component suppliers are growing by making components
and products for systems integrators. Firms benefit from specialising in systems
integration because these activities require fewer assets* and generate higher margins
than product manufacturing. Because systems integrators have an in-depth knowledge
of their customers operational needs as well as the products they have designed, they
are best placed to provide services to monitor, operate, maintain, finance and support a
114
6. _Tipology of cases
product and gain revenue through their integrated solutions life cycles. A good example
of this would be the pneumatic waste collection systems by both Ros Roca (22@) and
Envac (22@ and Hammarby Sjostad) or the decentralised energy system by London
ESCo (Gallions Park) mentioned in the previous table.
Some utility firms are also expanding the scope of the product offering to include
services. This allows firms to find new business models because they can capture life
cycle profits associated with the product and secure more continuous streams of
revenue. Most utility firms (especially energy and water companies) are vertically
integrated. Vertical integration enables these companies achieve coordination which, in
the network organization, is systems integration. For systems integrator firms, an
intimate knowledge of their products and customers needs enables systems integrators
to provide operational services. By effective outsourcing and managing of upstream
component manufacturers, these firms can concentrate on their core systems integration
and operational service activities, while building up their capabilities in business
consultancy and financial services to offer entire solutions to a customers needs.
Energy firms are vertically integrated and dont concentrate only in systems integration
capabilities (because they are not abandoning energy generation) but they are moving
downstream into services by focusing on maintaining, financing and operating the
supply network. They are single vendor systems integrators when it comes to energy
(developed in-house), while multi-vendor system integrators when it comes to building
the network.
Engineering consultancy firms (like Barcelona Regional, Sweco, Arup or Atkins)
provide multi-vendor systems as they provide services to design, integrate and service
components and products manufactured by external suppliers. They are horizontally
integrated because they provide integrated solutions to customers across different
industries.
Capabilities to deliver Integrated Solutions
Throughout the whole thesis, firms involved in the different projects have been
evaluated to determine which their capabilities were in relation with those that are
supposed to be the capabilities needed for delivering integrated solutions. These
capabilities are: systems integration, operational services, business consultancy and
financing. As we have already seen in the previous analysis of cases, it is quite difficult
to find firms in the urban environment that own all of these capabilities. It seems that,
being infrastructure networks large-scale capital intensive systems, it is probably more
difficult to offer all these services by a single company.
Systems integration
Systems integration capabilities have been developed by some firms in order to provide
customers with physical products that can easily be deployed with services as part of a
solution to a customers need. Some firms may have traditionally designed and
integrated systems using in-house developed components or may have always been
based on providing services. The service providers with no in-house technology
specialise in providing systems integration from products sourced from external
manufacturers (some examples can be found in WS Atkins or Arup).
115
6. _Tipology of cases
Customers (in this case municipalities) demand turnkey* solutions where the supplier is
responsible for the entire set of activities involved in the design, integration,
construction, testing and delivery of a fully functioning system. As it has previously
been said, ENVAC or Ros Roca seems to be the firms offering what we could call
integrated (turnkey) solutions. Systems integrators can also cooperate with partners in
joint ventures* or consortiums to carry out other products, services or capabilities
required to provide complete solutions to customers. Some examples can be found in
Gallions Park, where LCCA selected EDF Energy as the preferred bidder to set up a
joint venture* Energy Services Company (ESCO*) whose responsibility is to develop
decentralized energy schemes for London. The centralised climate control in 22@
Barcelona, designed and managed by Districlima (partnership of Suez, Agbar and
Axima) could be another example.
Operational Services
A general trend that has also been identified is that suppliers are moving into the
provision of services to maintain, renovate and operate products. Utility companies,
such as energy and water companies, offer comprehensive services to manage, maintain
and operate a product through its life cycle from sale to decommissioning*. These
services are usually related to the maintenance of the networks they operate or customer
services.
A less common practice is providing embedded services, such as Fortums advanced
energy control service or Agbars remote control systems for fault report in the network.
But the most interesting product resulting from both systems integration and operational
services is providing integrated solutions. The most significant integrated solutions in
the cases reviewed are those provided by Envac and Ros Roca in the pneumatic waste
collection system; and Districlima and London ESCO in the centralised climate control
and the decentralised energy system respectively, where products and services are
offered together as an integrated solution.
Business Consultancy
Some firms are also developing business consultancy capabilities to advise customers
on how to plan, design, build, finance, maintain and operate systems. However, it can
be noticed that, in our case studies, most firms owning business consultancy capabilities
are concentrating on developing this capability; usually isolated. Some examples would
be: 22@BCN,S.A. and Barcelona Regional for 22@; Stockholm Business Region, and
Sweco for Hammarby Sjostad; LDA, London ESCo, ARUP and Drivers Jonas for
Gallions Park and Urban Initiatives LTD, Alan Baxter, Black & Veatch and WS Atkins
for Ashford.
These firms are usually pure design, legal or engineering consultants that are
commissioned to develop a certain study for the new area or have to develop a plan with
the premises previously established by partnerships involving the municipalities and
utility companies. Whats more, they usually work with stakeholders*, municipalities
and firms to develop their products and services, but customers outsource these works
because they dont have the necessary skills or expertise to develop them.
116
6. _Tipology of cases
Financing
Some firms have also increased capabilities to provide finance (usually asset*
management or vendor finance). The provision of finance has sometimes been together
with design, construction and maintenance. However, the most common companies
offering finance services are municipalities or local administrations pushing sustainable
developments.
Actually financing is a real barrier for the development of these processes, as innovative
processes are usually most expensive, at least the first ones, some of them not becoming
profitable till they can get returns from repeating the integrated solution in other
projects. Sometimes it is quite difficult even for municipalities to find funding for their
projects. However, some consulting firms offer financing capabilities to help develop
their projects and, in the construction field, certain developers* like Skanska also offer
financing facilities participating in PPP*. In utility firms, this is not so common.
However, London ESCo owns and finances the assets* for the decentralised energy
system and Districlima in 22@ is involved in a kind of PPP* in a 25 year concession
where local administrations (Ajuntament de Barcelona and Generalitat de Catalunya)
invest around 25% of the overall cost.
Not many large public sector PFI* and PPP* projects have been identified in our cases
(they are usually more related to other infrastructure fields such as transport or
healthcare, as they appear in the Ashfords Future project). Some examples of PPP*,
apart from the Districlima case, could also be found in Hammarby Sjostad, such as the
Sea Bus (a biogas driven commuter ferry).
Partnership Structures
Customer with limited technical experience may require partnerships as early as the prebid phase to discuss business plans, user requirements, and conceptual solutions, prior
to specifying and integrating systems. This is what happens with municipalities when it
comes to planning infrastructure.
Municipality-firm and inter-firm relationships
Inter-firm co-operation is very often concerned with the transfer, exchange or pooling of
technology. New products also require the co-operation of firms with different
capabilities. The indirect exploitation of new technology could be sought either through
market transactions (transactions in licences, for example, where there is still some kind
of cooperation between firms) or through co-operation with other firms. However,
technology cant be transferred just by selling the right to use processes (it consists of
experience and skills, the know how rather than know that).
In the cases we have been studying, some partnership examples can be identified.
Usually, for the characteristics of these innovative processes, they are both partnerships
between the municipalities or local administrations and firms (to deliver a certain
infrastructure), but also firm to firm partnerships to offer a new product or service
joining capabilities from the different firms that are required to develop this new
solution.
117
6. _Tipology of cases
The most important partnership structures identified in these four cases can be classified
into administration-firm partnerships and inter-firm partnerships. Regarding the
administration-firms partnerships, we can find examples in the work done at 22@
Barcelona, Hammarby Sjostad and Ashford, due to the complex innovations that had to
be delivered; municipalities had to work with all the firms involved in the process. In
Hammarby Sjstad, for instance, the unique partnership between administrations,
authorities, architects and developers* has led to numerous innovative environmentallyfriendly technical solutions which have been essential for the development of the
Hammarby model. GlashusEtt, which is the centre for environmental communication in
Hammarby Sjstad, is also a partnership between the Stockholm Water Company,
Fortum, the Stockholm City Development Administration and the Stockholm City
Waste Management Administration and a way of explaining to the inhabitants how the
innovations they live with work.
In Ashford, Ashford Borough Council also joined with key development stakeholders*
to form the Ashfords Future Partnership, which had to produce a masterplan and
delivery plans to guide the Ashford Future project. This kind of partnerships is also
advantageous for consultants like ARUP, which working in partnership with industry,
governments and other organizations, have developed assessment methods and tools
that enable their clients' to incorporate sustainability into their business strategies,
planning and operations such as the previously explained IRM tool.
