Re-urbanization in the vicinity of Munich?

To what could be called in Munich as a re-urbanization is, as a hotchpotch of economic and cultural appreciation and social restructuring of the inner city mark: As a trend extension to further structural refinement of the old town and the surrounding neighborhoods, as real estate and finance-dominated capitalization of urban development and as the discovery of the inner city as a place to live by a money-elite and various dominant social milieu, whose wishes had been directed residenzielle rather exquisite residential neighborhoods on the outskirts or in the southern region.

The concept of re-urbanization in the case of Munich can irritate the extent that he could assume a reversal of previously observed suburbanization. In the case of Munich, however, applies to both: You could call the Munich Reurbanisierungsprozess as a specific variant of re-urbanization, which combines two directions of movement in itself. There is still, and thus could be of "continuity" to speak, instead of a socially and economically selective outsourcing of residential and commercial locations of the city into the countryside, and we have it at the same time with an equally socially, economically and culturally selective enhancement of downtown to do.

The processes have in opposite directions, but are simultaneously in their socio-spatial selectivity. But this does not mean that the observed Reurbanisierungsprozess "urban neutral" - on the contrary, visible urban Umprägungen the Old City and its fringe areas in favor of wealthy social strata and different loads are also disadvantaged. They are in turn triggers of differents Gentrifizierungseffekten, revaluations and restructuring in those urban areas that are adjacent to them directly and indirectly. These effects are particularly felt in the housing market in the supply of private households in the neighborhood relationships and also in the use of public spaces. It bluntly, the Munich city Reurbanisierungsprozess the socio-spatial expression of social dominance and dominance relationships.

It is still not clear what further consequences associated with it. A Munich-based journalist describes two scenarios: "you could say it bluntly, Munich has two choices before him. Option one: The bubble bursts, the developers stuck with empty floors. Then there will be some failures, the market will change, not always, but perhaps a bit - in fact, are now distributed in many luxury homes that have very large apartments into smaller, slightly cheaper, because this increases the circle of buyers. For the average income in Munich a little hope, but really very little, because one thing is certain: The price of land and housing will not sink, so it does not come by.

Option two: the experts are mistaken, and is also available in the next ten years be enough buyers who can afford living in the heart of the city. Then we could with Munich happen, what do cities like London and Paris for a long time: the expensive quarters are always empty, there are either only shops and offices or well-sealed apartment block with a porter, and who have a regular-paying job, have far outdoor living, the suburbs or further, and each day more than an hour drive to work. In some quarters in Munich, in Bogenhausen better in Schwabing, one gets a feel for it already, looks like that might someday: Only disappearing cafes and shops, then come antiques and furniture stores that customers almost never see. Then one day disappear, these shops. And everything is very well swept, empty sidewalks "(Max Fellmann in SZ-Magazin v. 11.3.2011, p 28).

Both scenarios offer the losers of the poor development prospects. Could in either case - should the upgrade to continue the city in favor of a high-income plutocracy more - enter a situation in which the city center to offer as a code to identify the city citizens / internally with their community a high priority for the shrinking layer of " average income - the center of Munich for a no-go area average citizen "in the city and the surrounding area to lose its relevance to the Munich city center, then neither monetarily and mentally still" afford "to?

But if not a collective appropriation of and identification with the inner city will take place, the cohesion of the community in Munich, is up for grabs. If this is not to enter anything, then the city policy, city planning and civil society on the ground will have to deal with issues of gentrification and urban society to address emerging stronger than she is obviously ready to present.

This article is an excerpt from the same article in the recently published book "re-urbanization. Materiality and discourse in Germany ", edited by Klaus Brake and Günter Herfert, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag Springer-2012th.