STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN — When I told a Swedish friend in Warsaw that I had managed to rent an apartment in the Farsta area of Stockholm, he frowned and said, “Oh, well. You only plan to stay three months.” Upset by his reaction, I pressed for an explanation and was told that Farsta was a “not-so-nice, lower-class section.”
With this warning in mind, my wife and I arrived in Farsta a few weeks later and were amazed to find a neat, modern community with attractive buildings blended into the granite-and-fir landscape, large play areas where children are safe from traffic, and a wealth of facilities for shopping or recreation.
Stockholm City Hall at twilight
Our friend, we remarked, must have been confused, or perhaps he was a bit of a snob. Now, after two months here and some reflection, it occurs that perhaps he was neither. Our pleasant impression of Farsta has not changed. But, as he said, it is “lower class.”
To an American who has lived his life in its cities, a lower-class neighborhood conjures up images of broken windows, weeds, deteriorating houses, congestion and, most of all, people without a share in the community. The slum. Stockholm has no slums. Here, a lower-class neighborhood is simply one where the standards — education, income, material possessions, and the like — are lower than middle class, the difference being more like a crack than a chasm. You cannot drive from a neighborhood of garish opulence to one of desperate poverty.
The Swedish welfare state, which has sought to guarantee a basic living standard to all Swedes, has reduced the number of poor and thus the number of urban poor. And though Stockholm has wealthy people — evidenced by the yachts which ply the city’s waters—it does not have what social economist Gunnar Myrdal calls “the super upper class” of the United States.
Stockholm, then, with no racial problem or great numbers of poor citizens, has been able to devote its attention to the basic challenges of modern urban living. While it may not have all the answers, the city has asked many of the right questions and is attempting to shape the future rather than be shocked by it.
Money, Money, Money
“The Swedes are among the most heavily taxed people on this earth,” begins one official publication almost in pride. The 1965 report of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development showed Sweden with the heaviest taxation of the world’s industrial nations — 39 per cent of the gross national product devoted to taxes. The U.S. was listed in tenth place with 27.3 per cent of its GNP going for taxes.
The most striking and fundamental difference between Stockholm and American cities is simply that Stockholm has enough money to do its job. The current city budget, including education, which is part of the city government, is a whopping $735,000,000. Stockholm has only 800,000 people.
The largest part of the city’s revenue is provided by a proportional income tax of 17 per cent. A city income tax of more than 1 per cent is generally considered high in the U.S.
Stockholm’s 100-man City Council sets the rate each year after they have approved the new budget, levying a rate sufficient to cover the expenditures they have approved. Theoretically, there is no limit to the size of the tax. It may be as large as the City Fathers feel is needed. The property tax plays a minor role in the city’s finances. The rate is 2-1 per cent of assessed value — an average home might be taxed $60 a year.
Stockholm and other Swedish cities already enjoy the strong helping hand from the national government, which American cities are beseeching. About one-fourth of the money spent by local government in Sweden this year will come from federal grants. Stockholm’s grants include money for maintenance and cleaning of major streets, for hospitals, and several other functions. The largest grant is for education — the salaries of teachers are paid almost entirely by His Majesty’s government and more than $40,000,000 was given for this purpose last year. Other grants help pay for schoolbooks, new schools, public facilities, housing, and fire fighting equipment.
An Equal Standard
Sweden began giving tax equalization grants to municipalities in 1965. “The aim of the new rules,” says the Ministry of Finance, “is to provide adequate community services every-where and to distribute the costs as evenly as possible. To date, the local tax rates have varied considerably — roughly from 10 up to more than 20 per cent of taxable income — as have the services provided by different municipalities.”
The equalization grants are tied to the local tax rate so that a community cannot impose low taxes on itself and then expect the national government to help it meet its needs. But when municipalities tax themselves adequately and still cannot provide satisfactory services because they lack a tax base, the national government will render them aid.
One of the major steps toward provision of equal services was taken in 1965 when the local governments gave up control of the police. To provide the same standard of law enforcement throughout the country, police were placed under the national government through regional administration.
Dreams and Deeds
Stockholm’s big budget allows it to do things, which are only idle dreams in many cities. This year, the city has a capital investment budget of nearly $174,000,000 devoted to new facilities and land acquisition-an amount larger than the operating budget of many American cities of similar size. The money is spent according to one-year and five-year investment plans, which contain time schedules for needed improvements.
The city employs more than 37,000 workers and can afford to compete with private industry for the services of skilled personnel — its building inspectors, for instance, are all graduate engineers.
