Looking across the rooftops of old buildings from the 1700s and early 1800s along Damstredet, a narrow street paved with cubic quarried stones in St. Hanshaugen, Oslo

This residential area was formerly a suburb of the city and was later incorporated into Christiania in 1859. Here was home to the famous Norwegian poet, playwright and author Henrik Wergeland (1808-1845), who lived at the top of Damstredet around 1840. The house where he lived and the adjacent stable remain standing. The Veslebrunen's stable, named after Henrik Wergeland's horse, is today used as a kindergarten. His writing studio, an octagonal gazebo, was moved to the Norwegian Folk Museum in 1902; however, a reproduction was constructed and inaugurated in the place of the original on the poet's 200th birthday in 2008. The building was reconstructed in the course of doctoral research on the relevance of authenticity in the context of cultural heritage conservation.

St. Hanshaugen

In the 1840s, on a rocky hill just north of the city centre, people gathered for a Midsummer Eve bonfire ritual. What was once a barren plot of land, collecting refuse, over the coming two decades, took the form of a park with vistas of the surroundings and burgeoning city, meandering paths, a restaurant, and a site for concerts and shows.

Over a thousand trees were planted, and today, the canopy of mature trees provides coverage and habitat for wildlife across various landscapes, including a reflecting pool, pond, and meadow. The district takes its name from this site, St. Hanshaugen Park, one of Oslo's largest and oldest parks.

 This park and the result of early urban planning efforts shape the district's character. Low-rise housing blocks from the late 19th and early 20th centuries are interspersed with public squares, street-level restaurants, and shops. The attractive and cohesive street life provides a vibrant pedestrian environment. Journeys by car in St. Hanshaugen are the lowest among the districts.  Most of the housing in St Hanshaugen was built before the Second World War.  The district’s historic architecture is complemented by notable young demographics, with a high proportion of residents between the ages of 20 and 39.

A denser and greener Oslo

 A pressing debate about development in Oslo and many other cities is founded on the ostensible trade-offs between increasing density and the desire for more open spaces.  Though Oslo is one of Europe's fastest-growing cities, experiencing a boom of building activity within a fixed growth boundary, it continues to expand the amount of green space within the city. 

 Recent research published in the journal People and Nature illustrates that the assumed either-or proposition of density on one hand or open spaces on the other is a false dichotomy. A global sample of cities found only a weak relationship between population density and urban greenery, concluding that open space wasn’t so much a product of density; instead, the proportional distribution of density and open public space was more a product of historical preconditions of policy and building culture.[1]  The conditions of density vary; it can rightly be associated with overcrowding in some contexts and sustainability and economic growth in others.[2] Nine freestanding blocks at Marienlyst, built between 1934 and 1936, represent innovative experiments in dense residential dwellings with an essential legacy to Oslo's urban form and urbanity today.   

Functionalist designs and radical philosophy

The development of mid-rise residential blocks is situated just north of Majorstuen on the west side of Kirkeveien.  The linear “Lamellar blocks”, standing in parallel rows of seven and eight storeys, were a radical departure from the perimeter blocks, tied to the oldest planning grid of 1624, or the garden city developments nearby.

Though all buildings are similar in construction of reinforced concrete and masonry block, fenestration, horizontal features, balconies, and flat roofs; six different architects are responsible for the different buildings, varying in finishes and adapted to the specificity of the site and program.[3]  The overall development reflects the functionalist trend of the time. 

