Atlantis #18.3 by ATLANTIS

EDITORIAL It is a paradox to start an editorial with a mention to the last issue, which was dealing with spatiotemporal relations. A widely discussed topic in the academic world resulted in a surprisingly big amount of contributions. The editorial team appologizes for the mistake of not printing the project Tranferium + in the previous issue, under the topic spatio-temporal relations. The project is printed in its full lenght in this issue. Acting small and thinking big, or big ideas from little people, and the search for alternative urban formulation processes, we surely expected a greater response to our theme. Unfortunately as it seems acting small is something really out there, far from any institutionalized environment. A do-it-yourself urbanism is created by people building their houses, exchanging ideas in weblogs, negotiating their movements and creatively appropriating the spaces planners have prepared in their offices. Bottom up happens. It cannot be done, it can be initiated. It is the most pragmatic approach to the urban reality and it cannot be

claimed to be part of the academic curriculum, the content of which is to be discussed in the coming issue. Receiving a cry for the loss of the critical student, we cannot resist addressing the question of how much the institution itself has contributed to this loss. Is higher education turning into a massive reproduction of employers or can it still promote freedom of thought and creative initiatives, within the offered programs, both in terms of content as much as of structural organization. As Confucius reminds us learning without thought is labor lost. Not claiming to think big, we remain aware that we should not allow education to prevent our learning. Cristina Ampatzidou

editorial contents from the board polis acting local in a global world - forewarnings from the

10 14 20

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;modernâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; era my del.ici.ous tranferium + housing demolition: to which good cause in urban planning and design?

24 29 30 36 38

visual dictionary beijing comment ina klaasen education in the mirror agenda polis partners

CONTENTs

02 03 04 05 06

The summer is coming!

from the board

Everybody has plans for the summer. Many go on holiday. Polis also goes on holiday. A trip to Iran with 40 people, with students of course and some teachers. Until the summer we are busy with the preparations of the big trip to Iran. An enthusiastic trip commission and some participants are making preparatory analyses, designing the trip guide, regulating visas etc. It is an enormous work, but by being occupied with the country before the journey starts, the impressions in real life will be more incredible and fascinating. April was for Polis the month of the urbanism week and the exhibition ‘History & Culture & Urbanism’. The exhibition about Iran is visited by a lot of people. Extensive analyses of the cities Isphahan, Persepolis and Teheran gave a beautiful image of the urbanism and history of the country. Next to the exhibition, there have also been organized lectures and film evenings, which though have been visited less good. In spite of this result Polis had a good chance to promote urbanism in these weeks. With that fact we as Polis are very glad. Hopefully we made more students enthusiastic for the urbanism and for Polis. Short before the summer holiday I will call on for students who are interested in a task in commission or board of Polis. A month after the summer holiday a new board is necessary, which will take the responsibility of the organisation in our place. Do you like to build new social contacts, to learn more about how to run an organisation and organise activitities besides your study? We search for enthusiastic students who want to be a member of the board. Contact us by e-mail on polis@bk.tudelft.nl or visit us at kab. 9.51. At last, I want to thank the editorial board for the new edition of Atlantis for the summer. An edition which totally fits in our year’s theme ‘Act small, think big’. Good luck with the making of the next Atlantis, for the first time an educational edition. A special word of thanks to the exhibitions and urbanism week commission for all the work and effort to make the urbanism week a success. You were great, despite all the work pressure. The final result was amazing! Erwin Stoffer

POLIS - platform FOR URBANISM

Urbanism Urbanism is energetic, following and guiding. Urbanism is subject to changes in society and discussions. As a practising Urbanist, it is important to take cognizance of these changes and to take up a position in society. This means for science as well. In doing so, the Urbanist fully is able to project his or her view on society. Urbanist Platform To determine positions for Urbanists in practice and in science, Polis created a platform. Urbanists are encouraged to enter this platform through displaying various activities such as excursions, lectures, debates, symposia or contests. The periodical Atlantis plays an important role in this. It gives a survey of all those activities, and, moreover, it acts as a medium for discussions

Consultation Polis is the link between science and practice. Polis is guarding contacts with various Urbanist representatives. And Polis is guarding the quality of Urbanism education by conferring with several parties in the Faculty of Architecture. Practice and science are tested in the consultations. Consultations with related organizations both in and outside the faculty are being held to reinforce the basis of Polis. Polis Trust The Polis Trust was founded by Polis Urbanism Platform to support financially individual and small-scale initiatives which flow from the daily practice in Urbanism or science. Please contact Polis to make an application. The members of the Polis Trust are: Roy Bijhouwer, Quadrat Urbanist, office for Urbanism, Architecture and Landscape Design, Esther Heemskerk, Polis vicepresident and Urbanism student, Miranda Reitsma, editor “Stedenbouw en Ruimtelijke Ordening” magazine, Maarten Schmitt, The Hague Urban Planner, Thom Wolf, Dura Bouw Amsterdam adjunct director. Gifts are more than welcome by giro 8522358, stating “Polis Trust”.

on POLIS

History Polis was founded by professors and students of the department of Urbanism in the Faculty of Architecture Delft in October 1989. Owed to the forces of changes in education it was obvious that the wish to reinforce and improve the quality of Urbanism education led to the founding of Polis. In addition, an important objective of Polis is to create a favourable atmosphere in which the interaction of education, science and practice is intense.

Acting local in a global world – forewarnings from the ‘modern’ era ALEXANDER g. VOLLeBREGT

[Current] intellectualism (…) is blind to the mode of existence and co-existence of perceived objects, to the life which steals across the visual field and secretly binds its parts together. (M. Merleau-Ponty, “Phenomenology of Perception”) Looking at the present global state of affairs, we observe that seldom in history has there thrived such a prosperous economic development; specifically in the West have intense financial growth patterns been witnessed.1 The results of the so-called ‘First world’ nations have produced economic frameworks that warrant optimal financial revenues. The foundation of their establishment has been set to ensure that through deep-rooted economic structures, a continuous profit-oriented urban expansion is realized. The embeddings of capitalistic structures – through policies, regulations, and control – facilitate the necessary transactions required for successive progression. ‘Third world’ countries, which may or may not have been exploited along their evolutionary pathway, currently find themselves in a complex situation. While they strive to escape their current predicament, outdated international agreements seemingly streamline the financial dispersal of monetary grants to the nations willing to comply with this intricate global economic model. Freedom, liberalism or democracy it seems, go paired with a capitalistic ‘way of being’. The question I put forth is: To what end, and to what e/affect? Before we try to answer this, we need first look into what type of urban model is required to create such an elaborate economic framework. The optimal urbanities of the Western first worlds are today the product of a Modern conditioning – a contained urban setting. Regulation, standardiza-

tion, and control are the keywords to ensure the maximum profitability of these urban worlds. Today we witness how the legacy of modernity still affects the spaces of the city. A homogenous urbanity extends over the natural surrounding, as ‘thin’ urban spaces underlie the contained pockets of urban livelihood.2 Vibrancy, dynamism, and vitality are seemingly only discovered within the historical centers; a legacy of the traditional city. Here one can experience the ‘thick’ spaces of the city, where the spatial configuration and layering of space-times experiences offer the opportunities for vivacity.3 Beyond these historical centers however, we find the peripheral spaces of the city where industrial areas, housing quarters, recreation zones and business parks exist as separate units in a fragmented urbanity; spatialized categorizations of urban sorts, which in turn establish the ‘optimal’ urban setting wherein each of its pre-programmed operations are executed; each spatial unit containing its own homogenous life-world; a gridlocked layout in which creative cultural evolution is virtually eradicated. So what in fact does this ‘optimal’ engender? Borrowing insights from systems theory, we learn that optima are attainable through direct relations; one-to-one correspondents where cause and effect are closely, if not entirely related. In fact pure optimums only truly exist where the ‘ins and outs’ are directly correlated; an organization that can assure such an absolute condition can only be found in a closed system; acting like a vacuum or container of relations. This entails by definition that the ‘system’ is established with clearly defined and highly rigid borders where direct relations are ‘properly’ inserted or extracted, and monitored; the fixed exchange of materia