When it comes to inter-firm partnership, our study cases also provide some examples.
In the foundation of Districlima, a firm to manage the Centralised Climate Control in
22@, a joint venture* was created. Local authorities, Elyo Iberica, Aguas de Barcelona
(Agbar) and Axima partnered so as to ensure to the communities an environmentalfriendly heating and cooling system. This partnership was necessary in order to obtain
the needed capabilities to design, build and operate the new system.
The same happened with BioRegional Quintain, which is a joint partnership between
BioRegional Properties and Quintain Estates and Development PLC that at the same
time is member of the One Gallions Consortia, aiming to deliver sustainable
developments for Gallions Park in the Thames Gateway. Finally, the London ESCo is
another example of new partnership aiming to supply energy in a decentralised manner.
This kind of partnership was born from the need to join companies with complementary
skills or capabilities for the realisation of infrastructure related to new technology.
118
6. _Tipology of cases
Therefore, a list of common features for the four previously reviewed cases identifying
them as areas experimenting with planning and use of integrated solutions for urban
infrastructure change into sustainability has been developed as follows:
1. All processes are capital intensive and technologically complex.
2. All projects have an integrated approach in design due to a holistic view* of the
urban system.
3. Theres a strong focus on sustainability
4. Municipality takes the lead in promoting and financing the delivery of integrated
solutions to urban infrastructure.
5. The four capabilities needed to deliver urban infrastructure integrated solutions
are usually not in the same firm neither in municipalities. Administrations
outsource design and management capabilities to other firms.
6. Cooperation between firms: theres technological transfer between different
sectors in the market.
7. Appearing both private-public and inter-firm partnerships (the first ones usually
to manage the design process and the others to deliver integrated infrastructure
solutions).
8. Some integrated solutions provided by single actors, especially in waste
collection and heat and power systems.
9. Problems with delivering innovation and convincing private firms to follow.
10. Some repeating structures, especially in utility companies, which are usually
vertically integrated (such as water and energy) now also providing services.
11. New business models (comprehensive services, embedded services and
integrated solutions).
12. Problems with innovation in non-competitive markets.
13. Problems in financing innovation in some cases, but not many PPP*, PFI*
appearing.
14. Most of the firms offer customer-centred solutions but search these solutions to
be somehow repeatable in other places.
119
7. Conclusions
7. Conclusions
In this section, well proceed to describe the final conclusions obtained from the
previous work that will try to answer the questions proposed at the beginning of this
thesis. The case study methodology has been quite suitable for the development of this
analysis because it is a good approach for comparison of cases and offers enough
information to extract conclusions from the proposed cases and get some answers to the
questions that arose at the beginning.
After reviewing the systems literature and going through a thorough analysis of the
proposed cases, we can conclude that systems integration is a good approach for urban
planning because it takes a holistic view* on the way infrastructure systems are
planned. Subsystems are designed bearing in mind that they take part in a more complex
system (the whole is more than the sum of its parts) and that they behave in relation to
the other subsystems; which is particularly useful for taking advantage of the synergies
that exist between these subsystems.
From what has been assessed in the case studies, we can confirm that the integrated
approach in design clearly outweighs the conventional way of working because it
enables the masterplanners and consultancy firms in charge of the network design, to
work out integrated design solutions in cooperation with the utility firms and other
stakeholders*. These solutions may certainly have an extra cost, but this is more due to
the better quality of the infrastructure solution provided than to the integrated process
followed (without which most of these solutions wouldnt have been reached). Many of
these solutions also become profitable in the long run because they provide considerable
energy savings and a more efficient management of the system (which may cut costs).
In assessing what firms get from systems integration and what the system gets, we can
conclude that systems integration enables firms to plan and manage the system they
develop in an integrated way; the design solution found is customer-oriented and serves
their own customers needs and so do the services and maintenance during its life cycle.
Therefore, the system is better operated and managed, and may also work more
effectively because its interrelationships with the other subsystems are born in mind
from the design stage.
Regarding the situations when the two types of systems integration (in design and as a
strategic business activity) go together it has to be pointed out that integrated design
solutions (technical solutions resulting from an integrated approach in design) are not
always integrated solutions for firms. On the whole, they are different concepts.
However, integrated design solutions can become integrated solutions for firms if the
resulting system from this integrated design requires products going together with
services and other products to work more effectively. That is to say, integrated design
solutions can be integrated solutions for firms if they have been conceived as products,
technology and services working all together in a customer-oriented way to achieve an
aim; which is quite common because integrated design facilitates the creation of more
efficient but also more complex solutions that may require that firms creating and
operating these solutions follow new models of industrial organisation (such as systems
integration).
120
7. Conclusions
When it comes to the expectations on the case studies, we should say that, even if
expectations for each case are a bit different (transforming brownfields into
technological areas, environmentally friendly neighbourhoods, zero-carbon sites or
planning new growing areas), all these projects aim to develop innovative sustainable
areas. Some cases, like One Gallions expects to demonstrate the economical and
technical viability of zero-carbon sites, so somehow innovation in these processes aims
to serve as a role model for future actuations.
Similarly happens with barriers and enablers. Although each case has its own specific
barriers, a common constraint for these complex high value processes is funding. Firms
are reluctant to invest in developments, systems or technology which initially cost more
than usual (because of its novelty, complex design or technology) and that are not as
economically profitable as the standard ones (or at least not proved to be so by now).
In general, funding for these projects is met out of taxes by municipalities (when it
comes to the public space) and developers invest in the infrastructure required by their
own developments. Usually developers and utility companies share the investment for
their infrastructure because they believe they will recoup the money once the system is
in service. Municipalities also invest hoping to recover their money from future tax
payers in the area.
It is particularly interesting the 22@ case, where land owners have to pay taxes to
finance the urban refurbishment when they decide they want to adapt to the new urban
plan. In Gallions Park, developers pay for the whole development, while LDA
(government development agency) is the owner of the land. In Hammarby Sjostad,
Stockholm municipality was also the land owner. Lending the land for a development is
also another way of public investment and promoting certain land uses. Finally, it is
also curious that the property owners in Hammarby Sjostad jointly own the Envacs
underground waste transportation facility through a joint-property association.
Another recurrent limitation for the development of integrated solutions in the urban
environment is convincing firms to change business models or create new capabilities to
adapt to the performance needs of these solutions. New technical skills are required and
also new capabilities have to be developed for delivering solutions for these cases,
which may not be profitable in the short run.
The main enabler in these cases has been the municipal push of innovation in the four
case studies and the creation of effective partnerships to carry out the integrated design
and the conception of innovation in the waste, water and energy systems. Cooperation
between administration, utility firms, developers and stakeholders* has proved to be
central to the successful development of these processes. An important figure in these
endeavours has been the development agencies or different partnerships in charge of the
coordination of the projects which can be identified in each case.
Municipalities are the leaders of these urban projects and at the same time the customers
to which integrated solutions are provided. In all cases, they are the pushers of
innovation in these areas and the responsible for the creation of the above mentioned
specific companies or agencies to manage these complex processes. Some of these
agencies had even been created a long time ago specifically for dealing with these kinds
of innovation processes in certain areas. Innovation is quite important in infrastructure
121
7. Conclusions
planning because it means optimising resources and improving the way things are done
(besides, from the business perspective, it is also necessary for firms to maintain
competitive advantage).
What seems clear is that integrated design cannot happen without the cooperation
between firms involved in the management of the systems to be designed;
technological, engineering and legal consultants, administrations or companies
managing the masterplanning process and all the other stakeholders* of the process.
This is demonstrated by the four case studies previously reviewed, as they had to take
cooperation into consideration from the beginning of the process to reach their goals
and reaching to an agreement from the beginning became the key of the working
process.
In Hammarby Sjostad, this cooperation was very important for achieving the resulting
model (the Hammarby Model), which interrelates the waste, water & sewage* and
energy systems in a way where the resources provided by one player are reutilised by
another. In the Gallions park case, another kind of cooperation between firms took
place. In this case, a joint venture* was created to develop the decentralised energy
system required for the project (the London ESCO Limited). This is a private limited
company with shareholdings jointly owned by the LCCA Ltd (a public agency) and
EDF Energy (a private utility company).
