Enduring Urban Renewal
An Interview with Marjut Klinga from Mellunmäki-liike
Marjut Klinga, founder of the Mellunmäki-liike, a resident movement in the Mellunmäki neighbourhood of East Helsinki, describes how urban renewal in the area appears to residents as a confusing process, under whose cover valuable green spaces are being built over with new housing. The interview forms part of Grassroots City, an art and research project exploring how local communities adapt to a changing climate.
Could you briefly describe your background: who you are and how you became involved in Mellunmäki-liike?
I’ve always felt proud of where I come from and wanted to do things for my own neighbourhood. Even as a child, I organised games evenings and community work days. My mother was a Social Democrat, and I later joined the Kontula Social Democratic branch as its secretary. When the party decided to close the local health centre, I was furious and resigned. At the same time, I started looking for a new way to work for my neighbourhood. I was invited to join the Mellunmäki-Seura, first as secretary and eventually as chair.
The Mellunmäki-Seura, or Mellunmäki Association, founded in 1965, was small but exceptionally active: it had around a hundred members, even though some 6,000 people lived in the area at the time. City grants made a wide range of activities possible. Over time, however, the membership aged, and younger people did not join. Registered association work and its administrative responsibilities were not appealing. The number shown on the website was higher than the real number of active members.
Eventually, for family reasons, I had to step down as chair. No successor was found, and the association was dissolved. I still feel guilty about that. After that, I founded the informal resident movement Mellunmäki-liike, through which we continue to organise various activities.
I’ve lived in my current home in Mellunmäki for 25 years and have chaired Mellunmäki-liike for a long time. I want to work for my neighbourhood, but sometimes difficult boundaries have to be drawn. The Muslim prayer room of the Kaunismäentie community is one example: some residents hoped we would oppose it, but we saw no grounds to do so. Many people resigned because of that decision.
The zoning of Bredbacka – a new residential neighbourhood planned in the place of an existing forest area – has also caused disagreements, and it may not reflect the views of all Mellunmäki residents.
How does Mellunmäki-liike operate? What are your main ways to advocate for the neighbourhood?
Zoning is our most important issue. We continuously monitor what is happening in the area and try to influence decision-making, for example by submitting statements. In the case of the Myllypuro health centre, I was also involved in a residents’ panel.
Communication is another key task. We took part in developing Korvatunturi Square (Korvatunturinaukio) and managed to negotiate a noticeboard for the square – a process that took three years. I have the key to the board, and only non-commercial information for local residents is posted there.
We also organise various events. A day-care centre and the parish now operate on the renovated square, and we try to arrange joint events with them. Activating older residents is also important. The further you go from the metro station, the older the population tends to be.
The city often asks for our views and statements, and we cooperate with them whenever possible. Applying for grants is difficult, however, because we are not a registered association and applications always require an official background organisation.
How does urban renewal appear in Mellunmäki?
Unfortunately, I see the term as a farce. It is superficial and does not fundamentally address our challenges. I asked city decision-makers whether renewal in practice simply means infill construction. The response was: “But you got the sports park Ojapuisto.” So, according to one city official, renewal in the area amounts to a single park.
City communications emphasise improving neighbourhoods, but this is not visible in everyday life. Construction is justified by the need to safeguard services, yet no new services have appeared. Older residents need indoor spaces, and schools are already utilised to their full capacity. It’s easy to say that people can go to neighbouring districts Kontula or Vuosaari, but that does not replace services in one’s own neighbourhood.
Along Mellunmäentie, the new buildings have only brought hairdressers and barbershops. Three of them already operate around Korvatunturi Square. We would like to see more diverse services.
How would you like the Mellunmäki-liike to be involved in the urban renewal project? What should the city take into account in similar projects?
If urban renewal is not to become a swear word or a joke, it has to start from listening to residents from the very beginning. When the renewal areas were announced, the city could have immediately asked in local forums what renewal means and what residents hope for. The revised city strategy itself says that existing urban structures and their communities must be taken into account.
I would see the solution in bringing local activists together. Any resident could join. Through shared discussions and workshops, we could outline what needs improvement and where development is needed. The results would be compiled into a document and taken forward. The co-design of health centres could also serve as a model. The most important thing is to plan together from the outset, even if not all ideas can be realised.
