Metapolis. Topoi. Scenarios

Vanessa Miriam Carlow,
Grace Abou Jaoude, Chantal Karadag,
Olaf Mumm, Marie Scheer,
Kristin Schöning, Ryan Zeringue
METAPOLIS.
TOPOI.
SCENARIOS
for Urban-Rural
Sustainability
in Lower Saxony

INTRO 7
1. The Lower Saxony Metapolis –
From an Open Call for Cooperation
to a Fundamental Understanding
of Urban-Rural Relations 8
Vanessa Miriam Carlow
PERSPECTIVES IN
URBAN-RURAL
PLANNING 13
2. TOPOI – A Scientific Approach
for Understanding Urban-Rural
Linkages 14
Vanessa Miriam Carlow, Olaf Mumm
2.1. Introduction 14
2.2. Lower Saxony Metapolis 15
2.3. The TOPOI Method 16
2.4. The TOPOI Types of Lower Saxony 21
2.5. Conclusion 24
3. Four Scenarios for Lower
Saxony 2050 26
Grace Abou Jaoude, Vanessa Miriam Carlow
3.1. Introduction 26
3.2. Scenario Planning Approaches 30
3.3. Case Study: The METAPOLIS Project 32
3.4. Evaluation of the Scenario Building
Workshop 35
3.5. Four Scenarios for Lower Saxony 36
3.6. Conclusion 39
CASE STUDIES 43
Vanessa Miriam Carlow, Chantal Karadag,
Olaf Mumm, Marie Scheer, Kristin Schöning,
Ryan Zeringue
4. PROTOTYPE I:
Eydelstedt, a Disseminated Hamlet 44
4.1. TOPOI Description 47
4.2. Four Futures for Eydelstedt 52
4.3. Scenario A: The Green Communities
of Eydelstedt 54
4.4. Scenario B: A Happy Future
Planned for Eydelstedt? 66
4.5. Scenario C: New Settlers
in Eydelstedt 78
4.6. Scenario D: Eydelstedt Repurposed! 90
5. PROTOTYPE II:
Detmerode, an Exo Satellite Town 102
5.1. TOPOI Description 105
5.2. Four Futures for Detmerode 110
5.3. Scenario A: The Green Communities
of Detmerode 112
5.4. Scenario B: A Happy Future
Planned for Detmerode? 124
5.5. Scenario C: New Settlers
in Detmerode 136
5.6. Scenario D: Detmerode Repurposed! 148

6. PROTOTYPE III:
Schöppenstedt, a Periurban Village 160
6.1. TOPOI Description 163
6.2. Four Futures for Schöppenstedt 168
6.3. Scenario A: The Green Communities
of Schöppenstedt 170
6.4. Scenario B: A Happy Future Planned
for Schöppenstedt? 182
6.5. Scenario C: New Settlers
in Schöppenstedt 194
6.6. Scenario D: Schöppenstedt
Repurposed! 206
URBAN-RURAL
INTERVENTION
CATALOG 223
Vanessa Miriam Carlow, Chantal Karadag,
Olaf Mumm, Marie Scheer, Kristin Schöning
8. Urban-Rural Intervention Catalog 224
8.1. Introduction 224
8.2. Building Types (B) 225
8.3. Streets, Mobility, Public Space (M) 228
8.4. Green and Blue Networks (G+B) 231
8.5. Functions (F) 234
7. Discussion and Evaluation of the
Scenarios for the three Prototypes
Eydelstedt, Detmerode, and
Schöppenstedt 218
7.1. Eydelstedt 219
7.2. Detmerode 220
7.3. Schöppenstedt 221
OUTLOOK 239
9. From Local Measures to Regional
Sustainability – An Attempt of
Upscaling 240
Olaf Mumm, Ryan Zeringue,
Vanessa Miriam Carlow
APPENDIX 253
References 254
Acknowledgements 262
Imprint 264

1.
The Lower Saxony
Metapolis –
From an Open Call
for Cooperation
to a Fundamental
Understanding of
Urban-Rural Relations
Vanessa Miriam Carlow
In 2015, the ISU – Institute for Sustainable Urbanism
at Technische Universität Braunschweig published
an open call for cooperation: “Have space. Want
ideas? Not afraid of students?” via our professional
networks. The open call was an offer to municipalities
and NGOs worldwide. The ultimate ambition was
to apply the talent of our students and ISU to existing
real-life problems. By cooperating with real-world
actors, we envisioned our students – future urbanists
– to get a glimpse of the everyday reality of their
chosen profession from the very beginning of their
studies. We also wanted to move away from an architectural
and urban design education where students
work on problems that their professors have “made
up”. In addition, we aimed to advocate work in public
administration as a rewarding professional alternative
to the classic career path in an architects’ office.
Through meetings with citizens, mayors, or chief
planners, we hoped to give our students an idea of
the responsibilities and joys the work of an architect
can entail.
The response was amazing! We received feedback
from municipalities around the world. However, most
expressions of interest in cooperation came from
villages and small towns in Lower Saxony, a federal
state in the north of Germany, where ISU and our
Technische Universität Braunschweig are located.
We kept our promise and conducted several urban
design workshops and master classes based on
the responses to our open call. We worked with the
Gowanus Canal Initiative in Brooklyn, New York – and
also held a design-to-build workshop in Brome, a village
near the city of Wolfsburg, and other more rural
municipalities. “We work with Brooklyn and Brome”
soon became a punch line at ISU.
8 INTRO