Even if the four chosen case studies are significantly different, we have been able to
identify common features in them that have enabled the development of a typology of
cases that encompasses the common features of the different cases in different fields
such as: their general approach, the kind of design processes they follow, the business
models used by firms, the distribution of capabilities or the role of the different actors.
Systems integration as a business strategic activity refers to the design and integration
of products and systems out of components developed in-house or sourced from
external manufacturers. The case studies demonstrate that some firms are changing their
strategies, some just adding services to existing products, others occupying new
positions in the value chain, and developing the capabilities to offer integrated
solutions. The clearest examples in our case studies of what an integrated solution
embodies are: Districlima (DH&C in 22@), Ros Roca and ENVAC waste collection
systems (Barcelona and Hammarby) and London ESCO (in Gallions Park).
Sometimes, like in the Gallions Park case, the change in business models has been
motivated by a change in policies. The new targets in carbon emissions have produced a
potential infrastructure convergence with developers* considering a change in their
business models (developers moving into the provision of services and energy
companies considering a move towards onsite infrastructure) and the incumbent energy
companies considering a move into the provision of onsite infrastructure, across a wider
array of services.
As we already know, the change in business models requires developing or acquiring
new capabilities. As pointed out in the comparison of cases, the supposed capabilities
needed for the provision of integrated solutions are distributed between the different
firms involved in the process of creation of infrastructures for the built environment,
being really difficult to find a single firm encompassing all the capabilities.
122
7. Conclusions
Obviously, by changing their business models firms seek to maintain competitive
advantage. In our complex world, a firms competitive advantage is not simply about
providing services, but how services are combined with products to provide high-value
integrated solutions that address a customers business or operational needs. Firms
venturing into systems integration have chosen their way to seek the achievement of a
sustainable competitive advantage.
As we know, innovation is essential for the maintenance of competitive advantage in
firms respect to their competitors. Nevertheless, we have assessed that a main problem
with urban infrastructure and service providers is that some of them are natural
monopolies in some countries. These companies industrialize their processes and, not
having any competition, they have no need to innovate.
In capital goods, the reason why firms are moving downstream in the value chain is that
a mixture of stagnating product demand and a growing installed base of products are
forcing economic value to migrate downstream from manufacturing to services. This is
due to the fact that the purchase cost of the product represents only a fraction of the total
cost of operating and maintaining it during its life cycle. In large technical systems, the
situation is a bit different, because the purchase costs or initial investment in these
systems is much higher than that of capital goods. Even if the costs of operating and
maintaining these systems are also higher and more profit can be made from offering
related services, downstream business models seem more profitable for capital goods
manufacturers whose purchase cost is quite low and much more proportional profit can
be made from providing services throughout the whole life cycle of these capital goods
than by selling more product units.
To conclude, concerning future case studies, it would be really interesting to follow the
processes of the four cases reviewed in this thesis in time, in order to assess the final
outcome. Some of these processes are still in a very initial stage, which means that some
systems havent been planned yet and that some innovative business models havent
been tested. Once the cases are finished, there will be more data about costs and time
spent in the planning of integrated solutions, which will enable a deeper comparison of
outcome respect to conventional methods (even if, as it has been argued before, this
comparison may be difficult to carry out).
Finally, regarding different future case studies and developing typologies, it could be
interesting to extend the same kind of analysis to cases out of Europe, trying to develop
a worldwide typology of cases if possible (taking also especial attention to the way
things work in the US, China, Japan or Australia). Another possible future study would
be following the same kind of case study methodology focusing on cases innovating in
other urban systems that havent been studied here, such as telecoms or transport
infrastructure (such as roads, railway, underground or bridges) where Public Private
Partnerships (PPP*) are more common.
123
8. Bibliography
8. Bibliography
Andersson, L. (1994) Motivating
Avfallsforskningsradet: Stockholm.
Environmentally
Responsible
Behaviour.
Ashfords Future & Environment Agency (July 2007) Integrated Water Strategy 20062031. [Online] Available at:
http://www.ashford.gov.uk/pdf/ Ashford_Integrated_Water_Strategy.pdf
Audit Commission (May 2005) Achieving Sustainable Growth - Ashford's Future
(inspection report for the Ashford Borough Council), Ashford, UK
Barcelona City Council (June 2008) 22@ the Innovation District. State of execution.
[Online] Available at: http://www.22barcelona.com/
Bosserman, S. (2007) What is an Integrated Solution? Diary of a Knowledge Broker.
[Online] Available at: http://www.newmediaexplorer.org/steve_bosserman/
Chesbrough, H., Rosenbloom, R. S. (2002) The role of the business model in capturing
value from innovation: evidence from Xerox Corporations technology spin-off
companies. Industrial and Corporate Change, Volume 11, Number 3, pp 529-555.
Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) (2005) Case studies:
Hammarby Sjostad, Stockholm, Sweden.
[Online] Available at: http://www.cabe.org.uk/
Davies, A. (2004) Moving base into high-value integrated solutions: a value stream
approach. Industrial and Corporate Change, Volume 13, Number 5, pp 727-756.
Deakin, M., Curwell, S. and Lombardi, P. (2002) Sustainable Urban Development: The
Framework and Directory of Assessment Methods, Journal of Environmental
Assessment Policy and Management, pp. 171-198.
English Partnerships & Housing Corporation (2007) Urban Design Compendium:
Integrated design and Managing quality places. [Online] Available at:
http://www.urbandesigncompendium.co.uk/
ENVAC (2008) Envacs guide to Hammarby Sjostad. Waste Solutions in a sustainable
urban development. Envac Head Office, Stockholm, Sweden.
Geroski, P.A. (1998) The growth of the firms in theory and in practice. London
Business School. Preliminary draft. London.
Hall D., Lethbridg J. et al. (2003) The UK Experience - Privatised Sectors and
Globalised Companies. CESifo Conference Centre, Munich
Hearn, M. (2008) Distributed Energy. BEER Conference Presentation, 13/02/2008.
EDF Energy.
125
8. Bibliography
Helms,
M.
(2000)
Encyclopedia
of
Management
4th
ed.,
Figure 1; p.739; Dayton, Ohio: Gale Group. [Online] Available at:
http://www.libraries.psu.edu/business/industryguides/analysis.htm
Hellstrm, M. (10th March 2004) Urban Sustainable Development in Stockholm. Speech
by Mats Hellstrm at the initiative Swedish Style in Australia 2005 (Melbourne,
Sydney). [Online] Available at:
http://www.ab.lst.se/upload/dokument/tillvaxt_i_regionen/Australien_tal.pdf
Jones, Gareth (March 2008) New business models needed for energy homes. Energy
world, no358, pp. 14-15.
Kogut, B. (2000) The Network as Knowledge: Generative Rules and the Emergence of
Structure. Strategic Management Journal, Volume 21, Issue 3, Pages 405 425.
Kor, Y.Y. and Mahoney, J. T. (2004) Edith Penroses (1959) Contributions to the
Resource-based View of Strategic Management. University of Delaware; University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Journal of Management Studies 41:1 January 2004
Lane, Thomas (2007) Sweden's green utopia. Building magazine, Issue 40.
[Online] Available at:
http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=583&storycode=3096706
Lennart Johansson Infobild (2007) Hammarby Sjostad leaflet. GlashusEtt.
Lapatra, J.W., (1973) Applying the systems approach to urban development. Dowden,
Hutchinson & Ross, Inc.
Markiewicz, K.R. (2004) Firm Capabilities and Absorptive Capacity: Implications for
Exploitation of Public Science and the Pace of Knowledge Exploitation. UC Berkeley,
Haas School of Business
Mashford, Kerry J. (2006) System Level Integration. Dongtan and Thames Gateway.
Arups Sustainable Innovation: Building & Construction Technologies.
National Audit Office, Sustainable Development Commission & Defra (2007) Case
study: ARUP - Integrated Resource Modelling (IRM).
[Online] Available at: www.sustainabilityatwork.org.uk/media/download/c667b908eb27-102a-8747-0019b9ed700d Poldermans, C. (2006) Sustainable Urban Development. The Case of Hammarby
Sjostad, Paper for Advanced Course in Human Geography. Stockholms Universiteit.
Penrose, E. (1959) The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
Porter, M. (1985). Competitive Advantage: Creating and Sustaining Superior
Performance, Free Press, NewYork.
