Energy Initiative Riga – Pilot Project of the Cities of Berlin and Riga (Latvia)

I. IDENTIFICATION
  • Investor (key institution): City of Berlin
  • Contact person: Dr. L. Snidere, luf@lanet.lv
  • Year of implementation: 2001
  • Implementation venue

  • Region: Riga
  • Town: Riga
  • Size of area: 3955 m2
  • Impact: local

    Total costs: 860236 EUR

    Source per every institution

    • regional: 331190 EUR
    • other: 529046 EUR
    II. TYPOLOGY
    1. Improved attractiveness of the architecture of the socialist buildings.
    III. DESCRIPTION
    1. What forms of cooperation were used as new approaches in the field of rehabilitation and conversion of urban functional areas?
    2. Energy Initiative Riga – Pilot Project of the Cities of Berlin and Riga is demonstration of technical feasibilty of complex energetic refurbishment of a privatised residential building without moving out the residents, implemetation of a technical package of measure to reduce energy consumption by half.

    3. Was the building or the space between buildings) identified as a valuable socialist heritage?
    4. None of the buildings or space between buildings have been identified as a valuable socialistic heritage as there are only limited theoretical concepts, methodologies and case studies for the socialistic heritage conservation in the Latvia. The buildings and space is usually modified or transformed regardless of its potential value.

    5. What criteria were applied to make this judgment?
    6. Not relevant as the answer for the previous question was negative.

    7. Was the building or space between buildings) important to local communities and how were they involved in decision-making process about its rehabilitation or conversion?
    8. The prefabhouses, multifamily residential building, were not energetic efficient. The project aims to the improvement of energetic efficiency. Therefore fo locals the project is very important. However, during the planning process, we identified no significant involvement of the local communities in the evaluation of alternative use and regeneration of the area.

    9. Were attempts made to improve territorial cohesion within the city/town/district? And, if so, how was success on this front gauged?
    10. The project has mainly very local significance.

    11. Were there attempts to reduced disparities between districts within cities/towns achieved reduced? And, if so, how was success on this front gauged?
    12. No attempts has been made to reduce disparities. The project was the pilot project in Riga.

    13. Other important facts and comments, e.g. critical review.
    14. The other aspects that were not included in the previous comments and are worth of mention include: - significance of the project in respect of high concentration of inhabitants in the zone in relation to overall population of the town.

    IV. SUPPLEMENT

    There are more than 6 000 people living in Dědina block of flats. The whole revitalization 3 -phases -process took 4 years and the total cost of the project was 11 200 000 EUR. It is one of the first completely reconstructed block of flats as far as the public spaces in Prague are concerned.

    Web site: www.zrea.lv/upload/attach/D26%20Assesment%20of%20best_practices__Oct2010.doc