In response to the open call, we met in person with the
mayors or chief planners of all of the municipalities in
Lower Saxony that had replied. We became intrigued
by the specific challenges those communities, mainly
small towns and villages, were facing. Consequently,
we started to conduct preliminary research and established
the Academy of Rural Spaces (Carlow et al.
2019) – a forum for cooperation between ISU and our
partner municipalities. Eventually, in 2016 we hosted
the international conference RURALISM. The future
of small towns and villages in an urbanizing world
(Carlow and ISU 2016).
We realized a number of things over the course of all
these intense exchanges:
While rural spaces have long been understood as
backward, they have – just like cities – undergone
drastic changes in the past decades, too. The industrialization
of agriculture, the change of lifestyles,
and other effects of the globalized, networked economy
have had a major impact on areas that were formerly
dominated by traditional agriculture, and have
led to enormous, also physical and spatial transformations
that are still on-going. In addition, prevailing
challenges such as resource and land consumption,
the need for better participation, and sustainable mobility
strategies are not only problems that concern
cities but also rural areas (Carlow and ISU 2016;
Carlow et al. 2021; Mühlbach et al. 2021).
Rural spaces are often depicted as peripheral and
being dependent on large cities. However, in Lower
Saxony, as in the whole of Germany and many other
European countries, the majority of the population does
not live in the large metropolises and metropolitan
areas, but outside of these – in towns, small suburbs,
and villages. This ultimately challenges inherited
concepts of urbanity, centrality, and accessibility
(Carlow et al. 2021).
We also observed that for a long time, concepts and
strategies for sustainable transformation have focused
almost exclusively on large cities and metropolitan
regions. However, there are many interlinkages
between spaces once considered urban or rural.
A holistic approach to understanding urban and rural
spaces in an integrated way may offer a new path towards
a more sustainable future. At the same time,
this is being challenged by traditional planning systems
that strongly differentiate between urban and
rural areas (Carlow et al. 2022).
Ultimately, no two places are alike, and rural or urban
are too broad categories to describe the lived reality
in cities, towns, or villages. Prosperous villages and
shrinking cities or vice versa, new functional designations
or changing lifestyles – a closer look is often
needed to understand the challenges that arise in
urban and rural development.
TOPOI. METAPOLIS. SCENARIOS for Urban-Rural
Sustainability in Lower Saxony presents the current
results of our ongoing work and analysis of urban and
rural communities in Lower Saxony. We developed a
new data-driven method called TOPOI to analyze
urban-rural settlement patterns (Carlow et al. 2022).
The method is introduced in Chapter 2. Based on
the insights we gained, we developed scenarios for
the sustainable development of different settlement
types and exemplary communities in the interconnected
network of cities, towns, and villages. In Chapter
3 we elaborate on the method we used to develop
these scenarios. The exemplary proposals we derived
for different possible and sustainable futures are
presented in Chapters 4, 5, and 6. Throughout their
The Lower Saxony Metapolis
9

development, these have been extensively deliberated
with our cooperating partners. Chapter 7 presents
a summary of our discussions. Chapter 8 is a
summary of the different design proposals that we
developed for the scenarios. In the concluding Chapter
9, we will show how an incremental change in the
communities may have a major impact on the larger
urban-rural system.
I would like to thank all of our cooperation partners,
mayors, planners, local politicians, activists, and
citizens of Barnstorf, Bersenbrück, Braunschweig,
Bremen, Bremerhaven, Brome, Elm-Asse, Detmerode,
Eydelstedt, Nienburg (Weser), Schöppenstedt,
Vechelde, Verden (Aller), Wittingen, Wolfenbüttel,
Wolfsburg, and Wolfshagen (Harz). With this book we
want to acknowledge your passion in the quest for a
good and sustainable future for (y)our communities.
I would also like to thank my colleagues at Technische
Universität Braunschweig and Leibniz Universität
Hannover for their constructive cooperation on our
joined research project METAPOLIS. An inter- and
transdisciplinary platform for a sustainable development
of urban-rural relations, funded by the
Volkswagen Foundation and the Lower Saxony Ministry
of Science and Culture (MWK).
This book is an invitation to continue the discussion
on the fundamental understanding of urban-rural
relations and the future sustainable development.
Amidst a pandemic, severe social disruptions due to
wars, climate change with severe draughts, storm
surges, and floods, and with global resources dwindling,
we all realize that radical shifts in the way we
live are necessary. This book provides a glimpse into
a positive future based on radical changes – we can
do this!
10 INTRO

1.1 Academy of Future
Rural Spaces in Lower
Saxony
Workshop in Barnstorf
2019 – ISU students
together with the mayor
Jürgen Lübbers
1.2 Academy of Future
Rural Spaces in Lower
Saxony
Conference on urbanrural
development at
TU Braunschweig with
experts, ISU students,
and representatives
of our partner municipalities
The Lower Saxony Metapolis
11