126
8. Bibliography
Prencipe, A. (1997) Technological Competencies and Products Evolutionary
Dynamics: A Case Study from the Aero-engine Industry, Research Policy 25, pp. 126175
Prencipe, A., Davies, A., & Hobday, M. (2003) The Business of Systems Integration.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Prencipe, A., Davies, A., & Hobday, M. (2005) Systems integration: a core capability of
the modern corporation. Industrial and Corporate Change, Volume 14, Number 6, pp
1109-1143.
Richardson, G.B. (1972) The Organisation of Industry. The Economic Journal,Vol. 82,
No. 327, pp. 883-896.
Singleton, David (2003) Sustainability: A risk management perspective (ARUP).
[Online] Available at: http://www.arup.com/sustainability
Svane O. (1999) A Sustainable Neighbourhood a Place and its People, its Services
and Exchange with Nature. Bebyggelseanalys, KTH; Stockholm.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G. and Shuen, A., (1997) Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic
Management. Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18:7, 509533
Urban Initiatives et al. (April 2005) Greater Ashford Development Framework (GADF).
Ashford Borough Council, Ashford, UK.
Wise, R. and Baumgartner, P. (1999). Go Downstream: The New Profit Imperative in
Manufacturing, Harvard Business Review, September-October: 133-41.
Other Consulted Bibliography
Barcel, Miquel (2007). Visions for the Future. Comissi de promoci econmica,
Ajuntament de Barcelona, 22@.
Daniell, K.A. et al. (2005) Integrated urban system modelling: methodology and case
study using multi-agent systems. Conference paper at MODSIM 2005 International
Congress on Modelling and Simulation: Modelling and Simulation Society of Australia
and New Zealand, December 2005 / Andre Zerger and Robert M. Argent (eds.):
pp.2026-2032
Johansson, R. & Svane,O. (2002) Environmental Management in large-scale building
projects Learning from Hammarby Sjostad. Corporate Social Responsibility and
Environmental Management, Volume 9, pp 206214.
Jonsson, Daniel K. (2006) Situations of opportunity for infrasystems Understanding
and pursuing change towards environmental sustainability. Thesis at KTH Arquitecture
and the built environment, Stocholm.
London Development Agency (2006) Zero carbon. Design proposals for Gallions Park.
LDA, London.
127
8. Bibliography
London Development Agency (2007) Gallions Park. Zero carbon development. LDA,
London.
[Online]
Available
at:
http://www.lep.org.uk/uploads/
220307%20LEP%20Forum%20W1%20%20Nick%20King.pdf
Nonaka, I. & Toyama, R. (2002) A firm as a dialectical being: towards a dynamic
theory of a firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, Volume 11, Number 5, pp. 9951009. [Online] Available at: http://icc.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/11/5/995.pdf
Oliva, A. (2003) El districte dactivitats 22@bcn. Aula Barcelona, Barcelona.
Sustainable Pittsburgh (2004). Green Zone Hammarby Sjostad, Stockholm.
[Online] Available at:
http://www.sustainablepittsburgh.org/NewFrontPage/EcoMunicipalities/Eco_Municipal
ities_Hammarby_Sjostad_%20Stockholm.html
Websites
AGBAR
Alan Baxter
ARUP
Ashford best placed in Britain
WS Atkins
Crest Nicholson
CSR Europe
Discover magazine
Drivers Jonas
EDF Energy
Energie-cits
Envac
Fortum
LCCA
LDA
Wikipedia
NCC
Nordic BioEnergy 2007
One Gallions
Resource for Urban Design Info
SEEDA
Southern Housing Group
Skanska
Southern Water
Stockholm City Hall
Stockholm Vatten
SWECO
Symbio City
Urban Design Compendium
Urban Initiatives
http://www.agbar.es/
http://www.alanbaxter.co.uk/
http://www.arup.com/sustainability
http://www.ashfordbestplaced.co.uk/
http://www.atkinsglobal.com/
http://www.crestnicholson.com/
http://www.csreurope.org/
http://discovermagazine.com/
http://www.driversjonas.com/
http://www.edfenergy.com/
http://www.energie-cites.eu/
http://www.envac.net/
http://www.fortum.com/
http://www.lcca.co.uk/
http://www.lda.gov.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/
http://www.ncc.se/
http://www.nordicbioenergy2007.se/
http://www.onegallions.com/
http://www.rudi.net/pages/16325
http://www.seeda.co.uk/
http://www.shgroup.org.uk/
http://www.skanska.com/
http://www.southernwater.co.uk/
http://www.stockholm.se/
http://www.stockholmvatten.se
http://www.sweco.se/
http://www.symbiocity.org/
http://www.urbandesigncompendium.co.uk
http://www.urbaninitiatives.co.uk/
128
8. Bibliography
Interviews
Miquel Barcel
Bjrn Cederquist
Erik Freudenthal
Michael Payton
Abigail Raymond
Ramn Segarra
Laurienne Tibbles
129
8. Bibliography
130
9. Glossary
9. Glossary
131
9. Glossary
the energy efficiency of buildings and facilities. ESCOs have the expertise to
make the most of energy efficiency opportunities. They generally act as project
managers for a wide range of tasks associated with making energy efficiency
improvements, and typically offer the following services: identify and evaluate
energy-saving opportunities, design an energy efficiency program that meets the
development needs, manage the project from design to installation to
monitoring, arrange for financing, train staff and provide ongoing maintenance
services, guarantee that energy savings will cover all project costs. When an
ESCO undertakes a project, its compensation, and often the projects financing,
is directly linked to the amount of energy that is actually saved.
Holistic View: A holistic view is taken when the idea of the whole of something
has to be considered to understand its different parts. The whole thing or being is
thought to be more than the collection of its parts.
Joint Venture: A joint venture is an entity formed between two or more parties
to undertake economic activity together. The parties agree to create a new entity
by both contributing equity and they then share in the revenues, expenses, and
control of the enterprise. The venture can be for a specific project only or a
continuing business relationship
Leverage: Borrowing money to supplement existing funds for investment in
such a way that the outcome is magnified. Borrowed funds to attempt to increase
the returns to equity.
Liability: the amount of money that a person or company owes.
Liberalization: fewer government regulations and restrictions in the economy in
exchange for greater participation of private entities; the doctrine is associated
with neoliberalism. Although economic liberalization is often associated with
privatization, the two can be quite separate processes. For example, the
European Union has liberalized gas and electricity markets, instituting a system
of competition; but some of the leading European energy companies (such as
EDF and Vattenfall) remain partially or completely in government ownership.
Liberalized and privatized public services may be dominated by just a few big
companies, particularly in sectors with high capital costs, or high sunk cost, such
as water, gas and electricity. In some cases they may remain legal monopolies, at
least for some part of the market (e.g. small consumers).
(to) pervade: to spread through and be noticeable in every part of something.
Private Finance Initiative (PFI): It is a subtype of PPP. The Private Finance
Initiative (PFI) is a controversial method, developed initially by the United
Kingdom government, to provide financial support for "Public-Private
Partnerships" (PPPs) between the public and private sectors. PFI projects aim to
deliver infrastructure on behalf of the public sector, together with the provision
of associated operational services. Every PFI project has its own particular
characteristics; however there are some common threads that run through all
projects. The public sector authority signs a contract with a private sector
Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV). The SPV is a company formed for the specific
purpose of providing the PFI. It is owned by a number of private sector
investors, usually a construction company, a service provider, and a bank. PFI
contracts are for long terms, typically 30-60 years. PFI is not just a different way
of borrowing money. Not only does the private sector consortium provide the
finance for the project, it also operates the services. This means that many public
sector staff that work in the PFI facility have their employment contracts
automatically transferred to the private sector.
Integrating Urban Infrastructure Solutions
132
9. Glossary
133
9. Glossary
Wholesale: connected with goods that are bought and sold in large quantities,
especially so they can be sold again to make a profit.
134
Appendix
Appendix
135
Appendix
Interview to Ramon Sagarra
Director dinfraestructures del 22@
(07/10/08)
Ramon Sagarra depn del departament que porta lurbanisme i el territori del projecte
22@ en lempresa 22@Barcelona,S.A. Aquest sn 3 parts: direcci de planejament
urbanstic (morfologia de ledificaci i dels carrers, rasants, alades reguladores i
aprofitaments), gesti urbanstica (procs dexpropiacions i tot all que fa viable la
gesti urbanstica, en el nostre cas amb una lgica molt privada perqu la major part del
sl s privada) i infraestructures (refer 35 km de carrer amb un seguit de xarxes que en
bona part shan de construir de nou). Treballa per 22@Barcelona,S.A. Societat annima
mercantil, 100% de titularitat municipal que actua de catalitzador del procs de
transformaci.