The blocks at Marienlyst incorporated functionalist design principles and its radical philosophy.  In Norway, a new attitude and approach to architecture and planning was inspired by foreign models, by Le Corbusier and Walter Gropius and the association C.I.A.M., Congrés Internationaux d’Architecture Modern.  Importantly, champions of the new architecture in Norway railed against functionalism as a “style” and underscored the public-focused project; architecture was only to be used as a tool to restructure the city for the greater good.  The temperament of the radical architectural discourse associated with functionalism is captured in PLAN magazine, the official publication of the Association of Socialist Architects.[4]  PLAN promoted functionalism as a component in the revolution of working-class culture.[5] 

The first issue of PLAN, published in 1933, contemporary with the Marienlyst development, sets out their philosophical program.[6]  PLAN’s mission statement, “Our Agenda,” elaborated on the local precepts of functionalism.  The agenda thrust architects into a leading position of revolutionaries where the overarching goal was a commitment to change society through the built environment.[7] 

The Marienlyst blocks embody the social vision of affordable dwellings for the masses with modern amenities for everyday conveniences, such as elevators, rubbish chutes, communal laundry facilities, and central heating and cooling for refrigeration units. The original plans show that the units are laid out on one floor, with most of the units having the living spaces facing south and the kitchen and sleeping rooms on the north side of the building.

The compact, multifamily residential buildings stand perpendicular to the road, oriented to maximize daylight views.  The land use of the freestanding blocks stands in contrast to the residential blocks just across Kirkeveien in height and form.  Instead of a block typology with segmented private space, The Marienlyst blocks rose adjacent to contiguous open public space. The development comprised 532 apartments and 14 shops.  This created Norway's most densely built residential area.[8] 

Legacy of Planning and Building Policy

There is a legacy of planning ideals and policies from this time.  Since the 1980s, urban densification has been Oslo’s main development strategy. [9]  Oslo’s compact city strategies have successfully cultivated density associated with desirable aspects of sustainable cities.  Oslo municipality reports that nearly all of the population (98 %) live closer than 300 meters to a green area, and this number has been increasing since 2006, in parallel with the city’s rapid growth.[10]  The border to the Marka areas – the forest areas surrounding the city - has remained almost unchanged since its introduction in Oslo’s 1936 Municipal Master Plan, contemporary with the Marienlyst development.[11] Oslo municipality master plans and policy documents support the compact city model, promoting development close to public transport nodes, emphasising urban green areas, and encouraging human-powered mobility.[12]

Today, the development from the 1930s contributes to desirable, liveable, and sustainable neighbourhoods.  The original plan integrated mixed-use development that persists, with cafés, boutiques, and commercial space on the street level. A chilled pint of local pilsner or a slice of pizza topped with locally sourced sour cream, exotic chorizo, and chilli honey is steps away.  Ample green fields are to the west and east of the complex, including places to grill and picnic, bocce and basketball courts, a minigolf park to the south, playgrounds, skate half-pipe ramps, volleyball courts, and a dog park.  The steep to gradual slope of Marienlyst Park makes for a community amphitheatre in the summer and a favourite sledding hill in the winter. 

 Residents are adjacent to public transportation lines and close to Majorstuen, a major public transportation hub with access to all subway lines, three tram lines and several bus lines, providing easy access to the rest of the city and wilderness areas.  It is a short walk to several grocery stores, the University of Oslo campus at Blindern, schools, kindergartens, a library, a post office, and medical centres.  

 The buildings along Kirkivein anchor the subsequent development of eight-story linear blocks in parallel rows on Hammerstads Gate and Suhms Gate built between 1936 and 1938. Regulations prescribed a newer development from 2004 to conform to the same linear blocks form, sited nearby in the Frogner district. These new buildings echo both the aesthetics and ideals of the buildings from the 1930s; they are designed to maximise light and air, make simple use of materials and connect to communal outdoor areas. Inside, there is a variation of layouts among the 255 newer dwellings. 

 Radical Plans and Governing Policy

 The historic development at Marienlyst conserves building values from the radical projects of the 1930s and express contemporary planning policy priorities. Today, urban debates about affordability, open spaces, neighbourhood qualities, and the greater social impact of development models are common themes.  Though much has changed in building technology, technique, and the fashions of aesthetics from the 1930s, the key debates about the urban form today are predicated on outcomes for the whole of society. [13] 

 Both the radical plans informing the functionalism blocks at Marienlyst, and the policy governing density today share a common value: that urban planning in Oslo must be in service of the society at large.  This is the essential inheritance shaping the model of density in Oslo.