Cities, though, are meant to provide services, not employment. Stockholm does. In addition to the routine services, the city provides its residents with gas and electricity, a port and 15 city hospitals with 9200 beds. A portion of the other services include 62 youth centers, 71 medical care centers for children under seven years of age, 137 day nurseries for children of working mothers, nine children’s theatres, 5000 flats for pensioners, free hot lunches for all school children and institutions for 3900 chronically ill aged persons.
While many citizens grumble about high taxes, there is no public outcry demanding they be cut. And often criticism of high taxes brings a defense such as, “But we get a lot for our money.”
Stockholm’s ability to deal with modern urban problems is in large measure due to its financial condition. But Stockholmers, in addition to giving the city economic initiative, have made it possible for the money to be used in an intelligent and creative way through far-reaching laws.
Municipal Ownership of Land
The City of Stockholm began acquiring land in 1904 by purchasing large estates outside the existing city boundaries with a view to future expansion. In 1912, the city bought a 645-hectare (nearly 1600 acres) farm in Farsta. The purchases continued, despite harsh criticism at times, with the City Fathers convinced that land ownership was to the city’s advantage.
Today, the city owns 12,600 hectares of the total land area outside the inner city of 15,000 hectares. In the inner town, the city owns just over a third of the 3600 hectares. Farsta, the farm purchased in 1912, is now a thriving sub-city.
Why should the city own so much land? It contends, “For the functional and systematical development of a big city, it is essential that the municipality can decide where and in which turn the different areas have to be built and see to it that public transport, traffic routes, sewerage, etc., are planned at the same time.
“Municipal ownership also enables the City to control that both the bigger and smaller shopping centres cover a suitable number of customers and are equipped with all kinds of social and cultural institutions as well as shops, and to prescribe how the land is to be divided between shopping centres, office blocks, flat blocks, one-family houses, parks and so on. The municipal ownership means that-no private land owner can prevent fair apportionment of land for open spaces.”
The Leasehold System
Once it owned the land, Stockholm could channel its development in the manner thought most necessary. It did this in the first case with the land bought in 1904 by developing a residential area for lower-income residents. The land was leased to individuals for construction of one-family houses and the city helped them obtain loans for construction costs. The leasehold prevented speculation in the case of future sales of the houses and allowed the city to reclaim the land if ever needed.
While industries generally desire to own the land they use, Stockholm does lease 150 hectares (370 acres) to industry. Land has been leased for construction of flats since 1934. While the city earlier resold some of the land it purchased, since 1938 it has avoided this practice.
City-owned land outside the core of Stockholm. City border in black.
The Law of 1907 regarding leaseholds permitted the city to reclaim the land after the first leasehold period — 60 years for dwellings and 26 to 100 years for industries. A new law passed in 1953 makes the lease valid for an “unlimited period” but the city can give a notice of termination after 60 years. If it does not, the lease is automatically extended for 40 more years. If the city seeks to reclaim the land and the leaseholder disagrees, the city must prove in court that the land is needed in the public interest.
When it reclaims land, the city must pay the leaseholder the value of his buildings at the time the lease expired, an amount, which is determined by the courts if no agreement can be reached beforehand.
The 1953 law gives the city the right to make up for increases in land value by raising the rent on the land. This revision is made every 10 years and values are determined by land prices on the open market.
The rent charged for leaseholds is based upon the amount of interest the city must pay on money used to make the purchase and on the cost of developing the land for use with sewers, streets and the like. It does not include the city’s original capital investment. Consequently, rentals are lower than commercial rates. The current charges, which are expected to be increased in the near future, range from 400 per square yard for one-family houses annually up to about $6.60 per square yard for prime commercial shopping center space. Rents in the downtown are much higher.
“…A Better Solution”
“There are those who suggest that the ground should be sold-as happens in many other municipalities and countries — when the city has determined how the land is to be used and a town plan has been established,” City officials admit. They counter, “The leasehold system is, however, in Stockholm regarded as a better solution.
“First of all, the increase in land value goes to the municipality. This is the main reason, but there are also other arguments in favor of leaseholdships. It gives the city a continuous control of the built-up areas and the construction. It makes it easier to arrange common facilities as, for instance, heating plants, parking places, underground service roads and the like.
“Modern legislation can, of course, impose such arrangements also on privately-owned land, but it is easier to supervise the utilization of these establishments In the long run if the ground remains in the possession of the city … it has proved necessary, on several occasions, to repurchase sites originally owned by the city … Finally, it is also worth mentioning that the City has influence on the ground value and can counteract unreasonable rises.”
Obviously, the disadvantage of city ownership of land is the cost of acquisition. This year Stockholm is expected to spend almost $50,000,000 to acquire new land. But the results appear worth the price. The Swedish government this year set up a special fund to grant loans to less affluent municipalities to begin land purchases.
