1. General information
Location and description of the intervention
City or FUA
Munich
Region
Europe
Native title of the NBS intervention
Freilegung Hachinger Bach
Short description of the intervention
The Hachinger Brook is a natural water body, which level of water is highly influenced by groundwater. Due to the spatial expansion of Munich, sections of the brook were forced into concrete canals and pipes. The idea of restoring the brook into a quasi-natural state had already emerged in the committee of city panning in 1984. The city council of Munich decided in 2014 is to reconstruct the natural state on a 2,6 km stretch of the Hachinger Brook between Kampenwandstraße and Hüllgraben by excavating it and to turn it into a recreational area. In addition to the stream, the former village pond next to the stream is planned to be restored. (Reference 1) Trees and other vegetation will be planted alongside some sections of the brook. (Reference 1, 2). Because of the reluctance of the landowners on the proposed site of the intervention to accept a brook flowing through their property, in 2020, the implementation still hasn’t begun. (Reference 7)
Address

München
Germany

Location
The NBS is situated in an area, with clear delineation of boundaries and a specific shape (polygon). The NBS project can also have more than one area location (more than one polygon, situated close by).
Area boundary
POINT (11.63339 48.12071)
POINT (11.63248 48.11852)
POINT (11.63137 48.11726)
POINT (11.63137 48.1134)
NBS area image
Source of NBS area image
Reference 1: Landeshauptstadt München, Baureferat (Ingenieurbau). (2012). Freilegung Hachinger Bach Zwischen Kampenwandstraße und Hüllgraben, flyer. München: Baureferat.
Type of area before implementation of the NBS
Unknown
Website of the intervention
https://www.tz.de/muenchen/stadt/berg-am-laim-ort43346/hachinger-bach-soll-wied…
Timeline of intervention
Start date of the intervention (planning process)
unknown
Start date of intervention (implementation process)
in planning stage
End date of the intervention
ongoing
Present stage of the intervention
In planning stage
Please specify "other" stage of the intervention
The project was delayed for years because the municipality couldn't buy the privately owned parts of the site (Reference 4).
Goals of the intervention
- exposing a 2,5km long section of the brook (Reference 3);
- restoring the former pond;
- improving ecological conditions of the water;
- increasing of recreational benefits (Reference 2);
- creating a green corridor with predominantly extensive meadows and shrubs;
- creating "calm bays" equipped with seating facilities;
- implementing structural elements that support the habitats of aquatic and amphibious organisms;
- planting trees along the stream and lake for shading;
- ensuring permanent flow, constant water level of the brook;
- creating seven culverts that meet the requirements for biological continuity;
- three bridges for pedestrians and cyclists;
- creating a 3,000 m long and 4.5 m wide path along the brook (Reference 1);
- creating playgrounds and other recreational areas (Reference 3).
Quantitative targets
The project aims to create:
- approximately 2,600m exposed watercourse
- one pond
- approximately 14 ha of green areas .
- 3,100m walkways and cycle paths
- 4 culverts at larger road junctions
- 3 pedestrian / cyclist bridges
(Reference 1)
Monitoring indicators defined
- Damage savings
- Biodiversity and Design of Green Surfaces
- Greenhouse Effect
- Pollutants
- Eutrophication
- Flood risk
(Reference 2)
Sustainability challenge(s) addressed
Water management (SDG 6)
Stormwater and rainfall management and storage
Improvements to water quality
Green space, habitats and biodiversity (SDG 15)
Habitat and biodiversity restoration
Green space creation and/or management
Regeneration, land-use and urban development
Promote natural styles of landscape design for urban development
Health and well-being (SDG 3)
Enabling opportunities for physical activity
Creation of opportunities for recreation
What types of restoration goals are / were defined for the NBS intervention?
Ecosystem-focused
What activities are implemented to realize the restoration goals and targets?
Rehabilitate and restore damaged or destroyed ecosystems
Restore ecological connectivity
Implementation activities
The project hasn't reached to construction phase yet, no implementation activity has been made.