[1] Robert I. McDonald et al., "Denser and greener cities: Green interventions to achieve both urban density and nature," People and Nature 5, no. 1 (2023).  See also, Emma Marris, "Cities Really Can Be Both Denser and Greener," The Atlantic monthly  (January, 12 2023).

[2] Kristin Kjærås, "The politics of urban densification in Oslo," Urban Studies  (2023).

[3] Construction dates and architects of the Marienlyst development:  Kirkeveien 98, 1934, architect Hans Wang.; Kirkeveien 100, 1934, architects Finn Bryn og Johan Ellefsen; Kirkeveien 102, 1934 architect, Olav Olson; Kirkeveien 104-110, 1936, architect Sverre Poulsen; Kirekeveien 112, 1936, arkitectF.S.Platou; Kirkevein 114, 1936 architect F.S. Platou.  Brunn, Ole Daniel. Arkitektur I Oslo: En Veiviser Til Byens Bygningsmiljø (Architecture in Oslo: A look at the city’s building milieu). Oslo, Kunnskapsforlaget. 1999, p196.

[4] PLAN Tidsskrift for bolig og byggespørsmål Utgitt av Socialistiske Arkitekters Forening: PLAN, "Our Agenda (1933)," in Nordic architects write: a documentary anthology, ed. Michael Asgaard Andersen and Steven Holl (Oxon: Routledge, 2008), 237.

[5] Jan Dahl, "Kritisk Revy Over Arbejdernes Boliger," Arbejderhistorie, no. 4 (2002).

[6] PLAN, "Vårt Program," PLAN : tidsskrift for boligspørsmål og arkitektur / Sosialistiske arkitekters forening  (1933).

[7] Dahl, "Kritisk Revy Over Arbejdernes Boliger."

[8] Gunnarsjaa, Arne; Arkitekturleksikon: Marienlyst-blokkene i Store norske leksikon på snl.no. Hentet 2022 fra https://snl.no/Marienlyst-blokkene.

[9] Petter Naess, "Urban Form, Sustainability and Health: The Case of Greater Oslo," European planning studies 22, no. 7 (2014): 1528.

[10] "Tilgang til grøntarealer,"  (Oslo Kommune Statistikkbanken), accessed December 8, 2023, https://www.oslo.kommune.no/statistikk/miljostatus/gronne-omrader/#gref.

[11] Petter Næss, Teresa Næss, and Arvid Strand, "Oslo's Farewell to Urban Sprawl," European planning studies 19, no. 1 (2011).

[12] Næss, Næss, and Strand, "Oslo's Farewell to Urban Sprawl."; Petter Næss et al., "On their road to sustainability? The challenge of sustainable mobility in urban planning and development in two Scandinavian capital regions," The Town Planning Review 82 (01/01 2011).

[13] Rebecca Cavicchia, "Uoppnåelig dyre boliger og fortetting. Et komplekst forhold," Oslo-speilet 2 (2021).

Blue-green infrastructure – celebrating bureaucratic innovation

Integrated into the cobblestone streets of Deichmans and Wilses Gate is an award-winning landscape architecture project, Oslo’s first rain garden – a local stormwater management project. Instead of channelling run-off water into underground sewer systems or culverts, rainwater irrigates a series of connected rain gardens planted with native grasses, combined with perennials blossoming throughout the spring and summer seasons. Water is directed from rooftops and streets, flowing through sculptural granite and other elements, creating a playscape for puddle-stompers going to or from Møllergata primary school nearby. Indeed, this was the intent as the landscape architect responsible for the project, Janicke Ramfjord Egeberg, said she wanted to create a street garden inviting children to walk and play through the rain beds.  