The new government policy, endorsed by the Parliament, states that cities “should acquire land to such an extent that they would have a dominating influence on the supply of land likely to be used for community development within the foreseeable future… (and) should imply the guaranteed availability of land necessary for construction during at least 10 years.”
A related step is a new national law giving cities the right of first purchase of large sites if the land is needed for community development.
SKÄRHOLMEN — Built on municipal land by elude two department stores, 65 shops
Svenska Bostäder AB (a city-owned development company), this is the newest commercial center in Stockholm. It will include two department stores, 65 shops and 25 public service buildings. Cost is more than $40,000,000. A net of underground roads service the center.
In the last decade, Stockholm began purchasing land in neighboring municipalities. To date, it has acquired more than 50,000 hectares (123,550 acres) outside city boundaries to be used for both residential development and recreation. Housing will be developed in cooperation with the municipalities where the land is located. And in 1971, when a new Greater Stockholm metropolitan government emerges, the land will be developed under it.
The city’s land purchases are carried out by STRADA, a municipally owned real estate company. The public firm purchases land offered to the city by private owners (a common occurrence) and seeks land on its own or on orders from the Real Estate department of the city. Each purchase must be approved by City Council and purchase contracts contain a clause releasing the city if the Council disapproves the purchase.
New Laws for Old Land
With many older areas in need of face lifting, Stockholm has begun a major renewal of the inner city. To do so has required new laws of property expropriation.
The basic expropriation law allows the city to acquire individual properties if, after a new town plan has been prepared, the property owner is unable or unwilling to redevelop his land according to the new plan. In such cases, the city normally must pay for the property according to the value it would have in the new plan rather than its previous use. The extra expense this involves has made the law little used.
Under a 1953 law, the city was given the right of zone expropriation to expedite the redevelopment of downtown Stockholm. Zone expropriation may be used when large areas of built-up land are in need of major rebuilding. The law authorizes the city to acquire the land before it has settled on a specific redevelopment plan and values of property are based on the previous plan for the area. This is said to have lowered the cost of expropriation and enabled more effective renewal.
The law gives the city the power to acquire not only the land to be redeveloped but also properties adjacent to the renewal area where a considerable increase in values is expected because of renewal. This is intended to stop speculation and cause unearned increases in property value to fall to the city.
Under zone expropriation, the city has an extended period of time in which to acquire the properties it needs and this period may be extended if need be. The law permits the city to take possession of property at the beginning of court proceedings, rather than waiting the months or even years it takes for such cases to be settled. Then, when the special Court of Expropriation determines the compensation due the property owner, the city must pay him 6 per cent interest calculated from the time it took possession of his property.
Cases are often settled out of court with the city sometimes giving the owner the right to erect a new building on the redevelopment site.
Hötorget (Haymarket) was the first section of downtown Stockholm to be redeveloped. It contains five office towers and a large new pedestrian shopping mall (shown below.) Car and foot traffic is separated in the area.
The city is required to provide tenants of the buildings it acquires with new dwellings in the case of residences and find those with shops and offices new premises of equal size and as well situated. This is often impossible so the city may offer less satisfactory quarters along with financial compensation. Some shopkeepers have been known to suspend business during the reconstruction and open new shops in the redeveloped areas.
The zone expropriation law has become the city’s basic tool in redeveloping the downtown commercial center. Some 230 sites will be acquired there, enabling the construction of new commercial and cultural buildings and an entirely new traffic system in the center of the Swedish capital.
Planning and the Public Interest
Swedish cities have a long tradition of what Americans call “home rule” and some Swedish planners call “the Holy Municipal Right of Self-determination.” This is especially true in the matter of town planning, a field in which Sweden in general and Stockholm in particular have won international acclaim.
In 1961, Stockholm was cited by the International Union of Architects as “an example to all other cities because they show foresight in land policy and intelligent coordination of the many problems confronting the modern city.”
Given the money and the land, the planners must provide the intelligent coordination. The basic document for Swedish planning is the Building Act of 1947, which gives municipalities a monopoly on the planning of new developments within their boundaries.
The most important feature of the law is that it takes away the right of developers to build dense subdivisions regardless of the problems such developments cause a community. Dense, urban development may take place only -where it is found to be in the public interest. The landowner remains free to build scattered, low-density buildings.
The Technique
The fundamental difference between Swedish and American planning is that in the U.S. large developments are planned by developers for developers while in Sweden they are planned by the city for the developer and the public.
As a rule in the U.S., a developer who wishes to build a residential or commercial complex assembles the land, hires an architect to plan the project, and then trots down to the City Planning Commission where he asks for approval of the plans and possibly for a rezoning of the land.
Armed with attractive color drawings of the proposed development and a ream of statistics showing its benefits to the community, he often convinces the laymen on the commission that he is doing the city a favor. The city’s planning staff — often undermanned and overworked — has given the plans a quick once-over and may suggest some changes. But the words of the planners seldom compete with the developer’s drawings and blueprints.