Type of NBS project
Creation of new green areas
Creation of semi-natural blue areas
Management and improved protection of rivers and other blue areas
NBS domain and interventions
Ecological domain(s) where the NBS intervention(s) is/are implemented
Grey infrastructure featuring greens
Riverbank/Lakeside greens
Parks and urban forests
Green corridors and green belts
Blue infrastructure
Lakes/ponds
Rivers/streams/canals/estuaries
Vegetation Type
Grass
Shrubs
Trees
Please specify how many trees were planted
unknown
Amenities offered by the NBS
Benches and drinking water stations
Playgrounds
Services
Expected ecosystem services delivered
Provisioning services
Water (surface and ground water for drinking and non-drinking purposes)
Regulating services
Flood regulation
Habitat and supporting services
Habitats for species
Cultural services
Recreation
Scale
Spatial scale
Micro-scale: District/neighbourhood level
Beneficiaries
Primary Beneficiaries
Local government/Municipality
Researchers/University
Citizens or community groups
Governance
Governance arrangements
Government-led
Please specify the roles of the specific government and non-government actor groups involved in the initiative
The project was initiated by the municipality as a answer of the increasing demand of the locals for reconstructing the brook (Reference 2). The project was delayed for years and still hasn't started (in 2020) because the municipality couldn't buy the privately owned parts of the site (Reference 4).
Key actors - initiating organization
Local government/municipality
Researchers/university
Citizens or community group
Land owners
Private sector or company
Key actors - Other stakeholders involved (besides initiating actors)
Local government/municipality
Public sector institution
Researchers/university
Citizens or community group
Land owners
Public space owned by the city
Participatory methods/forms of community involvement used
Consultation (e.g. workshop, surveys, community meetings, town halls)
Policy drivers
NBS intervention implemented in response to an Regional Directive/Strategy
Yes
Please specify the "Regional Directive/Strategy"
The study for the holistic evaluation of the project refers to the 4th Article of the EU's Water Framework Directive (2000): "In line with the requirements of the European Union, all Member States are requested to "protect, improve and (re-) clean surface waters to ensure a »good condition«" (Reference 2). This was confirmed in the email correspondence with the contact person, see uploaded doc in the reference section.
NBS intervention implemented in response to a national regulations/strategy/plan
Unknown
Please specify the national regulations/strategy/plan
The email correspondence with the contact person revealed: "The policy drivers that affects the intervention are especially the water legislation of the European Parliament (EG-Wasserrahmenrichtlinie: Richtlinie 2000/60/EG) and the federal law update (Wasserhaushaltsgesetz – WHG) (details in the „Grundsatzbeschluss“ page 5-6)" (see uploaded doc in the reference section).
NBS intervention implemented in response to a local regulation/strategy/plan
Yes
Please specify the "local regulation/strategy/plan"
The study for the holistic evaluation of the project refers to local plans in the following way: "The section of Hachinger Bach to be assessed in this work has been included in the development plan (No. 1725) within the scope of the planning in 199513" (Reference 2).
Mandatory or voluntary intervention
Mandatory (based on policy)
Intervention is mandatory
Spatial planning guidance
Enablers
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS vision/strategy/plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of specific city-level GI/NBS section/part in a more general plan - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify the general plan with GI/NBS section
The area of reconstruction in the Hachinger Bach has been included in the development plan (No. 1725) within the scope of the planning in 199513" (Reference 2)
If there is a relevant strategy or plan, please specify the theme / type of the plan.
Water regulation strategy
Urban redevelopment plan
Presence of city network or regional partnerships focused on NBS - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Presence of GI / NBS research project - mentioned in connection to the project
Yes
Please specify
A holistic evaluation study was prepared by authors from Bundeswehr University Munich to support the planning of the project. (Reference 2).
