Bijlmermeer_Failed rationalist utopia becomes Amsterdam success story

“

Throughout the world, the heroic days of slum eradication, mass housing and modernist urban planning were characterized by a strong belief in the power of architecture and urbanism to promote development and to shape social relations.

“

(Fiori & Brandão in Hernández 2010: 183)

LM ER ME ER

BIJ

context_GEOGRAPHY

context_GEOGRAPHY Amsterdam area_1575

Bijlmermeer area is a polder

context_GEOGRAPHY

Amsterdam area_1901

Bijlmermeer area_a polder

Amsterdam area_1700

Bijlmermeer area_a polder

context_GEOGRAPHY

Bijlmermeer area

polder used for farming

context_GEOGRAPHY

Amsterdam area

development phases in the 20th century

background_FIRST TIMELINE

background_INTELLECTUAL INFLUENCE

CIAM_1930s

Amsterdam town planning designer member of CIAM (1930-1947)

-Amsterdam extension plan drawn up in 1935

1925

Le Corbusier Plan Voisin, Paris

1945

Le Corbusier Ville Radieuse

background_NEW MASTER PLANS

1935

Amsterdam extension plan (AUP)

1966

Bijlmermeer master plan

background_NEW MASTER PLANS

1965

Bijlmermeer «The city of Future»

background_SOCIO-ECONOMY

HOUSING: - in parkland - 23,000 nearly identical dwellings - Comfortable and spacious (100-125 m2) - Middle class housing - Rented and managed by housing associations

Social problems due to dropping of rents: poverty, crime, nuissances, youth gangs, unsafe public space, unemployment (50%), sans-papier -Manageability problems (high costs) - felt huge and not-personal -Most stigmatised neighbourhood in NL (‘poor black ghetto’)

background_SECOND TIMELINE

- “functional town� failed:

background_WHAT LED TO DECLINE

large & expensive (building costs, rents...) unsafe car park abundance of viaducts (created dark spooky spaces) insufficient shops menacing atmosphere in public areas - due to honeycomb form - the original plan was never completely executed due to budget cuts - 1980s: vacant dwellings 2 times higher risk of crime than in Amsterdam drug abuse - the dream of a functional town became a nightmare

background_WHAT LED TO DECLINE

“The physical environment of the Bijlmeer changed drastically with the inflow of minorities.”

Silvan Boer

interviewed inhabitants: 77% « crime was the estate’s main problem » (without directly lining this to its urban design) 21% « it is necessary to change the urban structure » 46% « partial demolition would be a good idea »

background_WHAT LED TO DECLINE

1992

4/10/1992, Boeing 747 plane crash in Bijlmermeer

process_GENERAL - it was decided to return to the urban design principles developed earlier: four-floor blocks with individual access toa limited number of apartments - urban principle of closed building blocks was applied again - since the 17th century in the canal of Amsterdam, this building typology has always been very successful

‘It is beneficial to use, if possible, solid but less durable materials, as this will decrease the life span of housing, which will allow for earlier replacement of housing and for adaptations to changing technical and societal conditions.’ Mr. van der Velde (1968)

process_PRINCIPAL ACTORS INVOLVED Target (areas): the URBAN target area is the Bijlmermeer.

Target (population): focus on people who suffer from high unemployment, poor housing conditions, a run-down urban fabric, and a lack of social amenities.

