Fortællinger Fra Mjølnerparken

Dansk:

Hvilken betydning oplever du parallelsamfundspakken konkret har haft for Mjølnerparken?

Det, parallelsamfundspakken konkret har betydet for Mjølnerparken, ser vi i dag. Hele området er under renovering og ombygning. To boligblokke er solgt fra, og andelen af almene familieboliger er reduceret til 40 procent. Det betyder, at 60 % af beboerne, i alt 289 husstande, har måttet flytte fra Mjølnerparken.

I 2010 indførte regeringen en årlig opgørelse over landets udsatte boligområder. Listen blev udarbejdet på baggrund af en række kriterier, blandt andet beboernes tilknytning til arbejdsmarkedet, uddannelsesniveau, indkomst, kriminalitet og andelen af beboere med ikke-vestlig baggrund. Samtidig skulle områderne have mindst 1.000 beboere. Over tid har betegnelserne ændret sig fra “udsatte boligområder” til “parallelsamfund”.

I 2018 vedtog regeringen lovpakken Et Danmark uden parallelsamfund – Ingen ghettoer i 2030, ofte omtalt som ghettoloven. Loven skærpede indsatsen markant. Hvis et boligområde havde været på listen i flere år, blev boligselskabet blandt andet pålagt at reducere andelen af almene familieboliger med op til 60 procent.

Mjølnerparkens beboersammensætning betød, at området siden 2010 havde været på regeringens liste over udsatte boligområder. De boligsociale indsatser ændrede desværre ikke på det, og derfor blev Mjølnerparken omfattet af den skærpede lovgivning og udpeget som et såkaldt omdannelsesområde. Det betød, at andelen af almene familieboliger skulle reduceres med 60 procent.

Derfra gik et omfattende arbejde i gang med at gentænke hele området. Det handlede blandt andet om, hvordan arkitekturen kunne understøtte mere tryghed i hverdagen og bryde med nogle af de udfordringer, den eksisterende bebyggelse gav. Ikke mindst kælderområderne, som med tiden var blevet brugt til utryghedsskabende aktiviteter frem for de fælles og kreative formål, de oprindeligt var tænkt til.

Samtidig blev der sat et omfattende genhusningsprojekt i gang. 289 eller 60 % af beboerne skulle permanent flytte fra Mjølnerparken, mens de resterende 40 % blev midlertidigt genhuset i forbindelse med den store renovering og omdannelse af området. Det var et stort indgreb for mange beboere. 

De midlertidigt genhuse­de beboere er endnu ikke alle flyttet tilbage til deres boliger. Vi forventer, at de sidste vender tilbage inden sommerferien.

Hvad oplever du, er det største dilemma i jeres arbejde med Mjølnerparken lige nu?

Hvis jeg tager udgangspunkt i min daglige kontakt med beboerne, så er der to grupper, jeg er i dialog med.

I det daglige møder jeg beboerne her i Mjølnerparken, hvor Bo-Vita har kontor i stueetagen på Hothers Plads 2. Samtidig er jeg i løbende kontakt – primært digitalt – med de beboere, der er midlertidigt genhuset rundt omkring, især i Bo-Vitas afdelinger i København. De beboere, som skal flytte tilbage, får opdateringer i nyhedsbreve om renoveringen og besked om, hvornår de kan forvente at flytte tilbage.

I kontakten med beboerne mærker jeg en tydelig frustration, der især hænger sammen med, at renoveringen er blevet forsinket. For mange beboere har det medført, at den midlertidige genhusning er blevet længere end forventet.

De beboere, der er flyttet tilbage, er samtidig vendt hjem til en hverdag med byggeaktivitet. Det giver også udfordringer i hverdagen.

Så ja, det har været et stort indgreb i hverdagslivet for beboerne i Mjølnerparken.

Kunne man have gjort det anderledes?  

Det er svært at sige. Det er en overvejelse, jeg også selv har haft.

Store og komplekse bygge- og renoveringsprojekter er tæt på umulige at planlægge og styre. Og de er svære at leve midt i. Man kan sammenligne det med en renovering i sin egen bolig. Det er også en periode med rod, usikkerhed og frustrationer, især hvis håndværkerne bliver forsinkede. Forskellen er bare, at her er det i en helt anden skala.

Ud over forsinkelser er det også min oplevelse, at den manglende indflydelse har forstærket beboernes frustrationer. Det er vigtigt at huske, at fraflytninger og frasalg er gennemført på baggrund af lovgivning.

Samtidig er der en forhistorie, som også spiller ind. Inden lovgivningen blev vedtaget, var man allerede i gang med at udvikle en helhedsplan for området i dialog med myndigheder og beboere. Da lovgivningen kom, ændrede rammerne sig markant. Processen gik fra at være mere lokalt forankret til at være styret af politiske krav.