proximity with often unsustainable effects, such as a
high rate of land take and dense commuting patterns,
have been characteristic of recent and current developments
(MSGG 2013; Mühlbach et al. 2021).
Figure 2.1 shows Lower Saxon settlements in relation
to different landscape types based on the classification
of the Lower Saxony State Office for Mining,
Energy and Geology (LBEG 1995). This map includes
the two large cities of Hamburg and Bremen, which
are two independent city states within the German
federal system and surrounded by Lower Saxon territory.
Depending on the landscape type, Lower Saxon
settlements show different sizes and distribution patterns.
The larger cities are situated along the river
bodies and on the foothills with fertile soils, whereas
in the heathland, on the coast, and in the hilly areas
of the Harz Mountains, settlement units are considerably
smaller and more scattered.
For the development and testing of our TOPOI method,
we selected two study regions on the basis of their distinct
development history, urbanization, and landscape
patterns. Both study regions include municipalities
from our partner network. The western study region
Vechta-Diepholz-Verden (A, Figure 2.1) is characterized
by a large number of evenly distributed, mainly
prospering small to medium-sized towns and many
villages in a sandy soil or heath landscape (Geest).
Founded on rather infertile soils, today the region is
characterized by intensive livestock husbandry and agriculture
(Tamásy 2013). The study region of the larger
Braunschweig area (B, Figure 2.1) includes both thriving
cities and declining municipalities in immediate
vicinity. The landscape of foothills is characterized by
very fertile loess soils (Börde), which led to an early and
relatively dense formation of settlements in the region.
2.3. The TOPOI Method
With the data-based TOPOI method, we analyzed the
settlement structures based on eleven planning parameters
of form (area, compactness, building density,
open space ratio), function (functional variety,
population density, retail and services ratio, agricultural
building ratio) and spatial linkages (settlement
density, public transport connectivity, proximity to regional
train stations) (see Table 2.1).
While our method can be studied in detail in several
scientific articles (Carlow et al. 2021; Mühlbach et al.
2021; Carlow et al. 2022; Mumm et al. 2022; Zhu et
al. 2022), in this book, we do not want to focus on the
technicalities of the method but rather on some of the
findings obtained by its application. The first results
concern the definition of settlement units. While the
traditional classification method of the Federal Office
for Building and Regional Planning – BBSR (Figure
2.2) differentiates four main settlement categories,
namely City (independent), Urban County, Rural
County with Densification Tendencies, and Sparsely
Populated Rural County, our TOPOI approach provides
a more detailed and fine-grained understanding
of the diversity of settlement units and their characteristics
due to the defined eleven indicators.
Other findings concern the unequal access to public
transport options, which the TOPOI method helped
us reveal. We found out that roughly 60 % of the area
in our two study regions had a densification potential
based on public transport provision in relation
to population density. On the other hand, approximately
50,000 people have no or only limited access
to public transport (Carlow et al. 2021).
16 PERSPECTIVES IN URBAN-RURAL PLANNING

OLDENBURG BREMEN HANNOVER BRAUNSCHWEIG
A
B
OSNABRÜCK GÖTTINGEN WOLFSBURG
0 20km
Study Regions River / Waterway Foothills
2.1 Built-up Areas and Landscape Types
of Lower Saxony and the two METAPOLIS study regions:
(A) Vechta-Diepholz-Verden and (B) Larger Braunschweig
region. Source: Carlow et Motorway al. 2022; Data: BKG 2012a,b;
ESRI 2018; LBEG 1995.
Main Road
Study Regions
Built-Up Area
Motorway
Main Road
River/ Waterway
Coastal Holocene
River Landscapes
Geest
River Landscapes
Geest
Foothills
Highland
Low Mountain Range
(Harz)
Built up Area Coastal Holocene Highland
Low Mountain Range (
25
km
TOPOI
17

0 1km
0 1km
0 250m
2.6
Exo Satellite Towns, too, can be
found at the urban fringes. As typical
large housing estates from
the 1950s, 60s or 70s, they have a
high functional variety, high population
density, but a low public
transport connectivity. There are
nine Exo Satellite Towns in our
study regions.
2.7
Periurban Villages are also located
at the urban fringes. They are
typically smaller than Periurban
Towns or Exo Satellite Towns.
Nevertheless, they usually have a
medium to high functional diversity
and a medium population density.
A special characteristic is that
they are located close to or have
their own regional train stations.
There are 42 settlement units of
this kind.
2.8
The 37 Small Periurban Villages
we identified usually have a smaller
footprint than the Periurban
Villages but nevertheless a high
functional diversity. However, their
connectivity is relatively low.
0 250m 0 250m
0 250m
2.9
Exo Villages, of which we found
524 in our study regions, are rather
isolated. Nevertheless, they
show a medium to high functional
diversity. They usually have a medium
population density and low
connectivity.
2.10
Small Exo Villages are also isolated.
The 73 we identified show
a high number of buildings with
agricultural use. They are characterized
by a large distance to the
next train station and a low connectivity
in general.
2.11
Disseminated Villages also include
agricultural buildings but at a lower
proportion than Small Exo Villages.
They are dispersed throughout the
territory, are located at a large distance
from train stations, and have
a generally low connectivity.
22
PERSPECTIVES IN URBAN-RURAL PLANNING

0 250m
0 250m
2.12
Agri Villages have a large proportion
of agricultural buildings and
at the same time a high building
density. Like many of the other
village types, they are rather scattered
and have a low connectivity.
There are 35 of them in our study
regions.
2.13
Disseminated Hamlets, of which we
made out 1,071, were the second
most common settlement type.
They are dispersed throughout
the territory, show a high building
density, a large distance from the
nearest train station, and a very
low connectivity.
0 250m
0 250m
2.14
Disseminated Living Agri Hamlets
are the most common TOPOI in
our two study regions, where 4,283
could be identified. This is the
smallest settlement type that is
distinguished by a very low connectivity
and a high building density
with a large share of agricultural
buildings.
2.15
The Exo Industrial Zone is a very
special TOPOS. As a typical industrial
area outside of cities and
towns, it usually contains a small
number of functions, has no population,
a high open space ratio,
low building density, and very low
public transport connectivity.
TOPOI
23