El Poble Nou era un barri fabril que es va crear fa ms de 200 anys per temes txtils i fa
uns cinquanta anys va quedar obsolet del tot. Van comenar a venir activitats que no
eren prpies per estar al centre duna gran ciutat o una rea metropolitana com s
Barcelona (terciries, restes dindstria pesada, etc.) i s per aix que arrenc el 22@.
La major part del sl s privada i lajuntament crea aquesta empresa per empnyer el
procs de transformaci. Es modifiquen els escenaris patrimonials del sl i es permet fer
unes coses diferents en aquest sl, samplien molt els usos admesos, es prohibeixen les
activitats industrials pesades, es prohibeix lhabitatge especficament (perqu s ls
ms lucratiu del sl i sallunyaria daconseguir lactivitat econmica que es pretn
crear) i sincrementa ledificabilitat del nombre de pisos respecte la situaci actual.
Aquestes sn les claus del pla per tirar-lo endavant.
-
Com es finana??
Lincrement dedificabilitat que es dna als privats i aquests nous usos fa que els seus
sls valguin ms, perqu es poden fer edificis ms alts i que nobtinguin ms
rendiments. Per poder-se transformar, han de pagar unes quantitats a lajuntament (al
22@Barcelona,S.A. com a bra instrumental de lajuntament) per poder fer aquestes
obres i aix representa aproximadament el 60% dels ingressos que tenim. Sn les
anomenades cargues durbanitzaci (crregues dels privats per poder fer les obres
137
Appendix
durbanitzaci). Laltre 40% surt aproximadament meitat i meitat entre companyies de
serveis i el propi ajuntament. Lajuntament aporta aquesta quantitat sobretot per
construir les xarxes que depenen dell. Aquestes no es poden considerar crregues
durbanitzaci com el paviment o els arbres perqu sn xarxes que gestions
lAjuntament. Per exemple, si construm una xarxa de recollida pneumtica de residus,
no passaran camions ni tindrem contenidors per tindrem uns tubs que recullen les
escombraries (que qui reculli les escombraries deixa de pagar) i per tant es paguen
posant aquesta installaci. Aquest 60, 20, 20 aproximadament, sn les proporcions
crtiques daquest pla. Tamb sha de dir que per arrencar aquest projecte lajuntament
s que ha posat diners avanant part de la inversi, que desprs recuperar, perqu sin
el procs era inviable en s mateix. Per tant hem de comenar arribant als llocs amb els
serveis perqu es dons el procs de transformaci, de manera que es van avanar diners
al principi i ara ja shan comenat a recuperar.
Sn 225 illes de titularitat privada. Lordre en qu es transformaran no el sabem. Cada
propietari del sl aprofita aquesta oportunitat per treure el mxim de rendiment daquest
de la manera que li sembla ms oportuna. Per tant no sabem quines seran les primeres
illes en transformar-se. Per tal de donar servei a aquests 35 Km i 115 illes, shan
articulat unes columnes vertebrals dels serveis de forma que garantim que estem a una
distncia de 2 illes de qualsevol promoci possible. Llavors, quan qualsevol propietari
decideix transformar-se, jo s que tinc uns serveis en aquesta columna vertebral i que en
el temps que ell tarda en fer-se ledifici, se li poden portar els serveis des daquesta
columna vertebral. Quan es porten aquests serveis es decideix si es fa reurbanitzant
sencer un carrer determinat o com es fa. Per crear aquesta columna vertebral han calgut
els diners de lajuntament, que han hagut davanar part de la inversi.
-
Els instruments que shan posat perqu es doni tot aix s la modificaci del Pla
General Metropolit (PGM) de la zona del districte on est situat el 22@, que s un pla
urbanstic que modifica el Pla General. Desprs hi ha un pla especial dinfraestructures
(PEI) que s el que regula com shan fet les columnes vertebrals de qu parlvem, i
entre aquests dos, donen lloc al que sanomena el Planejament Derivat. Per cada illa (el
ms com) o cada paquet dilles, sen fa un pla especial de reforma interior (PERI*) o
actualment Pla de Millora Urbana (PMU). Els PMU sn els que limiten el temps.
Tpicament, si parlem duna illa, diem que el pla es dur a terme amb un mnim dun
any i un mxim de quatre amb un afegit de quatre ms (si en 4 anys no ha passat res i
cap privat ha comenat a construir res; els segents 4 anys pot ser ladministraci que,
des de la seva iniciativa, impulsi el pla si creu que s dinters general), per tant amb un
mx. de 8 anys. Cada illa o paquet dilles en els quals es fa el planejament derivat est
sotms al seu PMU i cada PMU t la seva prpia planificaci (amb aquest mxim de 8
anys). Ladministraci pot promoure la reparcellaci si creu que el projecte s bo i
dinters general com a part interessada daquest procs de transformaci si en els 4
anys que ha tingut el privat per tirar-lo endavant no ha passat res. La reparcellaci fa
que el sl es redistribueixi en nous propietaris. Si no passa res en aquests 8 anys, aquest
pla deixa de tenir vigncia i se nhauria de fer un altre. Si en una mansana ning hi vol
fer res, all es queda tal i com estava.
138
Appendix
-
La modificaci del PGM s de labril de lany 2000 i el primer que es va fer per
comenar a dur a terme aquest projecte va ser veure quins eren els edificis consolidats i
dinters histric o cultural que valia la pena conservar i que lactivitat que tenien a dins
tamb era desitjable que es conservs per que era illegal. Sels va donar un termini per
regularitzar-se. Per fer-ho van haver de millorar les seves infraestructures amb una
intenci clarament productiva perqu els feia ms competitius i van haver de pagar les
primeres crregues durbanitzaci. Eren edificis i, per tant, la part de crrega que els
tocava era relativament petita i a la vegada era una manera de fer comenar a funcionar
el projecte.
-
Es paga amb la reparcellaci, quan es crea una nova distribuci del sl entre els nous
propietaris per adaptar-se a la nova normativa (amb un espai per serveis i zones verdes
que s daproximadament un 5%). La reparcellaci,un cop aprovada s inscrita al
registre de la propietat. A partir del moment en qu saprova definitivament aquest
repartiment, que s quan saprova la reparcellaci i es poden fer els nous edificis, s
quan es paguen les crregues urbanstiques. Conseqentment, no es podr comenar un
edifici si no sha pagat. Si un propietari t un edifici i no el vol tirar, aleshores el pla
lha de respectar, mantenint-se aquest amb lanterior qualificaci (22a), que s industrial
i no passar a 22@, que serien gaireb tots els usos menys habitatge (oficines, comer,
hotels...).
-
Aquestes crregues es paguen per transformar-se. Per passar de poder edificar 2m2 de
sostre/m2 de sl a edificar-ne 3. A ms a ms, els nous usos sn entre el doble i el triple
de cars que el sl industrial (es cobra ms transformant-se). En fer la reparcellaci es
genera un balan de drets i deures. Si tinc un edifici que sha de respectar i hi ha un
percentatge de sl que tinc dret a edificar per no puc, puc vendrem aquest dret. De
totes maneres, hi ha una lgica econmica i una formal o arquitectnica, no deixarem
construir un gran bloc al costat dun edifici baix.
-
De normal estem acostumats que els serveis passin per sota la vorera i a cada casa entrin
tots els serveis i, per tant, les voreres estan completament collapsades. Aqu al 22@ ja
hi ha unes xarxes preexistents que van subministrant els diferents serveis i les voreres ja
estan ocupades amb aquests serveis. Qualsevol de les illes del 22@ es pot transformar
amb un ordre indeterminat, i si ho fa, jo li he de fer arribar els serveis adequats.
Aleshores, faig la graella de nous serveis, per no puc eliminar els serveis antics perqu
em segueix donant servei a les illes que encara no shan transformat. La xarxa elctrica i
de telecomunicacions es far nova, per no puc tallar la installaci existent. Les voreres
estan bastant ocupades.
Davant daquest problema, es va decidir crear una nova manera de desplegar els serveis.