Det betyder, at nogle af de forventninger og forståelser, der blev skabt tidligt i forløbet, ikke længere stemmer overens med det, der senere er blevet gennemført. Og det er også med til at skabe usikkerhed og frustration hos beboerne.

Ja, præcis.  

Københavns Kommune er tæt inde over samarbejdet og er med til at sikre, at projektet bliver gennemført. Min oplevelse er, at Bo-Vita ofte bliver set som den ansvarlige for forandringerne. Her er det vigtigt at huske, at boligselskabet er forpligtet til at følge den lovgivning, der er vedtaget. Det har ikke været muligt at vælge en anden løsning. Der skulle ske en reduktion på 60 procent af familieboligerne.

Der er mange tekniske forhold i, hvordan det konkret bliver gennemført, men i praksis er det boligselskabet, der møder beboerne i hverdagen. Det betyder også, at det er her, frustrationerne ofte lander.

Det kan jeg godt mærke i mit eget arbejde. Når jeg fortæller, at jeg er tilknyttet Bo-Vita, bliver jeg ikke altid mødt med åbne arme. Det er en del af opgaven – og så må relationerne bygges op over tid.

Og hvad tænker du nu, du sagde selv, at til sommerferien, så skulle alle være flyttet tilbage. Hvad tænker du, i forhold til at folk skal lande godt? Hvad er vigtigt?

Der er mange ting i det. Jeg kommer udefra og har ikke selv boet her, så jeg har ikke de samme beboerfølelser. Min baggrund er fra politiet i København og jeg kendte godt til Mjølnerparken, men mit arbejde har givet mig et tættere indblik i hverdagen i området.

Da jeg begyndte, var området stort set en byggeplads. Men i takt med at stilladserne er kommet ned, er det tydeligt, at der er sket en forskønnelse af de fysiske rammer.

Samtidig er der kommet nye beboere i frasolgte boligblokke i karré 2 og 3. Det har givet en større variation i beboersammensætningen. Sammen med de arkitektoniske ændringer, hvor der er arbejdet med tryghed, synes jeg, at det peger i en positiv retning for området.

Hvis beboerne skal lande godt, er det vigtigt, at der bliver skabt gode rammer for fællesskaber. Her spiller både grundejerne og beboerdemokratiet en rolle. Det kræver, at man arbejder med et fælles “vi” og ikke et “os og dem”.

Der er allerede gode eksempler. Café 30 er et socialøkonomisk initiativ, som er med til at skabe liv og sammenhæng i området.

Det er et stort og vigtigt projekt. Nu handler det om at få de sidste beboere tilbage, så hverdagen kan falde på plads igen.

Med den rette vilje kan Mjølnerparken blive en endnu mere integreret del af Nørrebro.

Så hvis det lykkes på en god måde, så om 10 år, hvordan ser Mjølnerparken så ud?  

Så taler man om Mjølnerparken, som man taler om ethvert andet boligområde på Nørrebro.

Uden stigmatiserende fortællinger.

Med en integreret butiks- og erhvervsgade, der inviterer resten af Nørrebro ind.

Det er en udvikling, jeg gerne vil bidrage til – så længe jeg er en del af arbejdet her.

Med den rette vilje er jeg sikker på, at det kan lykkes.

---

English:

What concrete impact do you feel the parallel society legislation has had on Mjølnerparken?

What the “parallel society” legislation has concretely meant for Mjølnerparken is what we see today. The entire area is undergoing renovation and redevelopment. Two housing blocks have been sold off, and the proportion of public family housing has been reduced to 40 percent. This means that 60 percent of the residents – a total of 289 households – have had to move out of Mjølnerparken.

In 2010, the Danish government introduced an annual list identifying socially vulnerable housing areas across the country. The list was based on several criteria, including residents’ connection to the labor market, level of education, income, crime rates, and the proportion of residents with non-Western backgrounds. At the same time, the areas had to have at least 1,000 residents. Over time, the terminology changed from “socially vulnerable housing areas” to “parallel societies.”

In 2018, the government passed the legislative package A Denmark Without Parallel Societies – No Ghettos by 2030, often referred to as the “ghetto law.” The legislation significantly intensified the intervention. If a housing area had remained on the list for several years, housing associations were required, among other measures, to reduce the proportion of public family housing by up to 60 percent.

Because of Mjølnerparken’s resident composition, the area had been on the government’s list of vulnerable housing areas since 2010. Unfortunately, the social housing initiatives did not change that status, and Mjølnerparken therefore became subject to the stricter legislation and was designated a so-called transformation area. This meant that the proportion of public family housing had to be reduced by 60 percent.