1 Source: GeoHive (http://www.geohive.com) 2 See Read, S.A., ’Thick’ Urban Space: Shape, Scale and the Articulation of ‘The Urban’ in an inner-city Neighbourhood of Amsterdam, presented at the 3rd Space Syntax Symposium, in Atlanta (2001). 3 I intentionally use this word to clarify the life generating conditions that traditional city centers generated, and are apparently still the most commonly frequented spaces of the city. ‘Vivacity’ stems from the words ‘viva’, meaning life and ‘city’.

passing from one segment to the next, producing its projected causal effects. Similar to a computational mainframe, the system of logics adhere to ones and zeroes, with little, in fact no space for ‘error’, ‘marginality’ or the ‘residual’ – adjectives that are inherent in creative practice. And what could possibly be the effects of such a closed model of thought within a continuously evolving world? What are the consequences of this optimal system of operations? We can logically propose that the parts of a system should reflect aspects of the whole. The internal effects on the societies that inhabit a closed and directly related urban setting would likewise result in what one could refer to as a society of direct relations. If each inhabitant, or cell, in such a system strives for its own existence – an inherent human condition – we result in a society of entirely dependant individualism, an almost Darwinist mindset in its surrounding constituents; a closed and competitive society yet adhering to highly governed authorities. While we reflect how the early 20th century illustrates the epitome of the ‘disciplinary society’, the new millennium societies of our contemporary metropolis are undergoing intense transformations as a merger of disciplined societies from across the globe co-inhabit spaces governed by foreign politics. Globalization – while creating new economic possibilities which further exploit Third World resources – not only redistributed foreign goods, but also converge people, ideas, and beliefs of myriad foreign cultures. However, here is where the unintentional effect of this process or exploitation starts to become more apparent and present in everyday urban life. The contained system, in which they operate,

starts to destabilize. The former direct correlation between the space of the city and its cultured society would undergo serious alterations. A new society consisting of so-called ‘minorities’ starts to inhabit the urban life-worlds of a previously contained society giving rise to frictions in the socio-spatial relations in the urban fabric. Eruptions become apparent in the evolutionary process of an ‘imploding-exploding’ city (Lefebvre 1970). The public space turns into spaces of outcry as the residuals of the constructed societies strive to effectuate their presence, seeking solidarity in their new urban environments. As a result, the ‘ministers of knowledge’, the political organs of urban life seem confused as they loose control over their citizens. They transmute the misfortune of their theories, into theories of misfortune. (De Certeau 2002) And how do they respond? With a ‘Hammer and Rock’ (Davis 1990) they re-establish their authority over their citizens; coming down hard with new regulations to enforce the proper behavior of their constituents leading to increased control over a new and seemingly uncontrollable society. Tension increases as the individuals strive to find their place in the city. Harder reactions follow from both sides generating the eventual society of the 21st century, a ‘society of fear’ reigned over by a ‘government of control’; a society where those that fall out of the constructed order, are destined as ‘errorists’, or worse, terrorists. The ultimate effect is a configuration with a socio-spatial segregation blindly enforced by its own leadership. A spatial causality emerges; from a disjunctive and fragmented urbanity to a disjunctive and fragmented society. The evolution of ‘the urban’ has resulted in what one could term as an increasingly complex city.

Complex (not complicated) by its layering of forms and relations in intricate realms; a physical space-time reality as new forms of mobility and motility emerge reconfiguring such notions as ‘proximity’; an apparent ‘virtual’ reality become visible as we begin to acknowledge the ‘lived spaces’ of the city where social beings inscribe their temporal spatiality in a city etched with modernistic scriptures; and also in the emergent ‘digital’ reality in which new forms of inhabitation through digitalized movement and communication emerge as global informational access instigate an open interrelated system of planetary 4 relations. However, these ever-increasing dense urban spaces are seemingly still attempted to be understood by an outdated and simple modernistic perspective which struggles to regulate, yet indirectly only further entangles its correlations. Edward Soja referred to the creative lived spaces of the city as the ‘Third Worlds’ (Soja 1996), the spaces where desires and aspirations are realized. Our contemporary urban planners, entrapped in their ‘set’ perspectives, limited by their own blind fields strive to induce creativity resulting in such notions as ‘creative economies’. Preconceived and regulated pockets of opportunity are inserted, from garage like spaces (in the form of studio, ateliers, etc) which spatially and financially support creative activity beyond a ‘normalized’ world, to policy regulated support systems seducing creative minds to exact their aspirations within an artificial milieu. 5 Many of these initiatives only implemented after their market-value has been researched and illustrated as being economically viable, or proven to be low-risk investments. Presented as culturally enriching, these often state funded initiatives are eventually yet another example of a misguided approach which secretly

only further empowers the governing bodies. The so-called third world capitals or developing nations, whether found in South America, Africa or South East Asia have potentials to develop and evolve beyond our current limited rationalized perspectives. We can not see beyond that which we cannot perceive; consequently, the established relationship wherein the dependency of developing nations for financial support from the developed nations is upheld. So while such nations may have not yet reached a similar economic condition as that of the advanced West, a potential to this seemingly degraded state lies hidden; there still remains an opportunity to evolve towards an urban model that is aware of the societal consequences of overdevelopment. The current pursuit for new development strategies mounting up in the East is one that will undeniably reshape global relationships for all time. While it seems that the world waits which direction China, Russia and India wish to embark, anxieties and tensions escalate as economical and environmental doom scenarios 6 are projected and counteract measures are hypothesized and researched. 7 ‘Size really does matter’ is a conclusion that can safely be made as the overwhelming population of China and India has the capability to effect dramatic change on a global scale. If natural resources have proven their worth, then the human resource capital of China (1.3 billion) and India (1.1 billion) amounting up to more then 1/3rd of the world’s total population will perhaps prove to be the greatest resource yet. 8 While the development and growth of China towards an inevitable super power arise, urban development strategies are conjured up