Subsidies/investment for GI / NBS in the city - mentioned in connection to the project
Unknown
Co-finance for NBS
Yes
Co-financing governance arrangements
Unknown
Was this co-governance arrangement already in place, or was it set up specifically for this NBS?
Unknown
Financing
Total cost
More than €4,000,000
What is/was the Cost/Budget (EUR) of the NBS or green infrastructure elements?
13,510,000
What are the total amount of expected annual maintenance costs?
84,000
What is the expected annual maintenance costs of the NBS or GI elements?
84,000
Please specify cost savings
Unknown
Please specify total cost (EUR)
The cost of the project is approximately 13510000 EUR (Reference 3).The water management office of Munich provides the funding for the project for the substantial improvement of the ecological condition of the area (Reference 3).
Source(s) of funding
Public regional budget
Public local authority budget
Other
Please specify other source of funding
The email correspondence with the contact person revealed: "We plan to use public budget from the city of Munich and budget from the State of Bavaria (Freistaat Bayern). The project is co-funded by the State of Bavaria according to the directives on grants for water management project (“Richtlinie für Zuwendungen zu wasserwirtschaftlichen Vorhaben” - RZWas) (details in the „Grundsatzbeschluss“ page 1-2 and in the „Projektgenehmigung“ page 3)" (see uploaded doc in the reference section)
Type of fund(s) used
Earmarked public budget
Direct funding (grants, subsidies, or self-financed projects by private entities)
Non-financial contribution
Unknown
Business models
Risk reduction model
Urban offsetting model (biodiversity or water)
Please specify other environmental impact
Improvements in diversity and function of urban areas.
Which of the involved actors was motivated by this model?
Public actor (e.g. municipality)
Type of innovation
Technological
Infrastructural innovation
Please specify technological innovation
The brook being covered for 80 years will be uncovered and reconstructed to a quasi-natural state for ecological and recreational purposes (Reference 4).
Novelty level of the innovation
Unknown
Please specify novelty level of the innovation
unknown
Replicability/Transferability
Unknown
Please specify Replicability/Transferability
unknown
Impacts, benefits
Environmental impacts
Water management and blue areas
Enhanced protection and restoration of freshwater ecosystems
Green space and habitat
Increased green space area
Increased conservation or restoration of ecosystems
Reduced biodiversity loss
Increased number of species present
Increased ecological connectivity across regeneration sites and scales
Other
Description of environmental benefits
The sustainability assessment of the project (Reference 2), states that all experts taking part in their assessment expect the project to have a positive impact on biodiversity by restoring brook ecosystems and improving habitats. The project is expected to improve the living conditions for species. The project is expected to improve the ecology of the area and create an environmentally beneficial, green waterfront area. Significant improvements are predicted regarding the diversity and function of the abiotic landscapes. The project is expected to improve the living conditions for species. For the other monitoring indicators that were defined, their expected impact is not given.
Economic impacts
Unknown
Description of economic benefits
Unknown
Social and cultural impacts
Social justice and cohesion
Improved liveability
Health and wellbeing
Gain in activities for recreation and exercise
Description of social and cultural benefits
The sustainability assessment (Reference 2) of the project expects the intervention to have a positive impact on the quality of life of citizens. It is also expected to create opportunities for physical activity and recreation. For the other monitoring indicators defined by the sustainability assessment, no prediction has been given on their expected impact.
Type of reported impacts
Expected impacts
Indicators
The sustainability assessment (Reference 2), mentioned the following evaluations:
- Biodiversity and Design of Green Surfaces
- Greenhouse Effect
- Pollutants/concentrations
- Eutrophication
- Flood risk (Reference 2)
Environmental, social and economic impacts
Green space, habitats and biodiversity (SDG 15)
Health and well-being (SDG 3)
Regeneration, land-use and urban development
Water management (SDG 6)
Analysis of specific impact categories
Job creation: The NBS created ...
No information available
Negative impacts: Did the project cause any problems or concerns?