preferred technique – where each axis represents the
range of desirable and undesirable futures. Participants
then explore each scenario’s characteristics,
provide a title for each future, and detail the narratives.
Finally, participants explore the implications of each
scenario through a set of indicators and develop contingent
and robust plans, policies, and strategies that
are refined into recommendations with timelines (Stapleton
2020; Abou Jaoude, Mumm, and Carlow 2022).
Increasing environmental, socioeconomic, or technological
challenges are likely to produce uncertainties
in the built environment and require scenario planning
processes, given their nature and long-term
implications. Thus, exploratory scenario planning is
recommended when external uncertainties (structural
uncertainty) are critical and imminent; conflicting
values and views between stakeholders exist (value
uncertainty); solutions require cooperation between
different scales; or problems and issues are unknown
(Abbott 2005; Avin 2007; Avin, Cambridge Systematica,
and Patnode 2016; Goodspeed 2020). Exploratory
scenario planning fosters systems thinking and seeks
to broaden the range of possible futures. Indeed, this
approach enables users to adequately account and
adapt to uncertainties.
Exploratory approaches to scenario-based planning
ideally result in robust and contingent plans and policies
that help communities better adapt to the future.
However, many scenario planning efforts fail to achieve
this theoretical goal and instead yield only insights
and recommendations or are often not followed up
after presenting the narratives (Avin and Goodspeed
2020). Scenario-based planning projects may involve
public participation and integrate quantitative and
qualitative data (Goodspeed 2020). Various exercises
may use models and sketch tools to generate, assess,
and visualize scenarios and understand future
development patterns and dynamics. Tools and
models are particularly necessary when iterations
are needed to refine and replicate results, or stakeholders
are faced with difficult decisions that require
the consideration of impacts and trade-offs between
scenarios. While many scenario-based planning projects
are essentially qualitative, it is often only regional-scale
projects and large organizations and cities
that undertake and can afford a quantitative level of
analysis. Through various case studies, Stapleton
(2020) demonstrated that effective exploratory scenario
planning does not require the use of tools and
models but rather a structured process and method
that can, alone, yield insights and guide policy. Compared
to traditional urban planning methods, scenario
planning can be a complex, time-consuming, and
costly exercise (Avin 2007). The cost and complexity
of a scenario planning project is contingent upon the
scale (regional, local, etc.), topics, and range of external
forces considered; digital and analysis tools used;
number of experts consulted; meetings held, etc.
3.3. Case Study: The METAPOLIS Project
Several workshops were undertaken as part of the
METAPOLIS research project to formulate four qualitative
scenarios for Lower Saxony. The research
project was conducted at Technische Universität
Braunschweig and Leibniz Universität Hannover in
cooperation with several Lower Saxon municipalities.
The workshops aimed to analyze physical, ecological,
social, and information networks and identify
32
PERSPECTIVES IN URBAN-RURAL PLANNING

3.3 Public Participation
Citizens participating in the scenario process had the opportunity to discuss and
select their preferred futures for the sustainable development of Lower Saxony.
Four Scenarios for Lower Saxony 2050
33

synergies across the urban-rural gradient in Lower
Saxony. Scenarios were then applied to the three
sample communities of Eydelstedt, Detmerode,
and Schöppenstedt. The expert meetings and workshops
were held between 2018 and 2019. Prior to the
scenario development process, an interdisciplinary
team of architects, planners and geoecologists had
devised a systematized process and considered the
13 identified TOPOI types (Figure 3.5; settlement
types or units) and their characteristics, namely
form, functions, and linkages (Carlow et al. 2022). In
subsequent workshops under the METAPOLIS project,
the participants represented more diverse disciplines
including political scientists, data scientists, environmental
scientists and traffic planners, to depict the
future of settlement types and their relations.
An exploratory scenario planning approach and the
scenario-axis technique were selected prior to the
commencement of the project. Initially, experts, academics,
and municipality representatives convened
to discuss their aspirations and visions for different
towns and villages in Lower Saxony (Figure 3.1). Apart
from stakeholders’ values and interests, three guiding
principles were derived from this workshop, namely
green and blue networks, five-minute city, and livable
communities. Data and GIS-based maps were later
collected and analyzed by the researchers to understand
the current conditions in the selected study
areas. Semi-structured interviews were carried out
with academic experts to gather more insights and
learn about the history, challenges and opportunities
pertaining to each discipline. Drawing on the interviews,
the project team collectively created an extensive
list of drivers, including population, migration, age,
disruptive technologies and energy consumption, and
questions that were later illustrated on cards. Key
drivers were also borrowed from the Sustainability
Strategy for Lower Saxony report (MUEBK 2017). The
indicator report of the German Environment Agency
(2017) and the interviews conducted by Böttger,
Carsten, and Engel (2016) on the future of Germany
were consulted, too. These reports and the book were
also crucial for framing questions that addressed diverse
disciplinary perspectives. For example, questions
regarding future urban development included:
(1) will density increase in major urban centers
in the two study areas or will there be more sprawl
especially around big urban centers? (2) What are
the common building types in the two study areas?
(3) Which spatial configurations will help achieve
higher densities? During a series of meetings, the
identified drivers were presented and the purpose,
scope, and timeframe of the scenario exercise were
determined.
During a second workshop, twelve participants convened
to formulate scenarios for the future of the two
study areas (Figure 3.2). Along with a deck of cards
describing previous studies, the questions were used
to initiate discussions. Participants were divided into
two groups and then encouraged to draw causal loop
diagrams and cluster drivers. Cards and questions
served as generative tools to prompt participants
to think beyond their disciplinary perspectives and
overcome presumed assumptions. An uncertainty
and impact matrix, otherwise known as the Wilson
matrix, was employed to help participants prioritize
and narrow down their selection of critical drivers.
Through the scenario-axis technique and plenary
discussions among groups, ‘lifestyles’ and ‘governance’
were selected as critical drivers to formulate
34
PERSPECTIVES IN URBAN-RURAL PLANNING