4 For a further elaboration concerning these three notions of reality refer to my paper Immaterial Relata in the Urban Construct in the forthcoming publication De-/signing the urban: Techno-genesis and the urban image. Bruyns, G. & Healy, P. (editors) 5 In the Netherlands there exists the ‘Broeiplaats Beleid’ (Breeding Places Policy) to stimulate intellectual innovations. 6 Rise in CO2 (carbon dioxide) emissions resulting from ‘higher’ standards of living as private means of mobility (e.g. motorized vehicles) threaten a rise in global warming at an unprecedented scale. 7 Italy for example opts to confront the quantity of China’s mass-produced designed textiles and crafts with high-end quality designs aiming at the middle to higher income populace. 8 While oil, coal and natural gases have the ability to produce direct financial revenues as an exportable asset, the exportation of ones cultured inhabitants simultaneously dis tributes all the cultural attributes that a nation comprises. Languages, beliefs, foods, and everyday way-of-life are baggage that migrating individuals in avertedly carry with them. This sets in process incremental flows of new assets establishing enhanced relations and inter-dependencies.

to facilitate possible new futures; particularly since western financial guru’s are invited to help reorganize the former industrial based structure into a digitalized based software and hardware structure. At first it seems that the East looked to the far West to study and replicate the massive development strategies illustrated particularly in North America. Large urban projects were initiated in order to realize higher densities of peoples, activities and eventually economies. At a later state, European models were appropriated as ‘new towns’ were emerging that had overly distinct European flavors as witnessed in the recently completed ‘International Automobile City’ 9 in the new town of Anting near Shanghai. One would almost suspect that the West has been invited to ‘colonize’ the urban field with their praxis and mindset.

‘westernize’ their current urban models, but must be aware of the consequences that it brings with it. They have the opportunity – perhaps even the obligation – to progress in a manner that is mindful of the social and environmental consequences resultant by the Western model of development. Undoubtedly, the effects upon the time-honored cultural identity through hasty yet enforced spatial and political restructuring may likewise transpire to be detrimental. These usually hidden attributes are destructive, not only for its current livelihood, but also for all living matter now and in our futures.

However, while the Western model may seemingly prosper, we can also witness the consequences that such a ‘productive’ model inflicts upon its constituents. The gradual decline in the overall health condition of its ‘productive’ citizens is more and more apparent. Not only does this result to financial consequences as stress related health care costs account for approximately 12 percent of the gross domestic product (!), escalating yearly, but the social consequences are perhaps even more alarming as many of us are not aware of the emotional, cognitive and physical consequences as we strive to manage the stresses of everyday living in increasingly denser and demanding worlds. 10 While the local inhabitants of these nations tend to suffer from this overall process of constant development, the citizens across the globe are suffering from the environmental effects that this process produces. The East may wish to engage in a process to

Alexander G. Vollebregt born in Uganda and raised in various African nations from a Dutch father and mother from the Dutch colony, Curaçao is an architect and assistant professor at the Faculty of Architecture at the Delft University of Technology (TU Delft). Coordinator of Spacelab: Research Laboratory for the Contemporary City, he also directs Spacelab¹s trans-disciplinary Urban Body studio. He is concerned with understanding the city, its architecture and its inhabitants as Œco-active bodies¹ woven togethet through extended relations into a fabric of the urban everyday. His research is concerned with the city as a process and as product of the real and virtual. He recently published ŒHidden Places, Hidden Powers¹ in ³Visualizing the Invisible² (Techne Press, Amsterdam 2006) and ŒImmaterial Relata in the Urban Construct¹ in ³De_/signing the Urban² (010 Publishers, Rotterdam 2006) and has been a visiting scholar at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), the Architecture Association, London (AA), and the Istituto Universitario di Architettura (IUAV) in Venice. He has run international workshops exploring urban concerns in Istanbul, Venice, Rome, Madrid, Beijing and Douala often collaborating with Stalker_ON, and has contributed numerous conferences in Europe, Asia and Africa.

9 AS&P (Albert Speer and Partners) 10 Forty-three percent of all adults suffer adverse health effects from stress; 75 to 90 percent of all physician office visits are for stress-related ailments and complaints; stress is linked to the six leading causes of death – heart disease, cancer, lung ailments, accidents, cirrhosis of the liver, and suicide; the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has declared stress a hazard of the workplace. (http://www.healthyplace.com/Communities/Anxiety/stress_4.asp)

MY DEL.ICI. OUS t ags DIY open source a ctivism webzines

www.grafittireserarchlab.com

www.l-e-a-k.com

www.wonderland.cx

www.forgotten-ny.com

www.abandoned-places.com

www.foundationbad.com

www.cityofsound.com

www.research.eyebeam.org

www.subtopia.blogspot.com

www.monu.org

www.anarchitecture.blogspot.com

www.informationlab.org

9 3

30 km

25 km

20 km

15 km

10 km

5 km

1 km

5 min

15 min

25 min

30 km

25 km

20 km

15 km

10 km

5 km

7 6

Green Industrial / Industrial park Business high / Business medium Metrostop Trainstations Highway arterias / Moscow ringroads Secondary roads Railwaytracks

1 km

ROCK CONCERT

GREEN

COMMERCIAL

MODULES

Housing Demolition: to which good cause in Urban Planning and Design? EDWARD HULSBERGEN

Why bother about housing demolition? The aim of this article is to discuss demolition in the context of urban planning and design (urbanism). Why not leave the decision to demolish housing stock in the hands of the housing specialists? Why not let them have their way to change the housing differentiation (which in the Netherlands, strangely, is called: herstructurering (restructuring)? Edgar & Taylor (2004) state that “new housing can be a driver of urban regeneration, and decent housing is an essential ingredient of any regeneration scheme” (p.153). They also observe, that although “the general history of urban regeneration and renewal is that it has been housing led, there is a widespread acceptance that area renewal cannot simply be housing focussed” (p.168). This ‘acceptance’ however seems in the Netherlands more often than not a form of lip service, if we look at the majority of projects in the practice. The decision to demolish part of a neighbourhood or district, and replace with new building and functions, is an example of drastic planning. Demolition is, as Van Kempen et al (2006:12) put it: “by far the most radical option to ‘improve’ a housing estate”. (1) Generally speaking, the decision to demolish housing is a consequence of a distinct problem definition and choice for a specific (housing) solution direction. In this problem definition there is apparently no (longer) space for maintenance, repair or renovation. When costs no longer match benefits, demolition and newly built will seem a rational decision. However, who decides about the lack of benefits, and what counts as costs, as demoli-

tion is no less than an irreversible activity. From an urban planning and design point of view, housing demolition is one of the tools to improve the conditions for a good spatial and functional organisation on various spatial levels; from the neighbourhood up to the region. Housing demolition might be right from a housing-led problem definition. The question, however, is which urban interests are included in this definition of the ‘problem’ and proposed ‘solution’? Roberts (2004:28) states that: “it is important to realise that there is an institutional as well as a physical dimension to the occurrence and persistence of urban physical problems. The absence of an adequate institutional capacity to intervene in the cycle of physical decline has proved to be a major impediment to the regeneration of many urban areas”. He also observes that “many public policy decisions are made without a full appreciation of their spatial consequences”, where policymakers and practitioners alike have great difficulty identifying “the urban problem” (Roberts, 2004: 23, 24). This is based on British experiences, but recognisable all over Europe. Replacement of the built environment is subject of intense discussion, related to spatial scale, ownership, use and other interests: see Box 1 for a limited overview of arguments for and against demolition. Demolition and urban considerations Urbanism is the study and practice of the spatialfunctional organisation of areas on various spatial scales, from building blocks to transnational regions. Urban planning and design are important to deal with spatial structural interventions in