Actors involved: - Public authorities (such as the European Commission, DG XVI and DG V; Ministry for Social Affairs; Ministry of the Interior; Amsterdam City municipality; Amsterdam Municipal Housing Department; Bureau Social Economic Renewal (SEV); Project bureau Vernieuwing Bijlmermeer); - (Semi-) public authorities (Regional Employment agencies, regional training centers, and so on); - City NGO’s (such as Housing Corporations, Chamber of Commerce); - Neighbourhood NGO’s (such as migrants’ organizations, churches, neighbourhood committees); - Private Investors

Levels involved: EU, National, Regional and Local (Central city-, District- and neighbourhood) Domains involved: housing, education, employment, culture/sport, infrastructure, care and safety.

process_OMA PROPOSAL

Schemes of OMA for improvement of the public space in between the existing spaces

process_OMA PROPOSAL Re-image: glorifying the concrete slabs n 1986 OMA proposed a ‘glorification’ of the existing concrete slabs, calling the whole complex a ‘monotonous beauty’. Hence OMA’s plan was drawn with a certain preference for the Bijlmer’s original large scale and repetitive elements. The bureau’s point of departure for renewal was the existing informal use of public spaces, which the office consequently turned into a new program for the area coined around the concept of the ‘Bijlmer Strip’. It was the ‘overwhelming visibility’ of the large estates that would be the driving force behind renewal.

The blatant acceptance and description of cities and areas resulting from the unplanned clash of infrastructure, planning, commerce and culture, followed by an attempt to understand them and finally to turn them into a design system, underlay the plan for Amsterdam Bijlmermeer (1986).

(Provoost, 2007: 20) OMA’s solution was to include the ‘ugly’ and the ‘ordinary’ in architecture and planning.

process_FIRST PHASE

1980s: First efforts: “Nieuw Amsterdam� (with about 50 million of europs budget for Bijlmermeer) A new housing association (1983) Technical improvements Demolishing parts of parking garages Rearranging public space Galleries and inner-streets closed off Lowering rents and free parking Splitting apartments Private gardens However, still maintenance problems, vacancies, social issues and crime, threatening bankruptcy

process_FIRST PHASE series of measures was taken to turn the tide in the high-rise area: -about one thousand four- and five- room apartments were split up into smaller units -rents were lowered and car parks made free of charge -parts of empty multi-floor car parks were demolished -empty storage spaces on the ground floor were converted into homes with gardens at the back -plots of land were issued to occupants so they could grow their own flowers and vegetables -here and there, parking was allowed at ground level -anti-burglary devices for dwellings were installed -lighting was improved -long galleries were closed at several places (compartmentalisation) and extra lifts were installed

1st generation improvements: green gardens connected to storage boxes

Compartentalisation in apartment blocks

process_EFFECTS OF FIRST PHASE

Slowly the situation improved - percentage of vacant dwellings decreased, and the - closing/ compartmentalisation of some of the galleries combined with the technical anti burglary measures - 1991 the decision was taken by the city council to demolish at least 3,000 apartments (about 7 of the honeycomb type of buildings) - total costs were at the time estimated at about 350 million Euros - the number of demolished apartment buildings rose to 6,500 and in the end the total costs of the whole operation was estimated at about 1.5 billion euro

process_SECOND PHASE-a comprehensive approach

- new, stronger, more comprehensive approach was needed -renewal process based on two elements: 1. spatial renewal 2. social renewal (including policy)

process_THIRD TIMELINE

design

Before: high-rise plats that were demolished by 2010 highlited in red (Projectbureau Vernieuwing Bijlmermeer)

design

After: construction that has taken place between 1992-2010 highlited in green (Projectbureau Vernieuwing Bijlmermeer)

design_GENERAL DESIGN FOR RENOVATION Although many small-scale measures to improve the quality of life had been implemented between 1975 and 1990, structural renovation in the Bijlmermeer did not actually commence until 1992. The aim of this renovation process was to provide specific support to residents in a vulnerable social position, whilst offering people in a stronger social position the opportunity for better housing within the Bijlmer itself. The various functions (residential, business, recreation and shopping) than became more intermingled.