No information was found regarding negative impacts of the project
COVID-19 pandemic
Unknown (in July 2020)
Methods of impact monitoring
Process of recording NBS impacts
No evidence in public records
Methods used to evaluate the impacts of NBS
Unknown
Evidence for use of assessment
Presence of an assessment, evaluation and/or monitoring process
Unknown
Presence of indicators used in reporting
No evidence in public records
Presence of monitoring/evaluation reports
No evidence in public records
Availability of a web-based monitoring tool
No evidence in public records
Impact assessment mechanism
Name of any specific impact assessment tools
Besides the email correspondence with the contact person revealed that "Currently no monitoring system is concretely planned. But we will very likely plan one when we will start the execution phase of the project. The project is now in the planning phase" (see uploaded doc in the reference section)
Use of GIS in mapping impacts
No evidence in public records
Citizen involvement
Citizens involvement in assessment/evaluation
Unknown
Citizens involvement in the analysis of the assessment/evaluation
Unknown
Follow-up to the evaluation / assessment
Unknown
References
Web links relevant to the intervention
Reference 4: The Hachinger Brook is to reappear again
Referemce 5: The status of the project
Reference 7: Angst um die Wasserader
Documents relevant to the intervention
Attachment Size
Reference 1: Hachinger Brook, flyer (2.14 MB) 2.14 MB
Reference 2: Holistic Evaluation of the project (1.6 MB) 1.6 MB
Reference 3: Description of the project (Draft resolution) (159.22 KB) 159.22 KB
List of references
1. Landeshauptstadt München, Baureferat (Ingenieurbau). (2012). Freilegung Hachinger Bach Zwischen Kampenwandstraße und Hüllgraben, flyer. München: Baureferat.
2. Disse, M., Schwarz, J. and Lisson, M. (2013). Nachhaltigkeitsbewertung: Studie zur ganzheitlichen Projektbewertung der Freilegung Hachinger Bach. München: Universität Der Bundeswehr München.
3. Reissl, A. and Messinger, B. (2012). Draft Resolution: Freilegung Hachinger Bach Zwischen Kampenwandstraße und Hüllgraben. München: Baureferat.
4. Tz.de. (2017). Neuer Park für Berg am Laim: Nach 80 Jahren: Der Hachinger Bach soll wieder auftauchen. [online]. Available at: https://www.tz.de/muenchen/stadt/berg-am-laim-ort43346/hachinger-bach-soll-wieder-auftauchen-neuer-park-fuer-berg-am-laim-8236440.html [Accessed: 31 Jul. 2020].
5. Muenchen-transparent.de. (2014). Submittals of Freilegung Hachinger Bach zwischen Kampenwandstraße und Hüllgraben im 14. Stadtbezirk Berg am Laim. [online] Available at: https://www.muenchen-transparent.de/antraege/3364278 [Accessed: 31 Jul. 2020].
6. Münchener Baureferat. (2017). Neuer Park für Berg am Laim: Nach 80 Jahren: Der Hachinger Bach soll wieder auftauchen. TZ.de [image]. Available at: https://www.tz.de/muenchen/stadt/berg-am-laim-ort43346/hachinger-bach-soll-wieder-auftauchen-neuer-park-fuer-berg-am-laim-8236440.html [Accessed: 31 Jul. 2020].
7. Süddeutsche Zeitung. (2020). Angst um die Wasserader. [online]. Available at: https://www.sueddeutsche.de/muenchen/bogenhausen-angst-um-die-wasserader-1.4757962 [Accessed: 31 Jul. 2020]
Interview
Attachment Size
Interview with the contact person (11.4 KB) 11.4 KB
Comments and notes
Pictures of the NBS
/sites/default/files/nbs/images/1009481444-ein-neuer-park-stadt-will-hachinger-bach-renaturieren-modndnabzea.jpg
Public Images
Reconstruction of Hachinger Brook (2012)
Reconstruction of Hachinger Brook (2012)
Atelier LOIDL, retrieved 08/18/2018 from Anna Kristina Heenes