Mayor's Resident Forum – Breiðholt

The number of dwellings to be constructed in Mjódd is very uncertain. The Housing Plan approved by the City Council - without presentation or consultation with residents - proposes the construction of 800 new dwellings in Mjódd. Currently, there are 1500 dwellings in the neighborhood of Lower-Breiðholt. Such a significant increase in the number of dwellings places a heavy burden on the neighborhood's infrastructure and significantly diminishes the quality of life for current residents due to increased shadow casting and traffic. Why is there no consultation with the local residents when there is a plan to increase the number of dwellings by 53%?

ANSWER: Land-use planning for the area has not begun, and therefore, no consultation process is underway. The municipal plan only indicates the number of dwellings that could be considered for the area, not the definite number that will be there.

Good day, When I invested in a single-family home at a premium price in a beautiful and well-established neighborhood by Stekkirnir, nothing indicated that when you want to enjoy the sun in your garden and relaxing in your cozy spot could suddenly turn into a situation where possibly hundreds of people are watching you! The sun all of a sudden gets blocked by massive new buildings! Apart from the chaotic traffic and transportation issues, just trying to get out of your street is a hassle. There is no consistency in these actions, nor is there consideration for the adjacent residential areas as is customary. This seems like a clear violation of privacy and a depreciation of your investment that should be addressed or compensated. Such extensive construction projects come with noise, commotion, disruption, machinery, and possibly explosions during the building of the new center, which I am personally well-acquainted with from personal experience. We will take photos of our house before this happens, and at the first sign of a crack in the wall, we will send you a notification and follow up on the matter in one way or another.

1. What is Reykjavík City's responsibility for such damage to nearby residential properties?

ANSWER: The concerns of residents about their properties, where most people's life savings are invested, should not be underestimated. It can be difficult to agree on arguments regarding alleged depreciation of properties, but it should be noted that according to the first paragraph of Article 51 of the Planning Act No. 123/2010, "Compensation due to planning and expropriation of property in planning and building laws,” (unofficial translation) anyone who can show damage due to the implementation of planning has the right to compensation from the municipality. The Article states: “If the implementation of planning causes the value of property to decrease, reduces its usability from what it previously was allowed, or devalues it so it cannot be used for the same purposes as before, anyone who can show damage due to this has the right to compensation from the municipal or state treasury depending on the national planning policy, or the municipal treasury will expropriate the property.” (unofficial translation). If a party believes their rights are infringed, they should direct their claim to the city council.

2. Do you foresee compensating those living close to the new center for financial damage, shadowing, and property depreciation this will cause?

ANSWER: The planning proposal for the area is not yet available, and no work on a detailed land-use plan has begun. Therefore, it is premature to discuss shadow casting and/or property depreciation at this point. The municipal plan only addresses what development permits could potentially be considered for the area, not what permits will be according to the detailed land-use plan.

“Heights of buildings should generally be determined by the city's geographic location, its natural surroundings, historical building patterns, street layout, and spatial formations, and the character of adjacent buildings.” These are admirable words in the newly approved Reykjavík Municipal Plan. However, they do not seem to apply to areas currently under development, where it is specifically stated in the municipal plan that they do not apply to densification areas. There is no need to consider the character or the adjacent buildings here. Residents in these adjacent buildings, like those near Mjódd, cannot trust these words about geographic location and natural surroundings apply to them. The sun is as high now in 2022 as it was when Dr. Guðmundur Hannesson, often quoted, pointed out Reykjavík’s geographic position regarding building heights and density. Maximum heights were set at three floors in the oldest neighborhoods and similarly in the Bakkar neighborhood. The municipal plan shows clearly the effect of tall buildings on the loss of sunlight in apartments on the lower floors, not to mention neighbors in row or single-family houses on one or two floors. An apartment resident on the fourth floor and below in a seven-floor residential building therefore sees the sun only from the spring equinox to the autumn equinox. The spring equinox is approaching, and it's a good time to imagine what it's like for someone who hasn't seen the sun through their window since fall. With the planned building volume in the municipal plan for Mjódd, it allows for 60,000 square meters of new commercial space and about 80,000 square meters of residential space, excluding current buildings, which are about 45,000 square meters = 185,000 square meters of building volume. The area is about 100,000 square meters, and the floor area ratio will be 1.85, which is not a reasonable standard if quality of the built environment is to be maintained, and it is three times more than general municipal plan standards have been until now. Residents in lower Breiðholt welcome development in Mjódd, welcome densification, and welcome the CityLine, but I can say with certainty that the residents do not want the insane standards for building volume, building heights, and density that impinge on the quality of life for current and future residents of the neighborhood. I watched an open meeting about transportation last Friday where the Mayor talked about past resident protests against Fossvogsbraut and Bernhöftstorfa. He expressed satisfaction that the City's plans did not go through then.