four first-generation scenarios, namely: Green Communities,
Planned Happy Futures?, New Settlers, and
Communities Repurposed! (Figure 3.4). Each scenario
narrative depicted diverse disciplinary perspectives
and considered issues that emerged during the discussions.
The scenarios reflected interests of stakeholders
(municipal representatives, funding agents,
and expert groups) and were formulated along the
three main guiding principles. After the workshop,
the project team drafted and refined the narratives,
which were later shared and presented to the participants
to solicit their feedback. The scenarios were
then visualized and presented to the public during a
public event at Technische Universität Braunschweig
(Figure 3.3). In a survey consisting of a series of
multiple-choice questions, visitors could select their
preferences for the future of Lower Saxony. The combination
of preferences was then supposed to lead
to a specific scenario. This exercise was intended to
raise awareness among lay audiences of the implications
of their choices and decisions and to discuss the
scenarios with the public.
3.4. Evaluation of the Scenario Building
Workshop
Various unanticipated challenges emerged throughout
the scenario building process. Although regarded as
a well-established ‘standard’ technique in scenario
planning, the workshop revealed the discrepancy
between theory and implementation of the scenario-
axis technique. The technique’s prevalence and
wide appeal are due to its clear, simple, and communicable
structure (Ramirez and Wilkinson 2014).
However, narrowing down the number of drivers to
two critical driving forces required extensive discussions
among participants a considerable amount of
time. Moreover, reaching consensus among interdisciplinary
experts was not easily achieved. Indeed,
selecting the two most impactful and uncertain
drivers required trade-offs between participants,
who reflected on the interests of various stakeholders.
This process has ultimately led to the loss of
insights gained during discussions on causal relationships
and drivers. Some participants noted
that the critical driving forces – lifestyle and governance
– did not closely relate to the project’s focus
or the two study areas. Throughout the workshop,
contrasting perspectives were not perceived as impediments
but rather as opportunities to consider
a broader range of possibilities. A short questionnaire
containing nine questions was handed out
to participants at the end of the workshop. The
questionnaire consisted of free-text and closeended
questions requiring participants to rank
certain tools. Overall, participants were satisfied
with the tools used in the workshop and the plenary
discussions. However, they were critical of the
scenario-axes technique and the short duration of
the workshop, which lasted four hours. While the
workshop employed an exploratory approach to
develop possible future alternatives, some participants
noted that the guiding principles where
strongly embedded in the scenarios and thus reflected
normative aspirations.
Four Scenarios for Lower Saxony 2050
35

4.
PROTOTYPE I:
Eydelstedt,
a Disseminated
Hamlet
4.1 Detached Houses
in the north of Eydelstedt
44 CASE STUDIES

4.2 Historical and Listed Farm Buildings
testify to Eydelstedt’s agricultural origins.
PROTOTYPE I: Eydelstedt
45

4.3 The Bargeriede River
cuts through Eydelstedt and is sometimes more,
sometimes less accessible to all.
46 CASE STUDIES

4.1. TOPOI Description
Eydelstedt is one of the 1,071 Disseminated Hamlets
in our two study regions. Disseminated Hamlets are
the second largest TOPOI group after the Disseminated
Living Agri Hamlet, of which there are 4,283.
Eydelstedt has a population of approximately 250
people. It is part of the municipality of Barnstorf. Altogether,
about 25,000 people live in Disseminated
Hamlets in our two study regions. Most Disseminated
Hamlets are located in the north-western study region
of Vechta-Diepholz-Verden, including Eydelstedt.
Disseminated Hamlets are characterized by their
high building density. They are dispersed throughout
the territory, are located a long distance from train
stations, and have a very low connectivity. Since no or
only a few public transport options are available, they
are primarily reached via individual mobility. On average,
the nearest regional railway station is located
7 km from Disseminated Hamlets. They usually feature
three different functions, including housing, but
no retail. Disseminated Hamlets are usually surrounded
by many other settlements.
Eydelstedt is a village. Spatially, it can be described
as a rather dispersed accumulation of historical
farm ensembles and newer residences, mainly singlefamily
homes. Only few of the historical farms are
still used as such. Today, most former farm buildings
have been converted into residences or small business
premises, such as hair salons or law offices. In
the hamlets, single-family houses have been added
to complement historical buildings. Overall, housing
is the predominant function in Eydelstedt. Vacancies
are not a phenomenon in the village. Besides the few
existing small businesses, there is also an elementary
school and a fire station. However, there is no grocery
store, pub, or café.
The small river Bargeriede is the dominant landscape
feature in Eydelstedt. West of Eydelstedt, it
joins the larger river Hunte. According to a municipal
regulation, areas along the Bargeriede are considered
flood plains where construction is not permitted.
The main potential of Eydelstedt seems to be its remoteness
and the beauty of the surrounding landscape.
The scenic environment with a rich tree population,
tree-lined avenues, and the two rivers offer a
lush environment and many opportunities for outdoor
activities. The building type of historical farm houses
holds enormous potential for reuse. Housing and
small-scale businesses are the dominant uses in the
village. Accessibility by public transport is relatively
low. There is an elementary school bus service eight
times a day. The next train station is located in the
neighboring larger settlement of Barnstorf and approximately
4 kilometers away.
Table 4.1 Attributes of the Disseminated Hamlet of Eydelstedt
A Area [ha] 12.31
C Compactness [%] 65
BD Building Density [buildings/ha] 6.24
OSR Open Space Ratio [%] 93
FR Functional Richness 5.25
PD Population Density [inhabitants/ha] 4.27
RSR Retail and Service Ratio [%] 1
AFR Agricultural Facilities Ratio [%] 14
SUD Settlement Units Density 35.75
PTC Public Transport Connectivity 1.75
PRTS Proximity to Regional Train Station [km] 4.32
PROTOTYPE I: Eydelstedt
47