relation to societal questions at large. Sooner or later, demolition and replacement of housing will include a variety of interests; of actors, sectors, on various scales. Also questions will arise about the sustainability of transformation activities. (2) An urban sustainable vision (perspective) concerns the long term continuing adaptability of the city and region within the changing framework of social and economic demands of society. Concrete interventions (projects, among these demolition and building) in this physical-functional organisation are short term but nevertheless crucial to obtain the goals on the long term. Urban considerations in relation to demolition can be many, ranging from urban structural questions (spatial and functional) to themes of a more social nature (the role and importance of actors; vulnerability and deprivation). From the perspective of urban planning and design (urbanism), one can imagine the difference between a housing-led and an urban-led rationality concerning the purposes and effects of demolition. Urbanists will ask questions like: Will the demolition and (re)building improve the spatial-functional structure of the area, and help to diminish problems? If demolition is an option to create diversity, what is to be built anew to avoid another kind of future â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;monotonyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;? What is the available space for more functional diversity in the neighbourhood, and could new functions in the neighbourhood contribute to the diversity on urban scale? How to define new relations between collective and private spaces? How to deal with cultural historical interests, especially the urban elements that are characteristic for the period of construction? What is in the development of the location the relation between physical-spatial in-

terventions and social-economic-cultural effects, with special attention to spatial scale? What is the attention to recent themes like safety, population composition, social-economic diversity, poverty, new technologies, and also planning and design instruments? Some conclusions for immediate implementation Though the discussion about demolition and (re)building is yet far from final, some conclusions can be formulated and advices proposed to implement in the regeneration practice. 1 â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Urbanism (urban planning and design) is to be considered as a frontline discipline in the integrated regeneration approach of neighbourhoods and districts. In the present common practice in the Netherlands demolition is mainly based on housing stock management arguments. This should change. Demolition and (re)building are instruments, and might be strategic instruments; strategic here means that the intervention solves a specified problem and at the same time triggers, stimulates or supports other necessary developments, e.g. economic opportunities. Demolition and building should always be implemented in a clear relation to other interventions. - Demolition is only a good instrument for the construction of a sustainable urban living environment if the urban structure is (also) being improved and new qualities are being added. Demolition should improve the connections within the area and with the other parts of the urbanised area. New building should increase the visual, tactile and auditory information for users,

and should support with priority the safe uses by pedestrians and cyclists (Salingaros, 2005a; Salingaros, 2005b). - Demolition should contribute to the improvement of the technical, functional and personal networks, and help to creating an environment with good opportunities for time-efficient uses for residents and other users (Dupuy, 1991; http://www.networkcity.bk.tudelft.nl). - Newly build environment should include new technologies. History shows that new technologies (sewage, water, energy, mobility) were always neglected in urban planning and design in the beginning, and were only included in a (too) late stage of development (Dupuy 2005). In our own time this happens with the new information and communication technologies (Drewe, 2005). 2 - ‘Urban matters’ need to be included in district transformation from the start, to be aware of consequences for neighbouring or comparable (price/quality) districts in the rest of the city. It must be made clear what the demolition intervention supports and what it neglects: spatially and socially. - Demolition should contribute to the improvement of networks of public space, to the possibilities for good uses (De Hoog & Van der Kooij, 2001; Meyer et al, 2006), to the decrease of vandalism and burglary, and to the increase of social safety (Lopez & Van Nes, 2006). 3 - Demolition is usually a traumatic experience for a neighbourhood. Investments in the upgrading of the environment and eventually new buildings are important tools to show residents that the intention is to really improve living conditions. These might stimulate the necessary

participation, and draw the attention of potential investors in economic activities. A basic lesson from the past is: create trust, first use the existing available and transferable space before demolishing existing buildings. - Existing social structures and local support which are important in sustainable urban transformations, should not be damaged by physical demolition. Newly built should also include supportive space (literally and figurative) for participation of a diversity of actors in the transformation process (Hulsbergen & Van Stam, 2003; Houterman & Hulsbergen, 2005; Hull 2001). 4 - Building ‘for the market’ should have a wide interpretation, with priority to needs. There are the needs of the present residents who might want to stay, want to remove to another district, or are inclined just to give up and disappear. There are the needs of people looking for a house who presently live elsewhere. And there are entrepreneurs and entrepreneurial starters looking for space. A societal fair transformation of a district includes all residents and users, and should openly include the vulnerable and deprived residents: “the worst of should be as well of as possible” (Radcliffe Richards, 1982:123). Demolition and rebuilding might be a good strategy to improve the conditions, but this needs (ex ante) clarification. - Demolition and newly built should be evaluated with their impacts on decreasing vulnerability and deprivation. Empowerment of (members of ) households is a key word here, i.e. capacity building and improving economic opportunities like getting access to paid work. A point of attention is the reciprocal relation between technological and social-economic

innovations (Drewe, Fernandez-Maldonado & Hulsbergen, 2003; Hulsbergen, 2005). 5 - Finally, no two neighbourhoods or districts are the same, even if they look alike at first sight. Easy generalisations are a threat to any area. Sustainable building on the neighbourhood level implies that the residents appreciate the qualities of their neighbourhood, and take care for its continuation. References De Hoog, M. & E. van der Kooij, 2001, De lange weg van Gooiland naar het nieuwe Ganzenhoef, Blauwe Kamer, 6, pag. 19 Drewe, P., 2005, Time in Urban Planning and Design in the ICT Age; In: Hulsbergen, E.D., I.T. Klaasen & I.Kriens, Shifting Sense in Spatial Planning, Techne Press, Amsterdam, pp.197-211 Drewe, P., E.D. Hulsbergen & A.M. Fernandez-Maldonado, 2003, Battling Urban Deprivation: ICT Strategies in the Netherlands and Europe, Journal of Urban Technology, Vol.10, Nr.1, pp.23-37

Amsterdam, pp.45-56 López, M.J.J. & A. van Nes, 2006, Ruimte, Tijd en Criminaliteit, RCM Advies, Den Haag, en Afdeling Stedelijk Beheer & Stadsvernieuwing, Faculteit Bouwkunde, TU Delft Meyer, H., F. de Josselin de Jong & M.J. Hoekstra, 2006, Het ontwerpen van de openbare ruimte, SUN, Amsterdam Mulder, K. (ed.), 2006, Sustainable Development for Engineers, Greenleaf Publ., Sheffield, UK Radcliffe Richards, J., 1982, The Sceptical Feminist, a philosophical enquiry, Pelican Books, London Roberts, P., 2004, The Evolution, Definition and Purpose of Urban Regeneration; In: Roberts, P. & H. Sykes, Urban Regeneration. A Handbook, Sage Publ., London, pp.9-36 Salingaros, N. A., 2005a, Principles of Urban Structure, with contributions by L.A. Coward and B.J. West, and chapter introductions by A. van Bilsen, Design Science Planning Series, Techne Press, Amsterdam Salingaros, N.A., 2005b, Towards a New Urban Philosophy: The case of Athens; In: Hulsbergen, E.D., I.T. Klaasen & I.Kriens, Shifting Sense in Spatial Planning, Techne Press, Amsterdam, pp.265-280 Van Kempen, R., A. Murie, Th. Knorr-Siedow & I. Tosics (eds), 2006, Regenerating large housing estates in Europe. A guide to better practice, RESTATE, Urban and Regional research centre Utrecht, University of Utrecht