Tots els edificis tenen planta soterrani. Rebentar la vorera i desplaar els serveis costaria
molts diners. Llavors portem els nous serveis per la calada, els posem a sota quan fem
139
Appendix
el carrer i al mig de cada illa aproximadament, fem unes galeries que connecten les
plantes (-1) dels diferents edificis. De manera que aquests serveis els intercepto i el fico
a dins de ledifici. Per la galeria hi poso tot el que sn cables, perqu pels tubs s una
mala soluci (com laigua t empentes i problemes mecnics grans, de normal no es
posa amb els cables). Aquesta soluci s molt bona per telecomunicacions i energia
elctrica. El clavegueram normalment no es toca, noms es fa de nou el claveguer quan
es fa ledifici, que s el tub que connecta ledifici amb la claveguera. La distribuci
daigua, quan es substitueix, de vegades lescomesa passa per la galeria, perqu s petit
i es comporta com un cable de polietil bastant flexible i que es pot clavar amb unes
brides per contenir les empentes. Els tubs de transport mai, mirem que passi per fora
perqu provocaria problemes de juntes i condensacions.
-
Les respectives companyies no han fet res. Tot el referent a les infraestructures del 22@
est definit en el PEI, que s un pla que lajuntament ha encarregat a una empres de
planificaci urbana que es diu Barcelona Regional, que tamb s pblica, tot i que no s
el 100% de lajuntament. A mi em toca desenvolupar el PEI com a cap
dinfraestructures del pla 22@.
-
Com volem que ens paguin el 20%, hem de contactar amb elles durant el disseny. La
tramitaci administrativa, perqu lurbanisme est molt reglat, fa que hagis de garantir
que una pila dagents vagin alhora. Aleshores, el planejament passa per una etapa
dexposicions pbliques i les companyies interessades fan les seves allegacions. Totes
les companyies, si no sels diu res, haguessin allegat que tenen el sistema normalitzat i
que el sistema del 22@ no entra dins els seus esquemes, i que la galeria la fssim
nosaltres. Per tant, abans de portar el PEI a aprovar, es va pactar amb totes les
companyies que haguessin de donar servei a la zona 22@ en quines condicions es feia
aquest PEI perqu no es presentessin allegacions en el perode dexposici pblica.
Desprs es van desenvolupar totes aquestes relacions fins arribar a les formes
constructives que han perms fer les obres i en aquest moment ja est fet un 30% aprox.
dobra feta, havent canviat la forma de distribuir els serveis.
Tots els serveis dels quals parlem sn monopolis naturals. Noms nhi pot haver un i ha
destar regulat. Els monopolis naturals que presten els seus serveis no noms a Espanya
sin multinacionals, industrialitzen els seus processos. I com no tenen competncia, no
tenen perqu innovar. Per tant, la companyia no t en compte el que vulgui fer la ciutat
perqu el que li interessa s el seu compte de resultats. Presten un servei pblic,
dinters general, regulat, per aix no treu que sigui un servei prestat per companyies
privades, que al final tenen un compte de resultats i unes accions que pugen i baixen i
persegueixen repartir dividends entre els accionistes o comprar empreses a lestranger
com feia Fecsa-Endesa. Per perseguir aquests resultats sindustrialitzen, i en aquest
procs dindustrialitzaci, les particularitzacions van fatal, perqu necessiten comprar
materials diferents, els perjudiques en la poltica de compres, els seus tcnics han de
saber operar i reparar diferents models i formats, ...
A nosaltres ens ha tocat fer la pedagogia de tot aix i convncer-los de que era una cosa
positiva per a ells. Vam tenir la sort que 35 km de carrer equival a una poblaci duna
140
Appendix
certa dimensi. A Fecsa, per exemple, sels va amenaar de que si no volien fer-ho ells,
es buscava una elctrica alemanya que tenia moltes ganes de tenir infraestructura a
Barcelona i que ho farien ells. De manera que, tot i que van veure que era una cosa
complicada, tamb van considerar que, per les dimensions, era prou gran com per fer-hi
dedicar un parell de tcnics a veure com es podia fer per compatibilitzar aquesta
industrialitzaci.
-
En aquest cas seria distribuir serveis a travs de galeries o crear un servei nou com s la
calefacci centralitzada o desplaar els centres de transformaci que tpicament estan en
un local que un senyor ha de cedir en el seu edifici, aqu no es fa aix; es posa el local
des del planejament urbanstic. Es colloca el centre de transformaci en el subsl, i des
dall es donar servei a tres edificis sense que calgui que cada edifici faci el seu, per
tant ser ms operatiu i no caldr aixecar el carrer. Per tant, sha canviat la forma de
distribuir els serveis; tamb sha ficat dins les cases molts serveis que estan al carrer:
sales tcniques darmaris a dintre les illes de forma que hi ha una xarxa despais per
passar els serveis. Per tant, la innovaci s haver distribut els serveis duna manera
diferent internalitzant-los, de manera que no estiguin al carrer ni estiguin a la vorera
sin ficats en sales dins els edificis, i garantint el dret daccs i de pas a aquestes sales i
edificis perqu les companyies puguin prestar els seus serveis de forma que el carrer
queda ms lliure de trastos i obres i menys sotms a la obstaculitzaci de les
infraestructures amb el ciutad.
-
En el moment que vam comenar la primera obra vam asseure en la mateixa taula els
ms afectats, que eren les empreses de telecomunicacions (Telefnica i Localret en
representaci de les altres). Localret s una associaci dAjuntaments que treballa amb
totes els operadors, i que tamb t un bon perfil tcnic. Tamb hi vam asseure FecsaEndesa, i Aiges de Barcelona i Gas Natural van venir els primers dies per desprs ja
no va fer falta. Amb aquestes empreses vam decidir fins el menor detall quines eren les
caracterstiques constructives de tot el que anvem a fer, i ams de mutu acord, perqu
les galeries sn comunes. Vam treballar durant dos anys i al final vam redactar un
document despecificacions constructives de les xarxes i espais del 22@. En base a aix
vam construir els carrers i les xarxes quan shan anat fent les obres de transformaci.
-
Nosaltres quan fem el carrer, quan toca fer-lo perqu hi ha un edifici amb prou demanda
per fer-lo, nosaltres ens posem dacord amb totes les companyies per fer nosaltres la
major part de la feina possible. Agafem un contractista (FFCC, DRAGADOS...) i
aquests senyors aixequen les calades i es dedica a posar-hi servei. Nosaltres tenim
acord amb les companyies per fer-li nosaltres lobra a ell. I ells la paguen (aquest 20%
de la finanament que ve de les empreses de serveis). Per aquesta obra s unitria,
saixeca el carrer i es fa tot de cop. Hi ha part de les obres que les companyies no volen
que les fem nosaltres, i aqu hi ha certa fricci. Per lobra s nica i shi fica tot el que
convingui, perqu no anirem obrint el carrer cada cop que hi posem un servei.
141
Appendix
Localret no presta cap servei, s una associaci de municipis que venia en representaci
dels operadors alternatius a Telefnica. Les que hi estan implicades sn: Telefnica
(telecomunicacions), FECSA-ENDESA (energia), Aiges de Barcelona (aigua), Gas
Natural (gas), Districlima (servei de climatitzaci centralitzada), lAjuntament de
Barcelona a travs de 2 concessionaris (ENVAC i Ros Roca) gestiona el servei de
recollida pneumtica descombraries, lAjuntament tamb t una xarxa de
telecomunicacions prpia que administren entre 22@ i lInstitut Municipal
dInformtica tant per prestar serveis propis com els semfors (per sincronitzar-los o
centralitzar les seus de districte o Gurdies Urbanes) com tamb part daquesta xarxa es
posa al servei de tercers. Els privats podran llogar la capacitat excedent daquesta xarxa.
La resta de serveis urbans: clavegueram amb lAjuntament de Barcelona que delega en
CLABSA (propietat de lAjuntament, per ms operativa).
-
A molts llocs, en el 35% del carrer es ref, perqu al refer el carrer, en un 5% dels llocs
ens molesta on est i no deixa passar la resta de serveis, per cota o el que sigui, i el 30 %
s un clavegueram vell que quan fas lobra et cau esmicolat. Ara ja sha aprs a priori a
saber que shaur de refer, per fins fa un any i mig o dos intentvem no tocar-lo i
queia. Ara ja nhem aprs ms i podem incorporar el tema clavegueram als projectes.
-
142
Appendix
infraestructures que samortitzen a molt llarg termini i han destar a una sola m... que
uns escombrin els altres ha estat un fracs en aquest sentit. En teoria, al pensar en la
liberalitzaci de serveis, aix tenia sentit per com no nhi ha hagut, t poc sentit.