Scenario A:
The Green Communities of Eydelstedt
LIVING
COMMON
uF.11
FARM
LIVING
FARM CAFÉ
uB.4
uM.2
DENSIFICATION
BETWEEN BUILDINGS
TEMPORARY
STREET GREEN AND
STREET LIGHT
HARVEST
FESTIVAL
DENSIFICATION OF THE
PERIMETER BLOCK
DEVELOPMENT
4.20
64 CASE STUDIES

uF.14
M
FARM
uF.2
uB.13
COMMON
uM.3
LIVING
uG+B.5
COMMON GREEN SPACE
uG+B.8
ACCESS TO BARGERIEDE
MIXED FUNCTIONS WITH
COMMON SPACE
RIDE-SHARE BENCH
PROTOTYPE I: Eydelstedt
65

4.5. Scenario C:
New Settlers in Eydelstedt
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
4.27
78 CASE STUDIES

Dear residents of Eydelstedt,
E
STRIP
It’s nice to have a communal garden that serves as a
multigenerational meeting point! Here in Eydelstedt,
in our new row house, we enjoy all the advantages of
owning our own home, yet without the disadvantage of
having to take care of our own garden. Our children have
the feeling of living at a playground. We enjoy evenings
in the barbecue area. There is always someone who waters
the plants, simply because we are a big neighborhood
community, where people like to help each other.
Whether it’s doing gardening together, having a chat at
one of the charging stations for our e-cars or at a neighborhood
meeting over a delicious cup of coffee: you always
meet someone you know. When I recently removed
the seats from our car to transport a cabinet, Stefan,
my next-door neighbor, offered his help – that’s really
worth a lot! And when we were on our way to Barnstorf,
passing wildflower meadows and fields, he told me that
he was very sceptic about moving into a row house. He
remembered all the row houses from his childhood
with very monotonous facades and gardens as small as
towels. But our houses here in Eydelstedt are anything
but boring and monotonous. The idea of a modular basic
structure that can be expanded according to one’s own
ideas, budget, and needs has really led to great and diverse
houses. I definitely had these concerns too, but
as I said, it was not just the large community garden
that convinced me in the end. I was also impressed by
offers such as the mobile food and medical service for
the elderly or people who are not mobile. Or the idea of
non-hierarchical streets, so that you can let your children
walk to school without worrying: these are strong
arguments for moving here.
Best from the future!
PROTOTYPE I: Eydelstedt
79

Scenario D:
Eydelstedt Repurposed!
4.37 Legend
Residential
Mixed Use
Industrial
Public
Leisure
Forestry
Solidary and Organic
Agriculture
Commercial
Energy
Transformation Area
TOPOS Boundary
Existing Buildings
New Buildings
Existing Streets
New Streets
Green
Water
Agriculture
0.25
km
98 CASE STUDIES

Functions
Since agriculture undergoes a restructuring from
mono-crop farming to vertically organized food production
in modern greenhouses, Eydelstedt, too,
is facing a transformation. New hybrid buildings
emerge that contain spaces for food production,
sales, co-working, for leisure activities, and even
housing.
I. Aquaponics
New production techniques offer the possibility to
grow certain fruit and vegetables with the help of the
circular aquaponic method. This method combines
the rearing of fish or other aquatic animals with food
production. The nutrient-rich water from the fish
tanks is fed to the plants, which are thus not only
watered but also receive valuable nutrients through
the addition of bacteria. The excess water can flow
back into the fish tanks via hoses, closing the circle.
With this method, high-quality food can be produced
on significantly less space with almost no emissions.
II. Hybrid Use
The new Productive Neighborhood or Productive
Rooftop building type allows for hybrid building uses,
contributing to a more vibrant village life. The ground
floor zones are used for public purposes such as a
café or a shop selling the produces grown on the upper
floors, a kindergarten, or other necessary functions.
In addition to this contribution to public life, synergies
are also created between the various uses in the
building, e.g., the use of waste heat for heating the
greenhouses, or the use of geothermal energy via the
foundations of the buildings.
PROTOTYPE I: Eydelstedt
99

5.
PROTOTYPE II:
Detmerode,
an Exo Satellite Town
5.1 Center of Detmerode
The shopping center of the Exo Satellite Town is nearby and
easily accessible for the residents.
102 CASE STUDIES

5.2 Detmerode Residential Area
There are different types of housing in Detmerode.
Here on Geschwister-Scholl-Ring, row houses are lined up.
PROTOTYPE II: Detmerode
103