Dupuy, G., 1991, L’urbanisme des réseaux, Arman Colin, Paris Dupuy, G., 2005, Networks and Urban Planning: the Evolution of a Two-way Relationship; In: Hulsbergen, E.D., I.T. Klaasen & I. Kriens, Shifting Sense in Spatial Planning, Techne Press, Amsterdam, pp.125-129 Edgar, B. & J. Taylor, 2004, Housing; In: Roberts, P. & H. Sykes, Urban Regeneration. A Handbook, Sage Publ., London, pp.153-175 European Council of Town Planners, 2003, The New Charter of Athens 2003, The European Council of Town Planners’ Vision for Cities in the 21st Century, European Council of Town Planners, Lisbon; http://www.ceu-ectp.org/e/athens European Commission, 1999, European Spatial Development Perspective Towards Balanced and Sustainable Development of the Territory of the European Union, Brussels Hulsbergen, E. & E. van Stam, 2003, Transformatie wijken 1950-1970; theorie en zes hypothesen, Atlantis, nr.14.4, pp. 42-45 Houterman, R. & E. Hulsbergen, 2005, Neighbourhood Initiatives: Time for Bottom-Up; in: Hulsbergen, E.D., I.T. Klaasen & I.Kriens, Shifting Sense in Spatial Planning, Techne Press, Amsterdam, pp.331-340 Houterman, R. & E. Hulsbergen, 2006, Neighbourhood transformation and urban planning and design; in: Gruis, V., H. Visscher & R. Kleinhans (eds), 2006, Sustainable Neighbourhood Transformation, IOS Press, Amsterdam, pp.93-112. Hull, A., 2001, Neighbourhood renewal: A toolkit for regeneration, Geojournal, 51, pp. 301-310 Hulsbergen, E.D., 2005, Vulnerability and Deprivation; In: Hulsbergen, E.D., I.T. Klaasen & I. Kriens (eds), Shifting Sense in Spatial Planning, Techne Press,

Endnotes: (1) And “just one of the many options” (Van Kempen et al, 2006:12). See also the paragraphs “Partial demolition as a last resort” and “Demolition as a solution” (103-107). (2) In this article it is not possible to go deep into urban sustainability. In our research programme Network Cities (http://www.networkcity.bk.tudelft.nl) we follow the definition of the European Commission (1999) which stresses the integration of societal, economic and environmental aspects, and the European Council of Town Planners (2003) which adds the importance of connectivity. The Delft Centre for Sustainable Urban Areas (SUA), in which Network Cities participates, has a focussed definition for the research programme as a whole (http://www.sua. tudelft.nl). See also the TU-Delft initiative for engineers by Mulder (2006).

Edward Hulsbergen is associate professor, Chair of Spatial Planning. This article is partly based on a more detailed discussion on demolition in relation to urbanism by Houterman & Hulsbergen (2006), a chapter in the book Sustainable Neighbourhood Transformation, where demolition is discussed from a variety of points of departure: social housing, real estate, urbanism, architecture; sciences, policies and practices.

Beijing 2007 Research Urban Body www.urbanbody.org Spacelab / Tu Delft

photography Roberto Dellâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;orco

VISUAL DI CTIONAY BEIJING

Demolition (noun) the tearing-down of buildings and other structures.

Hutong (noun) narrow streets or alleys, most commonly associated with Beijing, China

Inner (adj) located or occurring within or closer to a center

dream (noun) the experience of envisioned images, sounds, or other sensations during sleep

victim (noun) anyone who is physically harmed by an other

protagonist (noun) central character in a story, generally synonymous with hero

Purpose (noun) the reason for which something is done, or the reason it is done in a particular way.

Struggle (noun) strife, contention, great effort

Collective (noun) family, commonage, commonality, community, cooperative, kibbutz, municipality, neighborhood, village

Ring a circular or surrounding line, band or mark

End (noun) Something toward which one strives

Periphery (noun) outer boundary

Comments on the Reaction of Joost Schrijnen to my Atlantis Article entitled ‘The Deltametropolis after the RPB-report’. INA KLAASEN

As public debate on scientific and societal aspects of what is taught and studied is not a habitual occurrence in the department of Urbanism, I’m pleased with Joost Schrijnen’s reaction on my article in Atlantis, issue 18 (Jan, 2007). I hope this will encourage more debates; after all we are an academic institution, should as such be ‘an open society’, and as such should benefit from conflicting opinions (and not from having to adhere to prescribed ones, as if we were an a design agency – like we were supposed to do in the early nineties).

in the first year of the Masters I do think though that students should be made aware that in a university setting a scientific-based underpinning of answers to these questions should be sought – that even the questions themselves can be questioned. Societal ánd scientific relevant, for instance, could be in this first stage of the Masters, an ex ante evaluation directed to which part of the population, in which sense, benefits from the set of interventions proposed in the spatial development perspectives that are generated.

With some points in Schrijnen’s reaction I agree, but not always for the same reasons. I agree, for instance, with the need for an administrative reorganisation focusing on the provincial level. Our present administrative system is certainly obsolete. However, a wealth of official and unofficial proposals on this subject has been published the past 50 years with hardly any concrete results - so I’m not over-optimistic that a democratically chosen Randstad council will turn out to be feasible. My reasons for supporting such a council are not the same though as Schrijnen’s. My motivation is that it might lead to a more efficient use of space, given the present municipal competition both between large cities and small towns. That is not the same as a priori assuming that a Randstad ‘province’ will also form one, internally synergetically optimal, urban, hydrological and ecological system.

And by the way, I do not agree that for centuries changes in the western part of the Randstad, or elsewhere, have been produced by only thinking in terms of urban systems, as this neglects totally the impact of changes in the agricultural system – and military system. Also it needs some explication – not to say it is questionable - how comparing one metropolis with another, and ranking them on ‘structure, program and spatial positions’ contributes to solving problems inherent to large, complex, urban systems in general and the western part of the Netherlands specifically.

If I understand Joost rightly in his opinion the focus in the Master curriculum should be on helping students discover the societal relevance of regional urban design and planning by making them aware of questions that arise in the professional domain. Important, certainly. Even

My conclusion is that we both want the best for students given their future task as professionals (and, for some, as scientists) – and for urban systems. It just seems that our opinion on the means differs.