In Sweden, whether the developer happens to be a private landowner, a non-profit cooperative, or the city itself, he does not make the development plans. Instead, he trots down to the City Planning department and informs the staff that he wishes to develop the site. The staff, after consulting the master plan for the city to see what kind of development, if any, is suitable for the site, makes development plans for the land.
The law requires that the planners consider both the rights of the investor and the public good. The site plan they prepare — which the law limits to an area no larger than can be developed in a limited time — fixes the location of the buildings and their height, the number of buildings on the site, the layout of blocks, and locations for pedestrian walks, parks, open space, playgrounds and parking facilities. Sometimes it requires land to be set aside for a new school.
A site plan for a neighborhood unit and small shopping center in Stockholm’s Bredang area. The plan designates buildings, streets, pedestrian walks, open space and play areas.
The site plan allows development of the land to a density based upon the value of the land and regulates the economic return — profit, if you will — which the owner may receive from exploiting the land. As the planners work out the development scheme, they frequently consult-and argue with — the developer.
When it is finished, the plan is made public so that it may be scrutinized by other landowners and interested citizens. If any objections are made, the Building Committee of City Council attempts to iron them out before delivering the plan to City Council for approval. Finally, the plan is sent to the county architect (an official of the national government) for examination and approval. This is usually given freely.
With the plan approved and returned to the developer, he has his own architect make the detailed building designs. Incidentally, the plan prepared by the city is free of cost to the developer. The planning staff of architects, engineers, economists and sociologists in Stockholm is large enough to devote sufficient time to both the interests of the developer and those of the public.
Plotting the Course
The comprehensive master plan for Stockholm outlines the city’s general development over the next 20 years. It is not merely prepared and filed but is revised continuously to make it what the planners call a “rolling” plan — one that changes as the community’s status and needs change.
It attempts to outline where and when development should take place and where it should be prohibited. Since much of the land is city-owned, the master plan is coordinated with a long-term capital investment budget to show what resources the city can devote to certain areas and when it can afford to develop them.
General rules governing the relationship of land use to traffic generation, housing growth, school locations, expansion requirements and financing, are included in the master plan. Some land is earmarked for reserve to provide for future population growth.
Stockholm, and a few other urban centers in Sweden, are now developing regional plans, recognizing that the development of a city is not determined solely within its boundaries.
Stockholm’s regional plan was adopted in 1958 by a federation composed of 80 representatives of 46 municipalities in the capital region, ranging in size from the city itself with 800,000 people down to the fishing village of Blido with 1000. The regional plan is concerned only with problems, which cannot be solved within the municipalities and seeks to coordinate their activities in dealing with common problems.
It looks ahead to what the region will be like — or should be like — in 30 years and is intended to be revised every five years. Among the matters it is concerned with are housing development, industrial locations, aviation requirements, highways, water and sewerage systems, and recreation areas. Though it is not mandatory, the plan enjoys strong support from the municipalities and is helping them shape their communities to benefit residents throughout the region.
Now, Sweden is studying the idea of a national plan for land use. As Jan Strömdahl of the National Board of Urban Planning explains, “Until now, there has been planning activity on a national scale only for different functions such as roads, railroads and hospitals. But the very swift development, the migration complex, the active labor market policy, the increasing competition for land between industries, recreation areas, natural preservation and so on, prove the need of coordination at the national level.”
A Matter of Attitude
With its money and its laws, and the nation’s vast social welfare system behind it, Stockholm has created a physical environment that is not endangered by social unrest.
Behind the city’s performance there is an attitude, which seems to make things gel. Some of it is expressed in words like those of Richard Carlgren of the City’s Finance Department. Talking about the city’s many services, he said, “We feel that if we aim for the sky, we may be able to hit the treetops.” The words were surprising, coming from a man who deals daily with the political realities of life.
The attitude is expressed more often in deeds than in words. It’s this attitude, which provides Stockholm with more than 40,000 acres of park for its 800,000 citizens. New York City, with 8,000,000 people, has only 36,000 acres.
The same attitude spends several hundred thousand dollars a year on sculpture for its parks and feeds the birds that flock to them. It devotes miles of valuable waterfront to people and to beauty. It dresses city street crews in snappy yellow uniforms.v
Who’s this? Why, it’s Sivert Rapp, and a friend. To learn more, see Page 16.
Some sculpture proves more useful than others. This work by Silvert Lindblom in Vallingby Center proves a handy place to rest and map plans
Mr. Meeker is an Alicia Patterson Fund award winner, on leave from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. This article may be published with credit to David A. Meeker, the Post-Dispatch, and the Alicia Patterson Fund.