5.2.
Four Futures
for Detmerode
We developed four scenarios for Detmerode and all
the other sample municipalities. While the scenarios
are equal in terms of their drivers, the way they
develop spatially is, of course, different for each of
the municipalities. However, each scenario follows a
certain development logic.
Scenario A is called Green Communities. It is derived
from a collaborative approach of living and working
in dense settlement structures. Scenario B is called
Planned Happy Future?. Here, the focus is on the efficient
use of land as a resource and the strengthening
of rural and suburban spaces as against the urban
cores in urban-rural agglomerations. Scenario C,
New Settlers, demonstrates how spatial expansion
can be steered in a more sustainable way than with
laissez-faire approaches. The scenario Communities
Repurposed! addresses the spatial and functional
transformation of the different TOPOI types. Unlike
other scenario approaches, all four scenarios are
intended to present a desirable future, even though
some seem to be more desirable and sustainable
than others. All four scenarios follow a certain spatial
logic in the way the community develops as a whole,
in certain subareas, or where transformation takes
place.
Scenario A:
In Green Communities, the focus is on reusing the
existing building stock and internal densification.
Scenario B:
In Planned Happy Future?, the existing building
stock is upgraded in terms of energy efficiency, redeveloped
and potentially extended. In this scenario,
transformation areas are mainly located within today’s
settlement boundaries.
Scenario C:
In New Settlers, today’s settlement boundaries are
expanded to accommodate growth. This scenario is
an exception as it allows new land consumption outside
existing settlement boundaries, whereby new
developments must meet certain sustainability criteria.
Scenario D:
Communities Repurposed! is a scenario that investigates
the redevelopment within existing settlement
boundaries. However, preference is not always given
to maintaining the existing building stock.
110 CASE STUDIES

e1cdb9
Areas of Transformation
5.11 Scenario A: Green Communities 5.12 Scenario B: Planned Happy Future?
5.13 Scenario C: New Settlers 5.14 Scenario D: Communities Repurposed!
Legend
Areas of Transformation
Water
Traffic
TOPOI boundary
Buildings
PROTOTYPE II: Detmerode
111

Scenario C:
New Settlers in Detmerode
uB.17
FRUIT
TREES
uM.7
COMMON GREEN SPACE
uG+B.4
uG+B.8
EXTENSION OF
PUBLIC GREEN
COMMON GARDENS
SHARED GARDEN SPACE
5.32
146
CASE STUDIES

uB.11
LIVING
uF.12
COMMON
LIVING
LIVING
uG+B.12
LIVING
LIVING
uM.6
COMMON
LIVING
COMMON
uF.16
E-VEHICLES AND
CHARGING STATION
HIGH-RISE WITH RESIDENTIAL
COMMON SPACES
MONOCULTURE
PROTOTYPE II: Detmerode
147

6.
PROTOTYPE III:
Schöppenstedt,
a Periurban Village
6.1 Schöppenstedt Railway Station
Mobility hub and the connection to Braunschweig
160
CASE STUDIES

6.2 Schöppenstedt Market Square
Centrally located in the village and with access to the river Altenau
PROTOTYPE III: Schöppenstedt 161

Scenario C:
New Settlers in Schöppenstedt
6.29 Legend
E-Charging Station
Car Lane
Existing Bus Stop
Railway Station
Railway
Railway Station Radius
600m
Bypass Cars
Car Park
Transformation Area
TOPOS Boundary
Existing Buildings
New Buildings
Existing Streets
New Streets
Green
Water
Agriculture
0.5
km
198 CASE STUDIES

Streets, Mobility, Public Space
This scenario entails an increase in traffic areas,
which are designed to be as sustainable as possible
through careful planning. Permeable street surfaces,
the visual separation of lanes, and roadside
greenery make the streets safer.
I. Sustainable Street Design
Since this scenario envisages new development areas,
it allows a new type of street design in terms of
layout and materials used. The newly built roads are
efficient and laid out without dead ends to ensure a
steady traffic flow. In addition, they are designed with
all road users in mind and include a visual separation
of the road space, for example, through differently
colored lanes for cyclists, pedestrians, and motorized
road users. The road surface is permeable to water,
so that rain water can be absorbed in the ground. This
makes the roads both safer for all users and more
environmentally friendly.
II. Charging Stations for E-Cars
In the course of construction works, charging stations
for electric vehicles are installed primarily at the mobility
hubs for arriving motorists and at the most frequented
streets; every new building is equipped with
its own wallbox. In addition, five new charging stations
are distributed across the town, some of them
next to an existing bus stop.
III. Bypass for the Town Center
Even though sustainable private transport is encouraged
in this scenario, motorized traffic should
not run directly through the center. To make this
possible, three parking lots are planned in walking
distance to the town center: one next to the railway
station, another one close to the industrial area, and
the third one at the western edge of the town center.
Furthermore, a new bypass road is constructed
to avoid heavy traffic in the center, which allows the
transformation of historical streets and preservation
of their human scale.
PROTOTYPE III: Schöppenstedt
199