Maarten Bouten Since MSc 3 is a more personal process than previous semesters I will go into some general aspects of it and not so much go into my own process. MSc 3 is the start of the graduation project, but should not be the first time to start thinking about it. Spending some thoughts about your ideas and opinions on urbanism in general and the subjects in it you might even feel passionate about is very welcome. This helps very much in finding the subject you want to work on for an entire year and prevents you from spending the first valuable weeks or months switching subjects. Although the schedule leaves room for this I can imagine doing more interesting things with your time. As I said the program leaves room for spending some time on doubts about your subject and problems in your process. Although I think this is necessary and an essential aspect in such an individual process, it also leaves room to spend half of the time on holidays if you very well know what you want and what youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re doing. Since graduating is such an individual process, where the responsibility for literally every choice is left to yourself, there are however very few people that can afford many of these holidays. The way you are stimulated in the choices about your subject and approach differs between the different studios and mentors and is something that in my opinion should be organized in a better way. As you can derive from what I have written before I would suggest to work ahead of the official schedule with one quarter. I think this is more challenging and also possible if you have a clear idea about your subjects at the start of MSc3. Present your complete thesis plan and theoretical framework at P1, spend the time until P2 on interesting research and the preparation of your design and work on the design proposal from P2. This gives you the time to come up with good results in an interesting research report and extensive design proposal. But again, how things are exactly organized is (like always) dependant on your studio, mentors and of course yourself. What will help you very much in your graduation process is to constantly have a clear idea about what youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re doing and why youâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;re doing it that way. Some passion about your subject and (personal) aims for your project will help to motivate you. This will prevent the moaning you sometimes hear in the ateliers about the fact that things are not working out or of people that have lost track of where they are going. To end the story and leave all the other experiences and surprises for you to experience, I state: graduation, a terrible process with fantastic sides.

education in the mirror

EDUCATION IN THE MIRROR MSC3

DANNY NELEMANS Er is mij gevraagd een stukje te schrijven over het 3e semester Urbanism. Mijn naam is Danny Nelemans, 24 jaar en ik volg de Master 3 Urbanism. Hiervoor heb ik een bouwkunde-opleiding genoten aan de Hogeschool Rotterdam, met een differentiatie van 25% in stedenbouw. Daarnaast werk ik 2 dagen per week bij het stedenbouwkundige bureau Palmboom & van de Bout. Momenteel ben ik volop aan de gang voor het programma van mijn studio “Urban Landscapes”, hierin ben ik bezig met het formuleren van mijn afstudeeronderwerp en bijbehorend onderzoek. Voor mijn keuze voor de afstudeerstudio heb ik mij voornamelijk laten leiden door de schaal waarop de studio’s zich voornamelijk begaven. Tijdens de voorlichting die wij in het 2e semester kregen, was er een keuzemogelijkheid van 3 studio’s: Urban Composition, Urban Transformation en Delta Design. Naar aanleiding van deze naar mijn mening, matige voorlichting, hebben wij een keuze moeten maken. Hierin heb ik destijds een keuze gemaakt voor Urban Transformations, omdat bij de voorlichting de overige studio’s naar een te hoog schaalniveau neigden. Aan het begin van het semester hebben we eigenlijk tijdens de introducties van de verschillende studio’s een goede presentatie gekregen, van wat de verschillende studio’s nu daadwerklijk inhielden. Toen bleek ook dat er niet meer 3 studio’s waren, maar dat het er nu nog maar 2 waren. De studio’s Urban Compositon en Delta Design waren samen verworden tot de studio Urban Landscapes. En ondanks dat ik mijzelf had ingeschreven voor een andere studio, heb ik toch de voorlichtingen gevolgd van Urban Landscapes. Voornamelijk omdat ik nog geen goed gevoel had van mijn keuze en mij vooral onduidelijk was wat deze studio nu precies inhield. Tijdens deze voorlichting heb ik pas echt een goede indruk gekregen, waarbij ik gelijk geinspireerd raakte voor mijn afstudeeronderwerp. Deze voorlichtingen had ik echter graag eerder willen zien. Dan had ik mij beter kunnen voorbereiden op een mogelijk afstudeeronderwerp, nu wist ik bij aanvang van het semester nog niet eens wat de verschillende studio’s precies inhielden. Ik had wel een bepaalde schaal waarop ik mijn ontwerpopdracht wilde gaan uitvoeren, maar een echte ontwerpopgave ontbrak. Inmiddels heb ik na een interessant 1e kwartaal, waarin wij met onze studio onderzoek hebben gedaan naar Urban Landscapes en wat hierin de nieuwe stedenbouwkundige Ruimtelijke elementen zijn, een leuke opgave naar aanleiding van dit onderzoek. In het 2e kwartaal ben ik aan het onderzoeken wat in het planningsklimaat van de belgische stedenbouw, de verdichtingsopgaven zijn in het verstedelijkt gebied, tussen de traditionele stad en het open landschap.

Rogier va n den Berg coord inator Ur ba n Lan ds capes A:

Rogier, can you give a brief history about yourself after you graduated?

I graduated, in Delft, at the studio Delta Metropolis which was led by Dirk Frieling Carl Weber and Wouter Reh which was an amalgam of urbanism, landscape and architecture. And I graduated together with a lot of students who where interested in the bigger scale. How could you strategically manipulate the metropolis? And next; what role have architectonic interventions, strategic designs, for that strategy? I was graduated on suburbia with a focus on a completely suburbanization of the green hart (also seen at the architecture biennale right now). So this big scale was always interesting for me. After I graduated I was ask by Dirk Frieling to teach in several studios. Doing this, and after working for one year at an urban office, I started my own practice together with Daan Zandbelt. After Dirk Frieling left the chair of urbanism and Joost Schrijnen became the new professor Joost asks me and Daan to come to the chair of metropolitan strategies and design. At that moment we divided the tasks, Daan did Msc 1 and I was doing Msc 3, which was at that moment Delta Design. Since three semesters it is called Urban Landscape and is a combination of the chair of Han Meyer and Clemens Steenbergen. So we always kept the band with the large scale. A: What is in your point of view the main difference between Urban Landscape and Urban Transformation? Urban Landscape studio is actually ‘the’ way of looking to the contemporary city. People who are able to design on a large scale, like a region, infrastructure or city, see the city from a other point of view, more like a kind of landscape. This is because the traditional métier of urbanism is quite attached to the city, which is made out of architecture, blocks and streets and squires. Now all the cities expand, especially in the Randstad, we see that a lot of peripheries are starting to overlap with each other. A lot of former agriculture landscape is becoming urbanized. The area between the old city and the empty landscape, as some call it ‘the in between’, is the largest part of the city and the core of the contemporary city, this is where most interventions are taking place. At lots of cities we can see that there the economical centers are started to pup up were new infrastructure is made and new forms of living are being developed. But you start designing there, the traditional tools of urbanism are quite limited. You need more views and perspectives to come with good design solutions. And the perspective we want to come with is the perspective of urban landscape, which is a mix of urbanism and landscape and architecture, so in that way we want to perceive the city. I think one of the most important differences between urban transformation and urban landscape is that we work merely with the design point of view. I think that urban transformation has theory as a starting point. We have a more pragmatic point of view, so the big different aspect is the way of methodology.