Asplan Viak won the Landskapsarkitekturprisen (Landscape Architecture Award) for this project in 2018.[1]   What has yet to receive an award is the updated regulation guidelines that enabled the visionary solution. In other words, what is worthy of recognition and celebration is the fact that the municipality created the possibility for this project when they defined such blue-green structures as fundamental for the sustainable development of Oslo, the preservation of the city's outdoor areas, and the enhancement of the city's biological diversity. Revision in the municipal plan designated that Oslo must further develop its blue-green structures, especially in areas of density, to preserve and strengthen Oslo’s blue-green character. [2] 

Initially, the project was intended to be a conventional street upgrade incorporating drainage to underground pipes and reservoirs.[3]  As is the case in many cities, increasing density combined with more extreme weather conditions increases the need for stormwater management systems. In recent years, Oslo has seen new rainfall records. Oslo Municipality’s Vann og Avløp  (water and wastewater) management updated guidelines advising that stormwater must be handled locally and openly to reduce flooding risk and advance the features of the blue-green city.[4]  These guidelines created new possibilities for innovative practices. 

Development, by its nature, is a complex endeavour. Responding to climate change compounds the demands of how our cities develop and function. Adding to this already multifaceted problem, impressive innovative design solutions are less likely to conform to status quo development models. Thus, the conventional processes and regulatory frameworks often do not encourage the change required in city development. It stands to reason that more innovative solutions require a higher degree of system change. 

Consequentially, to develop innovative solutions for enlivening cities, we should focus on the fundamental, though somewhat paradoxically sounding aspects of bureaucratic innovation. Innovation is associated with creativity and imagination, while bureaucracy is associated with regulation, protocol, and authorization, yet the former is governed by the latter in urban development. As such, urban innovation is often indebted to unsung heroes creating innovative policies and whitepapers and guiding farsighted changes in laws, standards, and regulations, enabling new possibilities in the built environment. 

 In this project on Deichmans and Wilses Gate, these rain gardens have an estimated 60,000 litres of water retention capacity. In effect, the rain gardens are both a strategy for climate adaptation and an exemplar of tactical urbanism, enhancing the placemaking qualities of the streets. The streets are also a part of the expanding “Bilfritt byliv” (car-free city life) initiatives. The street cannot be used as a thoroughfare, and car traffic is limited only to local access. All parking spaces have been removed except for two for persons with disabilities. Bicycle racks, street furniture, and lighting have been added. Today, similar projects with water capture from roof areas and green surfaces are being used across Oslo at different scales for growing food, nurturing plants, in play areas, and water sculptures. The results simultaneously enhance city infrastructure, urban ecology, and urban living as planned – and then designed. 

Though the transformation of the built environment creates the most visible artefacts of innovative thinking, often the most profound changes are founded in the more prosaic operations of planning processes. This suggests that if we want to elevate innovative practices, then recognizing innovation in policy should be predominant.[5]  Among the practices that make Oslo a great city is the context for deploying, financing, and delivering innovative development.

[1] The landscape architecture award (Landskapsarkitekturprisen) is an award confirmed by the Norske Landskapsarkitekters Forening honouring projects that contribute to raising, renewing and developing Norwegian landscape architecture, first awarded in 2015. 

[2] Kommune, Short Kommuneplan 2008 - Oslo mot 2025, 45, 50.

[3] Ivar Winther, "En våt drøm," Arkitektnytt, no. 04 (2018).

[4] Policy dokuments for Oslo’s stormwater management strategy, action plan, and guidelines referenced include: Oslo Kommune, Handlingsplan for Overvannshåndtering i Oslo Kommune (Kortversjon),  (Oslo, Norway 2019); Norges offentlige utredninger, Overvann i byer og tettsteder - Som problem og ressurs,  (2015); Oslo Kommune, Strategi for overvannshåndtering i Oslo 2013-2030,  (Oslo 2014); Oslo Kommune, Overvannsveileder,  (Oslo 2023).

[5] Thomas Fisher, in his book, Designing our way to a better world, promotes making the “invisible” aspects of design – such as design processes and procedures and the attendant policies that shape our daily life - more visible. Thomas Fisher, Designing our way to a better world (Minneapolis, Minnesota, London, England: University of Minnesota Press, 2016).