SURFACE FROM
NATURAL,
POROUS
MATERIAL
EFFICIENT
TRAFFIC
8.31
u M.13 PERMEABLE ROAD SURFACES
Sealing of land should be avoided,
as this destroys the habitat for many
creatures and increases the danger
of local flooding in the event of heavy
rainfalls. The permeable road surface
is a solution to decrease gray areas, in
particular in villages. Where asphalt
surfaces disappear, streets built from
natural materials such as stones are a
good option to increase permeability.
(inspired by DAV 2007)
PARKING LOTS
AS PUBLIC SPACE
8.32
u M.14 TRANSFORMED PARKING LOTS
New uses can be envisioned for parking
lots that are empty most of the day.
A pocket garden, a place to play outdoor
chess, an extension of the local
bakery for outdoor seating, a bench to
rest, bike stands etc.; on just 12.5 sqm
of parking space, many uses can be
imagined.
(inspired by Fabian Lippert, LKA Berlin, RBG
(db 2014); Lokale Agenda 21 Wien 2021)
8.33
u M.15 AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES
Autonomous vehicles could be a
solution to make traffic and space
consumption as efficient as possible.
These vehicles transport locally produced
goods from A to B and can also
be used by all inhabitants; they help
transform streets into a safe space for
pedestrians.
(inspired by Senatsverwaltung für Umwelt
Berlin 2021)
CAR LANE
TRANSPORTATION
OF FREIGHT
VIA RAIL
CYCLE LANE
8.34
u M.16 CYCLE LANE
An additional cycle lane is intended to
reduce car traffic in the village. Safe
and convenient use will make it easy
and attractive to switch from car to
bike.
(inspired by Aichinger and Frehn 2017)
8.35
u M.17 RE-ACTIVATION OF
RAILROAD LINES
Reopening old railroad lines shifts
freight traffic back to rails, thereby
reducing car traffic in towns and villages.
Of course, local public transport
around the villages can also benefit
from this. This is a sustainable alternative
to transporting goods by truck
and to individual transport by car.
(inspired by Dostert 2021; MW 2022)
BUS STOPS
SUPPORTING
THE FIVE-MINUTE
CITY PRINCIPLE
8.36
u M.18 SMART DISTRIBUTION OF
PUBLIC TRANSPORT
With a clever distribution of bus stops,
the principle of the five-minute city,
where daily goods and services can
be reached within a five-minute walk,
can be transferred to rural areas,
which often lack public transport options.
On-call mobility solutions could
also benefit from this.
(inspired by Carlow and Hong 2016; Carlow
2022b)
230 URBAN-RURAL INTERVENTION CATALOG

8.4. Green and Blue Networks (G+B)
PLANTS
SPACE FOR
RECREATION
FRUITS +
VEGETABLES
8.37
u G+B.1 GREEN ROOFTOPS
AND FACADES
Due to the shading and thermal buffer
provided by plants, their insulating
effect and evaporative cooling, green
roofs and facades are an innovative
solution for saving energy in buildings
and cooling the immediate surroundings.
In addition, these green spaces
can serve as a habitat for animals.
(inspired by TOPOTEK1 2022)
8.38
u G+B.2 PUBLIC PLAYGROUND
As a meeting place and play area, public
playgrounds are an ideal retreat
for children in cities, small towns, and
sometimes also villages. By greening
them, the relationship to nature can be
strengthened and many things can be
experienced and learned.
(inspired by LML 2022b)
8.39
u G+B.3 LOCAL FOOD PRODUCTION
Food is produced locally using green
areas where fruit and vegetables can
be grown and processed. If done in a
sustainable way, this can decrease the
ecological footprint of food production.
(inspired by Prinzessinnengärten Kollektiv
Berlin 2022)
SOCIAL SPACES
LOCAL GARDENS
8.40
u G+B.4 SPACES OF SOCIAL
ENCOUNTERS
Places of social encounters can have
many forms. They serve as meeting
areas for residents and are important
for a functioning community.
Here, neighbors of all ages and
backgrounds can engage in common
outdoor activities such as gardening,
barbecueing, or playing.
(inspired by LML 2022b; TOPOTEK1 2020)
RECREATIONAL
WATERCOURSE
8.41
u G+B.5 PUBLIC ACCESS TO WATER
Where a watercourse exists, it should
be made accessible to the general
public as a recreational and play area.
(inspired by Atelier Loidl, BPR (Bundesstiftung
Baukultur 2022m))
8.42
u G+B.6 COMMUNITY GARDENING
To provide food locally, new green
spaces are established where the
community can grow seasonal fruit
and vegetables for their own consumption.
For this purpose, underused
green spaces are detected.
(inspired by Gemeinschaftsgarten Allmende-
Kontor e.V. 2022)
Green and Blue Networks
231

IMPRINT
© 2022 by jovis Verlag GmbH
Texts by kind permission of the authors.
Pictures by kind permission of the photographers /
holders of the picture rights.
All rights reserved.
Cover design: Johanna Siebein, Studio Laucke Siebein
Cover image: SpACE Lab at ISU – Institute for Sustainable
Urbanism, TU Braunschweig (spacelab-isu.org)
All diagrams, maps, drawings, and photographs were created
by SpACE Lab at ISU – Institute for Sustainable Urbanism,
unless otherwise noted.
Copyediting: Bianca Murphy
Concept: Vanessa Miriam Carlow, Chantal Karadag,
Olaf Mumm, Kristin Schöning
Design: jovis + Johanna Uhrmann (johannauhrmann.at)
Lithography: Bild1Druck Berlin
Printed in the European Union.
Note by the editors: We have made all possible efforts to
trace references to texts, works or photographs back to their
authors and give them the appropriate credit. We apologize
for any omissions and will correct them in the next issue.
Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche
Nationalbibliothek
The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the
Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data
are available on the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de
jovis Verlag GmbH
Lützowstraße 33
10785 Berlin
www.jovis.de
jovis books are available worldwide in selected bookstores.
Please contact your nearest bookseller or visit www.jovis.de
for information concerning your local distribution.
ISBN 978-3-86859-725-7 (Softcover)
ISBN 978-3-86859-988-6 (E-PDF)