A: Can you say something about your company? (www.zandbeltvandenberg.nl) Daan and me started one year after we graduated, so already four years. We started working on large scale, doing research and strategies for bigger cities, authorities and parties who are saying something about the Randstad. Now our company is focused on three scales; we are doing metropolitan strategies, urban design and the architecture scale. Doing these three quite different fields people often say; why don’t you specify? But we think we have to do the broad way because on every level some things are more important than others. On the large scale you don’t start designing but make scenario’s and talk with parties. But on the smaller scale you start designing quite fast. The large scale is mostly saying something about the future of over 20 or 30 years, so the product is always a book or strategy, so comparable with the Msc 1 but without dealing with a political power. An example what our company did is a study for harbor sites in Europe for Stadshavens in Rotterdam. Stadshavens had the task to develop a Hugh area in the harbor of Rotterdam from about 1000 ha but they didn’t know how to start. So they asked us to travel over Europe and have a look at different cities in Europe and say something smart by comparing different cases. Because one of the key things of saying something smart or dealing on a large scale is that you are able to compare it with existing examples. That’s also a large part of the study, so try to analyze your subject and compare it with comparable subjects all over the world. Right now we are working on a design laboratory called Z-lab and is connected with the South-Wing (Zuid-vleugel) of the Randstad. It is the atelier of the province of south Holland where we design whit all kind of different parties. The idea is that all the separate cities in the S-W are growing together to one amalgam of urban landscape and infrastructure. We collected a lot of designs from different parties where we try to make their interventions typical. At the end we try to connect all these and come up with a new urban plan for a the S-W city. A:

How important is it working both in practice and school?

It’s extremely important because our field is so tight connected with reality. A:

Do you think students are ready participating for Msc 3?

Again it depends on each student. But the main problem is that lots of students still haven’t finished some projects in their previous masters or even bachelors, which is quite annoying for them selves. Because the Msc3 is quite heavy, not only in terms of the amount of hours but you also have to make an essay, define your project, doing the methodology course. But you are also in a sort of battle with yourself about what to do after graduation. But sometimes I am also disappointed about the reverse of the

student, which is often quite limited this in a way knowing what is going on, only having seen a few projects. A: How are Msc 3 and 4 related with each other? And are you satisfied with the output of it? Students have in the beginning of the Msc 3 a broad field of interests and problems. The Msc 3 works more like defining what your task is. The Msc 4 is more focused on an answer on the question you opposed in msc 3, so answering in form of a design. The out put of course depends on each student. But I am really satisfied of the output. Recently we have made a booklet which is called ‘11’(in the bouwshop) and is a collection of the output the best graduate projects of the last three years combined with an interview of important stakeholders about the project. So if someone is graduated on the R’dam airport we went to the director of the airport and asked for their feedback of the project. And if someone graduated on islands at front of the Dutch coast we went to the province of Zuid Holland or Rijkswaterstaat. So we ask the stakeholders about the value of the project, is it realistic, is it interesting, does it give a new view about the topic in what way is it bad, etc. Because my role at the university is quite limited, I am only working there for two days a week, so all the research I am doing is mostly in office. The problem is that in the Netherlands smart people working for one year on one topic is almost impossible. So working for one year on a topic is only possible at the university. So I see the studio with the students of important value for research. I try to put those projects in a context use their projects for articles where I try to define the theoretical layer around that. A:

Do you think students are ready participating for Msc 3?

Thank you so much!

Alex Voll ebregt coord inator Ur ba n tra nsformat ions A: Alex, can you say something about yourself and condense your specification at the faculty? I started as a student at the faculty in 1994. In 1999 I went for half a year to UCLA (University of California and LA) to know more about the theoretical and social-spatial aspects of urbanism and architecture and spatial practices. This because the courses at this faculty where great courses but also very limited into their social-spatial focus and its importance. So this really helped me understanding the conceptual possibilities of urbanism and architecture. In 2001 I was asked by Prof. Jurgen Rosemann (Urban Management and Renewal) to run a studio in the context of architectural interventions which was called ‘New Urban Housing’ where I was looking for different spatial conditions or a mix and dynamics in the social fabric. I did that for two years and when I was graduated I was asked, together with Steven Read, to set up a new interdisciplinary studio that would be a kind of carry on to these different conceptual thinking on space and urban environment. Steven Read came from the Space Syntax background and I was more inspired by Henry Lefebvre, on the social spatial issues. Because space was a comment dominator in all our engagements we established in 2001 a series of evening seminars to do research about space. During these series we invited people who were dealing and thinking about space in a different way, not purely in a criteria way, construction way or architectural esthetic way but more about space itself. Basically every two weeks we had seminar evenings where someone proposes a paper and we discuss about that. We did this for a year to help developing our understanding of how our new laboratory and its curriculum, which has started in 2002, could be developed into a disciplinary platform. Because space had become a dominator we logically created this group called ‘Space Lab’. This to develop our own kind of program that focus on the things, that when I was a student never had the change to focus on, I always find interesting to look at. The space lab was a great success, talking about the amount of students we basically had 70% of all the students from urbanism came to our lab and had almost 100 % of the international students coming to our research group. We not only focus on Holland but our focus point was more on global urbanism, more about different sides in the world in using our theories. It was very different and challenging, very theoretical driven. Because it was quite new we were not only teaching but also learning, so our students were more co-researchers. So we were exploring together, together with the students we were on the same line. The only thing is that Steven and I had a little more experience and reading but for the rest we were the same. So we didn’t only have success in quantity but also quality we had the first year 4 cum laudes! In 2004 some of our students submitted their final project to get a price for the 11th international student competition, a competition for graduate projects all over Europe. And our students came 1st, 2nd and 3rd from whole Europe. So we were proud and set up and exhibition showing these projects.

A: How is Urban Transformation organized? In 2002 9 studios where divided under 3 laboratories. Which meant that space lab was put under the umbrella of Urban Transformations, together with Globalization, Network City and Urban Design. So we had to share our time with these students so this was quite an organizational challenge and a little identity loosing, but in a way it worked out. In 2004 we started to create an Msc 2 program where interdisciplinary experimental work can be done, so the ‘Urban Body’ program was established. It is now running for 3 years with a maximum of 60 students for 30 ects. The Urban Body is a really big unit, for 5 months students are focusing on the same thing, the same project. It is a mix of ICT, philosophy, architecture, people from the academy, people from the practice like OMA, Lars Spuybroek, studio SPUTNIK. So we could exchange between students, practice and different disciplines. The course is also to make a better transition to Msc 3 for both architecture and urbanism. A: how is it possible that there is no collaboration between urbanism and architecture? That is possible because in the past it was purely logistic, students could form their own mentor team so three mentors could be chosen. This was great for the student because he had maximum freedom. The problem was that the student had so much freedom that he didn’t know how to deal with that and was not able to structure himself clearly. So the average was instead of one year one year and a half and even 2 years. Because their work was individually done all information disappeared, a waste of energy, research and knowledge! Again on that we see our students as co-researchers, we see our students as small PHD-ers. So we have students which are doing so well in conceptual thinking and writing skills that now we have seven phd-ers which are all coming from out our own master program. So our phd-ers are home grown. A: What is in your point of view the main difference between urban transformation and urban landscape? Urban transformation has as a departure point; the transforming of the environment and the fact that it is transforming, so the transformation and how than that effects. A: From September 2007 they are going to shuffle the Msc3 structure completely, what is going to be different? Well to be honest, absolutely nothing, it is going to be different from this year that the labs won’t exist anymore and studios are no studio’s anymore but projects. But we are doing that already for a long time so for us nothing will happen. So we still going to offer a location where we as a team going to focus on. So again the same problem that nine projects are offered but there are only 40 students. So I am afraid that they have to reschedule again the concept. Maybe the only difference is that I don’t have to coordinate Urban Transformation. The new unit means no more different studios, so the names are not recognizable anymore. Because it hasn’t worked for a lot of people but for us it has worked. So now every lab can offer a project. In September 2007 the ‘Space Lab’ project is going to focus on Cape Town. A: Are you satisfied with the final output of Msc 4? Yes, we had great students which have result in 9 phd-ers. A: I want to make a short link to the transition between the Msc2 and 3, what do you think of this transition? Do you think the students are ready to start with Msc3, are their skills high enough? As I told earlier we have organized this Urban Body where students could work interdisciplinary in one group and afterwards choose for architecture or urbanism. So they had a basic knowledge to step to Msc 3, so we have more created a one year and a half master program. But because both urbanism and architecture has reorganized themselves so not a single Dutch student could follow our program. So the reality is that only Erasmus students could follow our program, but they are only here for half a year. So it is a great program but unfortunately couldn’t be offered to the regular students.