From that point on, extensive work began to rethink the entire area. This included considering how the architecture could help create greater everyday safety and address some of the challenges posed by the existing buildings – especially the basement areas, which over time had become associated with activities that created insecurity rather than serving the communal and creative purposes they were originally intended for.

At the same time, a major rehousing project was launched. A total of 289 households – 60 percent of the residents – were permanently relocated from Mjølnerparken, while the remaining 40 percent were temporarily rehoused during the large-scale renovation and redevelopment of the area. It was a major disruption for many residents.

Not all of the temporarily rehoused residents have moved back into their homes yet. We expect the last residents to return before the summer holidays.

What do you see as the biggest dilemma in your work with Mjølnerparken right now?

If I take my point of departure in my daily contact with residents, there are two groups I am in dialogue with.

On a daily basis, I meet the residents here in Mjølnerparken, where Bo-Vita has its office on the ground floor at Hothers Plads 2. At the same time, I am in ongoing contact – primarily digitally – with the residents who are temporarily rehoused elsewhere, especially in Bo-Vita housing departments across Copenhagen. The residents who are set to return receive updates through newsletters about the renovation process and information about when they can expect to move back.

In my contact with residents, I clearly sense frustration, particularly connected to the delays in the renovation project. For many residents, this has meant that their temporary rehousing period has lasted longer than expected.

The residents who have already moved back have also returned to a daily life still marked by ongoing construction work. That creates challenges in everyday life as well.

So yes, it has been a major disruption to everyday life for the residents of Mjølnerparken.

Could it have been done differently?

That is difficult to say. It is something I have reflected on myself as well.

Large and complex construction and renovation projects are almost impossible to fully plan and manage. And they are difficult to live through. You can compare it to renovating your own home. That too is a period marked by disorder, uncertainty, and frustration, especially if contractors are delayed. The difference here is simply the scale.

Beyond the delays, it is also my impression that the residents’ lack of influence has intensified their frustration. It is important to remember that the relocations and property sales were carried out on the basis of legislation.

At the same time, there is a longer history that also plays a role. Before the legislation was passed, work was already underway to develop a comprehensive plan for the area in dialogue with authorities and residents. When the legislation came into force, the framework changed significantly. The process shifted from being more locally rooted to being governed by political requirements.

As a result, some of the expectations and understandings established early in the process no longer align with what was later implemented. That, too, has contributed to uncertainty and frustration among residents.

Yes, exactly.

The Copenhagen Municipality is closely involved in the collaboration and helps ensure that the project is carried out. My experience is that Bo-Vita is often seen as responsible for the changes. Here, it is important to remember that the housing association is obligated to comply with the legislation that has been passed. There was no possibility of choosing another solution. A 60 percent reduction in family housing had to take place.

There are many technical aspects involved in how this is implemented in practice, but in everyday life it is the housing association that meets the residents directly. That also means that this is where frustrations are often directed.

I can feel that in my own work as well. When I say that I am affiliated with Bo-Vita, I am not always welcomed with open arms. That is part of the job – and relationships have to be built over time.

And now that you mentioned everyone is expected to have moved back by the summer holidays; What do you think is important in helping people settle back in well?

There are many dimensions to that. I come from outside the area and have not lived here myself, so I do not have the same emotional connection as the residents. My background is in the Copenhagen police, and I was already familiar with Mjølnerparken, but this work has given me a much closer insight into everyday life in the area.

When I started, the area was essentially a construction site. But as the scaffolding has come down, it has become clear that the physical environment has undergone a significant beautification.

At the same time, new residents have moved into the sold-off housing blocks in courtyards 2 and 3. This has created greater diversity in the resident composition. Together with the architectural changes, where a sense of security has been a strong focus for the design, I think it points in a positive direction for the area.

If residents are to settle back in well, it is important to create strong conditions for community life. Both property owners and resident democracy have a role to play here. It requires working toward a shared sense of “we,” rather than an “us vs. them” mentality.

There are already good examples of this. Café 30 is a social enterprise initiative that helps create life and cohesion in the area.

This is a large and important project. Now the focus is on getting the last residents back so everyday life can settle into place again.

With the right commitment, Mjølnerparken can become an even more integrated part of Nørrebro.

So if this succeeds in a positive way, what will Mjølnerparken look like in 10 years?

People will talk about Mjølnerparken the same way they talk about any other residential area in Nørrebro. Without stigmatizing narratives.

With an integrated shopping and commercial street that invites the rest of Nørrebro in. That is a development I would like to contribute to for as long as I am part of the work here.

With the right commitment, I am confident it can succeed.

---