The Urban Space Central 15 project is an extensive urban development initiative aimed at transforming and enhancing the neighborhood located within the boundaries of Märzstraße to the north, Mariahilfer Straße/Linzer Straße to the south, Neubaugürtel to the east, and Sturzgasse to the west. While primarily situated in the 15th district, it encompasses areas of the 6th, 7th, and 14th districts as well.
The key focus of this project is to incorporate the outcomes of an extensive planning and participatory process into a sustainable neighborhood development concept. This concept aims to address the unique needs of the area while establishing frameworks for future developments that both preserve and enhance the existing quality of life.
Critical objectives include the creation and enhancement of green spaces, the reduction of barriers posed by railway infrastructure, and contributions to climate protection and adaptation strategies. Additionally, the project will explore potential perspectives for the area between Felberstraße and Westbahn.
The holistic approach taken by the Urban Space Central 15 project underscores its commitment to fostering a more sustainable, inclusive, and environmentally conscious urban landscape.
© GB*/Daniel Dutkowski, denn nun ist der Stadtraum belebt/bunter.
Involved Actors & Resources
| Governmental body: | No, at least not directly |
| Other public actors: |
|
| Private for-profit actors: | No |
| Private not-for-profit actors: |
|
| Civic actors: | All residents living in the 15th district (Rudolfsheim-Fünfhaus) |
| Other actors: | Public actors, for-profit, non-for-profit in joint alliances for small-scale neighborhood projects |
| Funding/Financial resources for the particular best practice example: | 100k€/ year for the duration of 4 yrs. app. 1.8 Mio. EUR for the duration of 3 yrs. |
| Specification | a) 50% funded by the district, 50% by the Municipality. b) through MA25 |
Type of Governance
| Deliberative, bottom-up participatory process Through alliances and collaboration for small-scale projects; or, as first initiative to get started larger (municipality-run) participation and/or urban development process |
Specific Features on the Practical Arrangements to Promote Inclusiveness
| Cost reimbursement (e.g., for public transport, compensation of working hours): | No |
| Provision of mediators (e.g., linguistic, cultural): | Yes; provided by the multi-disciplinary teams in a) and b) |
| Frequency of activities within the best practice: How often and for how long did participants involve in best practice (e.g., in general friendly towards employed people or people with care responsibilities)? | Unknown |
Target groups
| External inclusion referring to who is invited or allowed to take part from the invitation (in an ideal situation) | Everybody from the 15th district |
| Internal inclusion referring to the participation of all participants within, i.e. the real situation | Unknown |
| Internal exclusion referring to certain participants who are overly dominant | Unknown |
| Vulnerable groups were specified in the designed plan of the best practice: | No |
| Did vulnerable groups participate in the best practice: | Unknown |
Public Information Activities
Means of Information provided: Website, Newsletter, Social Media
| Information documents (e.g., flyer, brochures, invitation letters): | sometimes for specific initiatives |
| Multiple languages available: | Depends |
| Non-technical language used: | Yes |
| Social Media: | Facebook Agenda15 |
Ways of Communication
| Website and social media postings: | Yes |
| Information documents distributed in the post box: | Unknown |
| Information documents distributed on streets and public spaces (during events): | Depends |
| Press releases in “traditional” public media (e.g. linear TV, daily newspapers etc.): | Yes |
| Special-target activities (e.g. through gate-openers, community workers etc.): | Unknown |
Monitoring
| Monitoring process on the best practice available? | Yes. However, for internal purpose only. Yearly and at the end of funding period. |
| Is there continuous information on monitoring results provided to the participants: | No |
| Integration of participants in the monitoring process? | No |
| Continuous information on monitoring results provided to network partners (public and non-public actors)? | No |
Impact Assessment and/or Evaluation
| Did an impact assessment (e.g., achievements, challenges) or evaluation (standardized success measurement) take place: | Unknown |
Citizen Empowerment & Representation
| Structured Decision-Making: | No |
| Explanation of objectives and methods, at the beginning of the process? | No |
| Do the participants make final decisions? | Unknown |
| Why not? Who decides instead? | Alliance of municipal department, urban renewal office and other actors involved |
| Is there a veto right by the citizens (i.e. if they are against a specific option this is not implemented?)? | No |
| At the end of the participation process: Final document on the decisions that were taken? | Yes |
| Is the publication of this document available? | Yes |
| Was the publication of this document sent to participants and/or affected community? | No |
Tools to Enhance Citizens’ Empowerment
| Clear definition and communication of mutual commitments, decision-making roles and any limits on the decisions? | No |
| Are specific tools available to participants (e.g., regular meetings or training, apps)? | Unknown |
| Integration of empowerment tools in multi-level-governance-system? | Unknown |
Involvement and Tasks of Participating Groups
| Which groups are involved at which stage of the participatory process? | Unknown |
| What are the tasks of the groups? Describe for each group. | Unknown |
| Which groups are underrepresented among the participants? Why? | Unknown |