Students mostly have absolutely no idea what to do when they started in Msc 3 and that’s also why we choose for locations. For international students they choose mostly for a project in their own country but because they are mostly well prepared no valuable time is lost. They used the summer to come with a whole bunch of ideas. A: Every half year there is a variation of hbo students and international students, tu bachelors are spread over the year. Can you subscribe the differences between these three groups? The international mostly have a visa for two year but they have to offer portfolios, pay an enormous amount of money commission fee, housing etc. So basically we are dealing with top students, really serious. People left their country to work here. Because you are coming here with a reason, you have an ambition. Also the social live is mostly otherwise that the regular students. The regular students don’t have to hand in portfolios so you can divide them with really top students and students who are a little more like going with the flow, take it as it is. But I want to say that it is maybe a waste of skills to blend it together, special things you have to threat special that’s how you can get state of the art products. Also all our phd students were international master students and we haven’t had one Dutch student. So in the future I hope to get one Dutch … but it is also a culture shift. Not many Dutch are doing research. A: Thank you so much for this interview

Trip to Iran 11 APRIL 2007 - 23 APRIL 2007 Polis organise a exposition in the Blokkenhal of the Faculty Architecture in Delft of cities in Iran. It’s an introduction for the 3-weeks trip to Iran in the summer. If you are interested in the program for this trip, look at www.polis.bk.tudelft.nl

Urban TV 11 JUNE 2002 – 31 DECEMBER 2008 Er wordt al zo weinig aandacht besteed aan ruimtelijke ordening op TV, dus ALS er iets wordt uitgezonden, mis het dan niet! De Urban TV Guide biedt uitkomst voor de hardwerkende urbanist: een overzichtelijke selectie van TVprogramma’s en webuitzendingen over stad en economie, techniek en cultuur, mondiale, lokale en netwerkontwikkelingen. Met af en toe een kritisch commentaar. http://www.urbanunlimited.nl

Follydock MAY 26 – SEPT 29 2007 An exposition about follies built in and around the Heijplaat in Rotterdam www.follydock.com

Wonen op Amsterdams water JUNE 16 - AUG 26 2007 The summer months at Arcam will be given over to the theme of acquatic building in Amsterdam. ARCAM is devoting its attention, in exhibition and book form, to the history of life on boats and barges, and to future prospects for floating construction. Besides floating homes, the topics include a theatre on the IJ waterway, motorways on pontoons, a church ship, a public library and waterborne gardens. www.arcam.nl

Internationale Architectuur Biënnale Rotterdam (IABR) MAY 24 – SEPT. 2 2007 The International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam is a biennial event that gathers knowledge and experience in the designing disciplines (architecture, urban design and landscape architecture) from all over the world and brings them to Rotterdam to present them to a broad audience. www.iabr.nl

A better world, an another power MAY 24 - OCTOBER 21 2007 In collaboration with International Architecture Biennale Rotterdam, which this year takes the theme of Power - Producing the Contemporary City, the NAI presents an exhibition about the groups who “overthrow power”. The exhibition A Better World - Another Power displays works by groups whose consultative initiatives, spontaneous creativity and activism is like a fresh breeze blowing through the urban planning world.

POLIS STATEMENT

W hat ha s b ecome with the cr iti cal s tudent? During many years students used to play an important and influential role in the making of educational programs and in the policy of the faculty and university in general. An important example was the participation of students in the appointment advisory committees concerning new professors. A couple of years ago the Board of the University decided to abolish the studentparticipation in these committees. To be honest, I am not sure if this decision contributed to a higher level of debate and decision-making in these committees. On the contrary: I think we miss the critical contributions of the students. Since their absence in these committees, the level of the critical debate in these committees decreased, and perhaps also the result of these debates: the quality of the professors. The most astonishing thing is that this happened without any complaint or protest of the students themselves. What happened with the critical and interested students? Are they too busy with earning study-points, or earning money, or drinking beer in the student-societies? Or are they also infected with the idea that the university (like everything these days) is a market, where quality will be defined by the game of supply and demand? To increase the level of our educational programs, we need the critical involvement of our students. But this critical involvement is only possible when the students themselves are convinced of this necessity of their participation, and when they claim a repair of their participation in the debates and committees themselves. Han Meyer Chairman Department Urbanism

call submissions for atlantis 18.4 E d u cat ion a nd Ur banis m The restructuring of the graduation year of the department of Urbanism has set off a larger debate within the faculty of architecture. The department dean professor Han Meyer would like to broaden this discussion to the outer world and initiated a collaborative effort. The department of Urbanism is going to work together with Atlantis to realise a special Atlantis issue devoted to the topic Urban education - how urbanism can be translated into education? Urbanism, so complex its content so difficult is its education. Since urbanism separated from architecture as a proper discipline, its object of investigation and definition changed considerably. In modern times the urban became omnipresent embracing literarily our perceived world, even more it determent how we perceive the world in itself. Here lays the two folded problematic. Not only that a distant view for scientific observation is rendered impossible but also the omnipresence of the urban annihilates the status of expertise. As Lefebvre already pointed it out, when it comes to the urban, everyone is an expert on the city. For the upcoming issue Atlantis would like to welcome contribution to following questions and also stimulate discussion beyond the down below: - Personal opinions about “ways to study urbanism” - Active or passive experiences as student or teacher - Academic vies on the topic of education - Description of applied educational system that worked or failed we invite your insights and analysis, your projects, your writtings and photographies. the coming issue of atlantis will appear in October 2007. Contributions, comments or questions should be sent to: Polis@bk.tudelft.nl under the subject “atlantis”

Atlantis Magazine for urbanism, a publication from POLIS, podium for urbanism, published 4 times a year. 18th year, number 2, Aanuary 2007 quantity: 500 issues

Main Editor Cristina Ampatzidou

Adress of the Editorial Office POLIS

Editors Anthony Fuchs Gijs Veugen Monique Suksmaninigsih Herman van Essen Tanja Bergqvist Arjen Spijkerman Thomas de Bos

Printer Thieme GrafiMedia Groep, Delft Advertisements Information at the address editorial office

Articles Articles, admissions and reactions can be offered to the address of the editorial office. Author guidance are available at the editorial office. Copyright with the permission of authors and acknowledgement of sources.

Subscriptions Polis-members receive the atlantis for free. Polis-yearcontribution: Students: € 10 Alumni: € 15 Practicalmembers: € 30 companymembers: €60 Previous issues: € 3