-
Home, s molt complicat per nosaltres ho hem fet bastant. Ara, ha costat bastant... En
la teoria de la integraci de sistemes les empreses eren ms eficients per economies
descala... per a la prctica no es pot dur a terme tal i com est ara, perqu una empresa
es busca la vida i ofereix ms serveis si est en competncia, per com no s el cas... Ha
estat molt complicat i ha estat el nostre esfor que al menys la ciutat hi surti guanyant,
perqu no haurem de rebentar els carrers varis cops, els serveis estaran de forma
organitzada perqu el manteniment sigui correcte i el servei no calgui anar-lo tallant
cada dos dies... Hem estat els treballadors municipals els qui tenem aquest repte i lhem
fet realitat.
-
Home, el model via concessionria i que siguin les concessionries les que estan en
competncia s una sortida: que la xarxa sigui de titularitat pblica, que en la xarxa
elctrica s bastant aix (Endesa i Gas Natural han separat la xarxa de lenergia que hi
passa). Per sn models que saguanten poc.
-
La nica manera s la pressi poltica. Aquesta s una qesti de voluntat poltica, si els
poltics diuen que hem de ser ms sostenibles, jo em barallar amb les companyies i
acabes i acabem pagant tots la factura, perqu les companyies tenen els seus ingressos
taxats i les seves despeses amb la seva industrialitzaci i tot all que els canvis ho
acabes pagant. En aquest cas, al final hi van estar dacord perqu els costos de
sobreexplotaci era relativament petit. Quan tens idees les pagues des de
ladministraci. No s cert que les companyies inverteixin. Tot el que inverteixen en
I+D s perqu ho dna lEstat en programes de foment a la innovaci. Lempenta
sempre ha de ser municipal.
Per les companyies de serveis, continuar sent un monopoli daquestes caracterstiques,
les atribucions i competncies que tenen depn noms de la voluntat dels poltics. Les
companyies de serveis, amb el servei que presten guanyen francament poc. El negoci s
molt intervingut. Per on guanyen diners s en tots els negocis associats al negoci
principal. s a dir, Fecsa-Endesa s el titular en rgim de monopoli de la xarxa elctrica.
Posant a disposici la xarxa de la prpia Fecsa a altres operadors energtics, Fecsa
guanya pocs diners. On guanya diners s construint aquesta xarxa, fent els centres de
transformaci dels edificis, aconseguint els contractes denergia perqu aquests vagin a
parar a ells i no a altres companyies... s a dir, tot all que gira entorn als seus serveis
sn negocis privats, i all s on shi guanyen la vida. Per aix es parla del dficit tarifari
dEndesa, que els costos energtics que paga Fecsa-Endesa sn molts ms que els que
reflecteixen la tarifa, que s veritat, per tots els diners que tamb guanya perqu t el
control de la xarxa elctrica tamb shaurien de comptar si es volgus fer un clcul ben
fet. Per no shi posen perqu actua com agent en competncia privat (tot i que s
143
Appendix
fictcia, perqu actua en el mercat, amb preus lliures, per exerceixen de monopoli). I
buscar un altre provedor que et munti una altra xarxa seria massa complicat.
-
144
Appendix
Interview to Erik Freudenthal
Manager of the Environmental Information Centre
(GlausEtt) at Hammarby Sjostad, Sweden
(13/08/08)
Erik Freudenthal came into the project 6 years ago, manager of the environmental
information centre. During these 6 years he learnt quite a lot about the project, how its
done, why they started it, how the project has been going on since the city of Stockholm
started looking at this area, which was done at the end of 1980s. Nowadays, his main
role is giving information about this project: the area, the building of the area and about
the environmental approach.
About the Project
-
Why did you decide to use the systems integration approach for the
planning of your project?
The city of Stockholm applied for the Summer Olympics 2004 and they had looked
very closely at Sydney because one of the reasons they got the summer Olympics 2000
was because of their environmental program and we think they were rather good at it.
This is why we developed this environmental program. What they then did was that
before making the masterplan, they sat down and said how can we make this as
environmentally friendly as possible? So the city planning department, the
development department, the environmental department, the Stockholm Water
Company, the Stockholm Energy Company sat down and, beforehand, they made all
these decisions: how to solve the infrastructures, which kind of buildings to build, how
tall would they be so thats why they started it.
-
Was it difficult?
Yes, it was quite difficult because it was the first time all these people sat around the
same table. Normally you contact them one by one and in two or three months you get a
reply. But here they sat together till they decided how to make this project as
sustainable as possible. They were a little bit relaxed at first, they came around it and
now we are going to use the experience from Hammarby to new city areas in
Stockholm.
-
Which are the companies involved in the process? Have they always been
the same ones? How did you choose that firms?
Skanska, NCC, Stockholm Water Company (the company from the city of Stockholm)
supplies all the water in the area and the treatment of the water of the households (in the
based water treatment plant). When it comes to the new strategy of taking care of the
storm water, the rain water, when building a new area in the city, you take care of storm
water locally, when it comes to the rain water from the houses and from the street
discharges on canals, but the main road is dirty, so you have to treat it in some way so
we have sequences in a wetland or a sort of marshland where water evacuates down
underground and under the ground water level. All you need is a sort of sandfill where
you let it stand still, so all these particles, the particles that do not break, ties etc go to
the bottom and then you release the water.
145
Appendix
Two and a half years ago we made a revision of the program because some of the goals
that were set were not measurable, so we took them away. Otherwise it has stayed
actually as it was taken by the politicians in 1997. It has stayed the same program.
When it comes to put down the infrastructure, take the garbage away, water that is
done by the city of Stockholm but then of course it is up to the developers (we have 25
different developers in the area with their own programs but here they all have to follow
the Hammarby program) that they should follow this environmental program because
when they fill the contract to buy the land, they all have to sign a contract about this
environmental program and there are some stipulations about energy supply, etc
-
Regarding the environmental plan that you have created, there must have
been a systems integrator, someone who has joined all the different parts
and put them all together to work in the same system?
The infrastructure is done by the city of Stockholm, then you have different parties who
are involved in that (Stockholm water company for instance is one because they have
put the pipes for the drinking water, and then also for the sewed water). Fortum, which
is actually a Finnish energy company, they are taking care of supplying electricity into
the buildings and also the district heating system, because 75% of the entire villa and
the block of flats and the city of Stockholm are connected to the Heating District
System. We have 4 major plants which are producing the district heating for the heat
you can get in your radiator and also the hot tap water.
When they made this program, the energy company was the owned by the city of
Stockholm and then was called Stockholm energy company, then at the end of the 90s,
so 10 years ago, they sold it to Fortum, the Finnish energy company, and they are still
within the organisation for this environmental information centre, but also in the city,
because they are the ----- of the district heating system.
-
Were all these firms involved in the design project? Do they also manage
the system they designed?
Yes, the Stockholm Water Company is taking care of the pipes for fresh water and the
sewing system and Fortum is taking care of the District Heating System, and the Waste
Company has a vacuum system for solid waste which is that you dont have a lorry
coming to every door to collect the garbage, there is an underground system that is
actually paid by the different contractors*, because they have to connect to the system,
which is managed by ENVAC together with the Waste Company of the city of
Stockholm.
When it comes to the water and sewing systems, this is something that has been going
on for a long time, and the District Heating system since the 1970 so thats in a regular
basis; but the unique thing here is the way to decide, that you start off a project and then
you know how all these different parts are going to come into the building site, because
it has been decided all together from the beginning for the whole city area. The foreign
trade commission in Sweden has developed the Symbio city (producing heating or
electricity out of incinerating garbage, the combustible waste; how to use a raw material
that the city is producing and how to use it in a profitable way focused on holistic
146
Appendix
city planning, symbiosis means finding synergies between urban technology systems
that save natural resources and cost less.).
-
Has this new model changed the way to work of the companies involved?
The companies involved in this process, when they started in 1997 and they found out
about this program, they thought they couldnt do this, that it was too much because
they had never done it before. But the City of Stockholm told them that if they wanted
to build new blocks of flats in this area they had to follow the program. So finally they
did it anyway and today its not a problem, because of course this learning process and
investment in new knowledge had a cost, but it wasnt much of a 2-4% extra.
Furthermore, materials were also more expensive, because they had to be
environmentally friendly and reusable as much as possible. For example, aluminium in
the roof has to be treated and then there is also an extra cost.
147
Appendix
Interview to Bjrn Cederquist
Local Planning Project Manager for the Stockholm Municipality
(03/11/08)
- How has this project been funded? Where did you get the funding?
