Authorization report Helsinki decided yesterday to demolish controversial dam – However, there are embarrassing issues on the road to historical change

City|Authorization report

Late on Wednesday evening, 48 Helsinki councilors rejoiced.

The problem of duration in the wheelchairs of eternity was now ahead: the council decided to start investigating the demolition of the Vanhankaupunginkoski dam.

Numerous initiatives and studies have been carried out on the dam over the years. Landing has been defended above all by improving the conditions of migratory fish.

There has always been a wall against it.

This time the initiative went through, but explanations are still ahead. The decision of the council does not directly mean that the dam will actually be demolished sometimes.

Concern a large pile of different question marks is associated with a cracking stone wall. The city must make a dam building protection law, water rights and nature conservation law estimates.

The most interesting issue is related to building protection. Helsinki was founded at the mouth of the Vantaanjoki River in 1550, and the National Board of Antiquities has classified the area as a nationally significant cultural environment. It is probably no exaggeration to say that the place is unique in Finland.

The city must therefore find out whether the dam can be dismantled in whole or in part without losing the protection values ​​of the built environment.

The nature conservation assessment must find out how landfilling would affect, among other things, the Vantaanjoki aquatic ecosystem, fish stocks in particular and the water balance. The wall has stood still for almost 150 years and has thus had its own impact on the environment.

The dam is protected by the s-3 protection mark, and its demolition requires a new town plan. Landing is also likely to require a new water permit, which will require the authorities to weigh the various values ​​in the area against each other.

The civil service according to previous studies, the revocation of the protection designation and the demolition of the dam may be “challenging but not impossible from the point of view of the legal regulation of building protection”.

In the past, dismantling has been considered impossible. So what changed now?

The answer is political will. The Greens convinced the majority of the council that dismantling the dam is a good thing. This is certainly due to the fact that in recent years there has been more talk about the living conditions of migratory fish nationwide.

Now the investigations are being done with the idea that every stone will be turned out of the way to make demolition legally possible.

And because of the great passions associated with the dam, the matter is likely to be settled in the administrative court in the end.