Will the Mayor stop an impending planning mishap in Mjódd and listen to us local residents now, or do substantial arguments and nearly unanimous residents' petitions count for nothing?

ANSWER: The planning proposal for the area is not yet available, and no work on a detailed land-use plan has begun. Therefore, it is premature to discuss shadow casting and/or property depreciation at this point. The municipal plan only addresses potential construction permits for the area, not what permissions will be according to the detailed land-use plan.

Breiðholt neighborhood planning is considered successful regarding the mix of residential types in all school districts of Breiðholt. If plans to build 800 dwellings in Mjódd go ahead, Breiðholtsskóli will not accommodate such an increase. If a new primary school is built in Mjódd—amid all the high-rises—it goes against the good planning philosophy of the neighborhood, with a mix of apartment sizes and types and, therefore, income groups in the same school district. (It can be pointed out that abroad, efforts are being made to fix such neighborhoods by better integrating them with their surroundings and introducing more diverse apartment types). Will the social-democratic government take responsibility for building an isolated island in Mjódd, where children in high-rises go to preschool and primary school only with their peers?

ANSWER: The questioner is correct that consideration should be given to educational matters alongside construction densification, which also applies to all development in the Mjódd area. Education issues are, therefore, an inseparable part of all planned land-use preparations for the area. This work has not yet begun.

I have lived in the Skógahverfi neighborhood for 46 years. Why are the streets not cleared? I have been unable to leave my street (Hléskógar) for weeks. I prefer not to leave the neighborhood; it is good to live here. Most of the services I need are here. I haven't been to 101 in years. Are we to lose all services Reykjavík City is supposed to provide for us? We pay our taxes and dues like other residents. I hope I can get out of my street soon and continue to enjoy the neighborhood.

ANSWER: We have had issues with ice formation on residential streets since February 7 due to significant snowfall. Inspectors must prioritize the equipment we have to break up the ice, focusing first on the streets in the worst condition. The same procedure is followed across the city.

Why does it take so long to clear snow—now turned to ice—from residential streets marked as service class 3? I sent a suggestion to the City on February 24 about poor snow clearing on my street and received the following reply the same day: "Valid suggestion, monitoring has been notified. This should have been done yesterday. Hopefully, it will be cleared later today. Best, Björn." Yet not a single city vehicle has come to clear the snow/ice, which has now become impassable.

ANSWER: The street in question, Norðurfell 1-11, was assigned to a contractor the same day the suggestion was replied to, and winter service staff believe the contractor cleared the street. If residents' experience is different, we regret that. Of course, our contractors can make mistakes, as can we, and we welcome re-submissions of suggestions on our Suggestion Portal.

Is it true that a right turn from Stekkjarbakki towards Höfðabakki will be prohibited? If so, I urge the Mayor to reconsider, as this route is used by many heading to Árbær, Höfði healthcare, Grafarvogur, and Vesturlandsvegur. If this route is closed, traffic will be diverted through neighborhoods like Fálkabakki or Vesturberg. Thank you.

ANSWER: There are no current plans to prohibit a right turn from Stekkjarbakki towards Höfðabakki.