Many planners have a good attitude: they join walks and workshops. Still, we would hope they would also attend residents’ own events, not just official ones. Unfortunately, it is common that planners responsible for an area do not appear at local events. It is frustrating to spend time on plans that never progress to implementation.
What role does local nature play in Mellunmäki?
We moved here from Itäkeskus years ago because of lower rents and a calmer environment. Bus connections worked, and forests were close by. We would not move back to Itäkeskus. Nature in Mellunmäki is important to us.
Mellunmäki has traditionally been a green district. Now Mellunmäentie has changed: buildings form a wall-like edge alongside streets, forests are felled, and a single pine is left standing. Greenery is shifted onto rooftops as sedum, even though the area’s real strength has always been its streams and forests. Green roofs do not replace ground-level, diverse green corridors.
We don’t need ski tracks outside our front door, but the situation of the Mellunkylänpuro stream shows what happens when impermeable surfaces increase: the stream seeks new paths, flood risk rises, and stormwater problems worsen.
Do you see climate change in your everyday life?
Mellunmäki has few water features, but climate change is still visible. In Vuosaari, especially around Mustavuori, moving through ditches and former bog areas has changed. You used to know where paths ran and what shoes you needed. Now you always have to be prepared with rubber boots.
In Mellunmäki, the changes show particularly in stronger and more frequent windy days. Summers are longer, hotter and more oppressive, with more humidity in the air. Our cottage near Kouvola also reflects the change: water movement affects cultivation, and local farmers say that they’ve had to consider switching to entirely new crops, such as maize and sugar beet. Water easily destroys barley and rye. The EU has even encouraged testing new crops and has had to compensate for lost harvests.
What opportunities or problems do you see in the zoning of Bredbacka?
The city justifies building in the area by saying the Bredbacka forest is not old enough to warrant protection. Yet its diverse green spaces could be a strength: the closer you get to Helsinki’s eastern border, the more nature-oriented housing could be offered.
The plan would bring around 2,000 residents to Bredbacka. The city says it has reduced the floor area, but a predominance of low-rise housing does not solve the demands brought by the tram. Detached and terraced houses also consume just as much land as apartment blocks. Discussion must continue to find a shared vision for the area’s future.
The city wants to reroute the stream under the power line to maximise buildable area, while at the same time there are plans for possibly cabling the power line underground in the future. If Helen (the manager of the electricity network) were to place the line underground in the 2040s, where would the stream go then? The stream’s current location would allow underground cabling while preserving valuable forest. Our position is clear: Mellunkylänpuro must not be moved. Ecologically, constant relocation of a stream is unsustainable.
The security perspective has also changed. Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine has highlighted the vulnerability of infrastructure, which must be taken into account in urban development as well. Underground cabling of power lines could suddenly become an urgent necessity.
How does the Mellunmäki Movement seek to influence the area’s future?
We actively monitor planning projects: the zoning plan for Mellunmäki metro station was made public in November 2025, and the Bredbacka plan in spring 2026. We write opinion pieces and submit proposed amendments. We have considered, for example, a 3D model showing the development of the whole Mellunkylä area from the Kontula shopping centre to Itäväylä. This would help examine the area as a whole: could taller buildings, for instance, be placed along the four-lane Kontulantie between Kontula and Mellunmäki, stepping down towards Itäväylä?
Another concern is the preservation of Mustavuori forest. The fear is that agreeing to even small encroachments will lead to further expansion of construction. The tram project is also uncertain, even though housing for 2,000 residents is planned along its route.
We aim to influence plans before they are approved. We take part in events and produce alternative visions, such as our proposal for the development of Mellunmäki presented at the East Helsinki Nature Event on 13 November 2025.
How could architects and planners work more smoothly with local communities?
Planners and politicians should understand that local nature means real nature within walking distance and not, in Mellunmäki’s case, the forests of Sipoo nearby. If city strategies promise to safeguard local nature, this must be reflected in decisions.
Cooperation with residents should begin at a very early stage, before plans are even drafted. The weight given to opinions should also be reconsidered: long-term residents or those who work locally have a different relationship with their neighbourhood than people who have only recently moved in.
The Mellunmäki-liike strives to look at the area as a whole and is in constant dialogue with residents. City officials have asked us to take part, and the movement is already trusted almost like a formal organisation.