The private investments in Hammarby Sjostad are roughly estimated to 20 billion
Swedish crowns. The City of Stockholm pays the public investments, infrastructure,
roads parks etc. The sum is very roughly estimated to 5 billion Swedish crowns. The
money comes mostly from our tax payers.
- Which has been the role of the Municipality in the development of this
project?
The role of Municipality has mainly been masterplanning and developing the public
areas and preparing the land, infrastructure, roads and parks.
- Why did you enrol in a complex technological and decision-making
process like this one?
The process is quite normal concerning the actors involved - the goals were though in
this case a little extra to achieve a higher environmental standard (partly to impose on
the Olympic committee to compete for the summer Olympics in 2004). The city was at
that time also deciding on a general environmental program for buildings.
- Which was your role in the project? Which were you tasks? How
were these tasks shared out with other companies?
I was a service manager in close contact with the local authority controlling the social
service planning in the area - schools, preschools, special housing for elderly and
handicapped. I was also in charge of accessibility in the area and contacts with the
inhabitants and visitors.
- Which position are you occupying in the value chain?
Maybe you can say "informer". We have an organisation called Stockholm business
arena and another called Technical visits that are concerned with this kind of
information activities.
- To what extent will competition help in the realisation of the
environmental objectives?
I think competition is crucial but also that public initiative and policy is important e.g.
subsidies and grants of different kinds.
- Why do you think innovation is important? How do you pay for
it? Where do you get the finding from?
Grants, competitions, stimulating meetings make the developers more willing to go
further. They also calculate to get pay-back in the longer perspective (especially if the
developer also manages the house).
148
Appendix
Interview to Michael Payton
Senior Development Officer at LDA (London Development Agency)
-
(19/01/09)
We are the Mayor's agency responsible for driving London's sustainable economic
growth. It's our job to ensure that London remains a global success story. To help us
deliver this we work with partners from industry, and the public and voluntary sectors.
We are funded by central government and are one of the nine Regional Development
Agencies for England.
The issue of climate change and its impact on London is a Mayoral priority. The Mayor
wants the GLA group to display clear leadership on this issue by implementing practical
steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and consequently help to achieve targets for
carbon dioxide reduction.
-
Because we wanted to address the issue of climate change and impact on the
environment, and a start point would be trying to build sustainable buildings. To get
hands on experience of going 'Zero Carbon'
-
Which was your role in the project? Which were you tasks? How were
these tasks shared out with other companies?
We are the land owner and are working with the chosen development partner Crest
Nicholson Bioregional Quintain (CNBQ) to build and sell the residential units. We have
been working with CNBQ to ensure that the scheme is Zero Carbon and meets the
highest specification. We have used technical advisers (Arup to assist with the technical
negotiations) and legal advisors to ensure our contract with CNBQ is suitable.
-
The heat and electricity should be provided by a biomass combined heat and power
plant, this will be run by a community ESCo*. This ESCo* will be owned by the
residents and managed by the residents management company.
-
Do you think it is possible to make more profit from these kinds of projects
than in the ones you are used to?
This project is definitely more challenging that standard residential development and
will undoubtedly cost more to build than a standard scheme. Whether purchasers are
willing to pay more for a home within the unit will have to been seen. In theory the
energy costs should be lower and therefore a premium over standard rates may be paid.
149
Appendix
-
The site will use a 'Community owned ESCo*'. This will be owned by the residents and
provide hot water, heating and electricity.
-
Competition is always good as it generates innovations and usually drives down the cost
of achieving an objective.
-
Why do you think innovation is important? How do you pay for it? Where
do you get the finding from?
Innovation is very important. It can be paid for in a variety of ways, including external
grants.
-
I would also like to know who the planning authority of the project is. Who
is the funding body? Which are the companies managing the different
systems (energy, waste, water & sewage, telecoms)?
The planning Authority is the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation. The
project will be funded by the developer CNBQ. They will need to go out to the market
to try and raise capital to deliver this project. At the current time this will prove very
challenging as the capital markets are not lending as they were 12 - 18 months ago.
CNBQ will need to decide how the various systems are to be managed.
-
It would also be very interesting to know if there have been any barriers to
the evolution of the process or any especial enablers.
The main barrier to this project is currently the state of the financial markets, the ability
to raise money to build the project. The sales values that can be achieved have also
dropped with the market. There are also technical limits due to the lack of innovation
within the biomass CHP market limiting competition.
150
Appendix
Interview to Abigail Raymond
Former Program Director of Ashford Future
(02/07/08)
The Ashford Future Board is in charge of identifying the needs and funding for the
development of the project in Ashford. Funding can come from constructors or the
Government. The developer is the one to plan the houses and roads and all the networks
needed for them.
-
Which are the roles of firms involved in the Ashford Future Project?
(English Partnerships, SEEDA, EDF Energy, British Gas, South East
Water and Southern Water)
Developers
Developers have responsibility for acquiring and developing land. To do that they need
to lobby for the necessary policies to be in place to support the principle of development
and then they need to get the appropriate consents (planning/building control etc) to
take forward that development. They are responsible for paying (at least in part) for the
necessary services/utilities to be put in place to serve developments, negotiating with
service providers like gas, water etc. They obviously recoup these costs when selling the
individual homes.
SEEDA
SEEDA's role is to promote economic development and that can include assembling
land for development or setting up infrastructure companies to provide infrastructure
ahead of development. They set up the East Kent Spatial Development Company to
provide services which are then paid for as development comes forward. This is called
forward funding infrastructure and they may be interested in enabling shared provision
if this would save costs/speed up delivery.
English Partnerships
English Partnerships (now the Homes and Communities Agency) has responsibility for
bringing forward residential development particularly on government owned sites such
as ex-hospitals. It is also responsible for ensuring that there is a supply of affordable
homes through grant funding developers and Registered Social Land lords. It sets
standards for developers to meet in bringing sites forward and might share some
abnormal development costs to enable sites to come forward e.g. contaminated land. I
doubt the costs of providing utilities would come into this category as they are fairly
standard costs but they may be interested in supporting demonstration projects if they
could see potential benefits.
Government
Where there are abnormal costs in bringing forward sites for development e.g. where
there is a need for a major service upgrade which the proposed development cannot
sustain, the Government may provide Growth Area Funds to plug infrastructure gaps.
They may look to Delivery Companies like Ashford's Future to enable that
151
Appendix
infrastructure to come forward. There may then be scope to explore the potential
benefits of marrying up with other utility provision.
Local Authorities
They give planning permission for development again covering issues like sustainability
and resource use. The planning stage needs to be satisfied that the site can be serviced
but is unlikely to look into how precisely services are delivered although resource
efficiency may become a more important issue in the future.
They also give building control certificates to ensure that buildings meet safety and
functional requirements but again it is unlikely they would dictate how services are
brought to the individual properties.
Highways departments may be more interested in promoting joint provision of utilities
as it would create less disruption in the delivery and maintenance of transport networks.
Utility Companies (e.g. Gas and Electricity)
These are responsible for laying services to development sites. They recoup part of
these costs from developers and part is met through future income from the occupiers of
the properties.
They are each overseen by regulatory agencies (e.g. OFWAT, for water whose main
function is to ensure that delivery standards are met and that the customer receives best
value for money). That may include ensuring that the companies are operating in an
efficient manner including exploring cost efficiencies through joint provision although
other imperatives such as timescales and commercial confidentiality/conflicts of
interests (i.e. where some companies provide a range of utilities may mitigate against
effective co-operation).
-
152
Appendix
developers will contribute around 400m of this (and utility companies a proportion of
that).
-
The agency responsible for waste collection is Ashford Borough Council while Kent
County Council is responsible for waste disposal. The two authorities work in
partnership to reduce waste through recycling and reuse. New waste treatment/transfer
facilities may be needed to support this.
-
The local authority responsible for planning and building controls is Ashford Borough
Council.
-
For the developers you commented on the previous interview that they were
Crest Homes and Berkeley Homes, but you also sent mails to Jarvis,
Pentland, Presimmon Homes and Henry Boot PLC, is this right?
Ashford's Future are working on a number of projects to promote energy and water
efficiency and are looking at how to promote more sustainable energy to support the
new urban extension areas e.g. Chilmington which will have 6500 homes.
-
Are there any outcomes yet? Are there any special barriers/enablers to the
development of the project?
In terms of outputs planning permission has been given in the last 5 years for around
5000 homes (3000 completed). Overall Ashford is set to deliver 31000 homes and
28000 jobs by 2030.
153