Article - MBL May 2026 — rcdp arkitektar

Architect Rafael Campos de Pinho believes the new survey by the Housing, Construction and Planning Authority (HMS) shows that current planning policy in the capital region does not reflect the wishes of residents.

The survey was published on Tuesday 21 April. The results indicate, among other things, that opposition to densification increases with age and is greater in the suburbs of Reykjavík than elsewhere in the capital region. The survey also suggests that many respondents are looking toward smaller and medium-sized multi-family buildings, which HMS considers reason "to reflect on whether the composition of new construction sufficiently reflects the diverse housing preferences of households."

Rafael says that if current planning policy continues to be enforced, the distinctive character of the built environment may gradually disappear.

"Someone driving into the capital region for the first time is captivated by what meets the eye. Moderately dense development in a hilly landscape with colourful houses and pitched roofs. This character of the area is both memorable and distinctly Icelandic. Individual aluminium-clad apartment buildings in grey tones fade into the shadow of the warm and cohesive appearance of the Icelandic town and cityscape. These are presumably well-insulated, sustainability-certified and even award-winning buildings, in perfect conformity with Reykjavík City's planning policy — but they could just as easily be almost anywhere in the world," says Rafael.

Whatever it costs

Rafael studied architecture and urban planning at the Brazilian university Escola de Arquitetura Universidade Federal de Minas (EA-UFMG), and also holds an MA in real estate from the economics faculty of the Universidad de Barcelona. He has worked in Iceland for 20 years.

"Over the past decade or so, planning decisions in Reykjavík have revolved around one idea: densification at whatever cost. Every city now wants to become a '15-minute city' — sustainable, efficient, economical and connected to strong public transport. In many ways this is a sensible goal. Dense European cities like Copenhagen and Barcelona have become the primary models for planners.

The ambition is admirable and in keeping with international trends and theories. But the problem lies not in the goal itself, but in the context. We import such ideas without asking whether they apply here. That is a fundamental issue. Do these ideas reflect the reality of how people in Iceland live, travel and use the city? Urban planning must be guided by reality, not by doctrine. We need to be realistic and must not be blinded by ideology."

A clear-cut conclusion

Rafael considers the HMS survey to demonstrate a mismatch between such ideas and the wishes of residents.

"According to the survey, there is a clear gap between the kind of housing Icelanders want to build and the housing that is actually being built. The survey, conducted in March 2026 with over 2,000 participants, brings this out in a clear and decisive way.

When asked what type of housing people expected to live in five years from now, 52% said they expected to live in a detached house or semi-detached house. Only 6% mentioned large apartment buildings — which is the type of housing that has dominated new construction in recent years. Regarding building height, 60% expected to live in one- or two-storey buildings, while only 10% expected to live in buildings of five storeys or higher. Preferences regarding the immediate environment tell the same story. When asked what mattered most in choosing where to live, 50% mentioned good natural light and 51% mentioned adequate parking — well ahead of good public transport connections, which ranked considerably lower. Moderate density was twice as popular as high densification as a preferred neighbourhood option," says Rafael.

Entirely different conditions here

"Barcelona is one of the most densely populated cities in the western world, and densification works very well there. It is important to understand why," says Rafael, pointing out that due to the climate, Spaniards can spend a great deal of time outdoors, well into the evening.

"The Icelandic reality could hardly be more different. Opportunities to spend time outdoors are limited and seasonal. People place great emphasis on natural light, warmth and the comfort of the home. Here, daylight is not a luxury but a necessity," says Rafael, noting that good natural light was among the priorities respondents placed highest in the survey.

As for transport, car ownership has become more of a burden than a convenience in many European capitals. Heavy traffic, congestion charges, lack of parking and better alternatives mean that many people forgo the car. Copenhagen, for example, has become a model city for cycling to work, supported by its rail network.

Reykjavík is fundamentally different from these cities. Due to the weather, cycling is not suitable for everyone — least of all in winter. The car remains the most practical option for many age groups.

We need to be realistic

"The Borgarlína light rail is often presented as the solution to the city's transport problems. While it can certainly improve certain transport corridors and make some journeys more efficient, there is reason to examine what bus rapid transit systems with dedicated lanes (BRT) have — and have not — achieved elsewhere.

The first major BRT system, built in Curitiba in Brazil, significantly improved transport for those who already relied on buses. It did not, however, replace the private car. Despite decades of successful BRT operation, car ownership in Curitiba remains among the highest in the country. The same argument applies here," says Rafael.

His conclusion is that it is best to build moderately dense development.

"This is what is often called the 'missing middle' in planning. Smaller apartment buildings, like those found in Hlíðar, Vesturbær and Þingholт. Moderate density that creates liveable streets, lets natural light into every apartment and eliminates the need for large parking structures," says Rafael.

"Environmental psychologist Páll Jakob Líndal has for years pointed out that a built environment that fails to meet residents' needs does not merely fail aesthetically. It exhausts people. It erodes communities, dissolves culture and gradually undermines mental health. These are not trivial consequences," says Rafael.

Shaped by ideology

"Recent years' development has been shaped by a particular ideology and set of doctrines driven by technical constraints. War on cars, cycling for everyone, streets shaped by turning radii for larger fire engines — because taller and denser buildings require larger fire trucks. Building facades clad in flat aluminium panels, because the specialists say it is ideal for Iceland — durable and low-maintenance, but dull from day one. Each decision seems reasonable in isolation, but together they form a soulless blend of building standards that fits perfectly into a financial spreadsheet.

The result is visible across the entire capital region. Buildings that meet every single criterion on the checklist but fail catastrophically at place-making. Reykjavík has a spirit of place — an Ortsgeist — that took a whole century to build and that people feel even if they cannot point to it. When the character of a city is lost uniformly, there is no identity left that can be recreated. We cannot certify our way back to the streets we love," says Rafael in closing.

Rafael considers Hlíðar in Reykjavík (above) an example of a neighbourhood with moderate density that is well designed.

Planning at odds with what residents want.