Achieving this meant demolishing the high-rise flat blocks and replacing them with other types of housing, renovating flat blocks, making sweeping changes in shopping centres and social and commercial functions, lowering the surfaces of traffic-ways, demolishing parking garages, and reorganising public areas. The renovation process also included major maintenance work and the creation of physical and social facilities for an area that can be properly managed once the renovation itself.

design_GENERAL DESIGN FOR RENOVATION

3 Pillars (integrated effort): -Large-scale renewal -Management and public safety -Social economic programmes

development_all phases 1990s - 2010

Strengthening the social position of residents The renewal of the Bijlmermeer is intended to contribute towards strengthening its residents’ social position, and to this end, new facilities and special projects have been set up.

Demolition of high-rise flat blocks It was decided in 1992 to demolish one quarter of the flats.

Most of the gallery flats in the H neighbourhood remained standing, about half of the flats in the G and K neighbourhoods were pulled down, and most of the flats in the D, E and F neighbourhoods were demolished as well.

A total of around 6,500 of the 12,500 flats were be demolished.

development_all phases 1990s - 2010 Rehousing of residents Families that are forced to move as a result of the renovation project but who nevertheless wish to remain in the Bijlmermeer, are entitled to a suitable and affordable home in the Bijlmermeer.

Flat renovation During the renovation of the flats, the interior walkways were often removed and the aerial walkways to the parking garages demolished. Ground-floor storage areas were being replaced by housing or other functions such as studios and business space. This improved the feeling of security in the surrounding public space.

Public areas remained green and traffic-free.

development_all phases 1990s - 2010 Repositioning of the blocks of flats some of the renovated flats were be allotted a new place on the housing market: this is known as repositioning (flats were being converted into student housing, studios etc.)

Newly developed homes variety of residential environments were created: living on the urban fringe, a combination of residential and business functions, high-density residential living near the district centre, and living in the vicinity of large areas of water. The 6,500 homes marked down for demolition were replaced with 7,200 new ones. Just as with new housing in other districts of the city, 30% were in council housing and 70% in the free market

development_all phases 1990s - 2010 Businesses - space for business activities was added to the ground floors - space was created for small-scale unobtrusive business activities in certain residential areas - projects have been realised for creating business space for new enterprises

Shopping centres and markets - characteristic bustle of shopping centres was recreated in the public space

development_all phases 1990s - 2010 Lowering some of the traffic-ways - lower some of these trafficways and demolish the adjacent car parks means a radical break from the original urban design concept for the Bijlmer. The distinction between a road as part of the major road network or as part of the subsidiary road network served to determine which traffic-ways would be lowered and at which points

Restructuring of public areas - 80% of the space in the original Bijlmermeer was used as a public area.

- parking was limited to the perimeters of the public area - public areas in places where the old flat blocks have been pulled down were be entirely restructured: they was reduced to 40% and cars were allowed to be parked in front of the homes - almost all of the Bijlmerpark was restructured. One part of it was made into an urban park with sports facilities, whilst the other part was made a natural park. About 780 homes were constructed along the boundaries of the park.

Lowering of roads around shopping centre Ganzenpoort (1978 and 2012)

development_all phases 1990s - 2010 Green areas - renovation required a clearly recognisable green belt which is easy to maintain and where people feel safe, with greater variation in layout and use, and with more private green areas for single-family homes - trees and shrubs surrounding the undemolished flat blocks were thinned out to enhance a sense of security - in places where flat buildings were being demolished and traffic-ways lowered, trees were felled to make room for development, roads, parking facilities, play facilities and a new green structure composed of green belts

Public urban green spaces

development_all phases 1990s - 2010 Clean, Whole and Safe - 33 million euros was invested to ensure that the quality of life for keeping the district “Clean, Whole and Safe� during that time Car parks - demolish nine car parks - most of the new parking spaces was designed to be on the street Social welfare, health and sports facilities - the Zuidoost Cultural-Educational Centre near the metro station was opened in 2004 - De Kandelaar, completed in 2007, accommodates a child-care facility and several organisations, including a number of church communities - a health centre was opened in 2006 - flat blocks, sports facilities were constructed.; a new Bijlmer Sports Centre was opened

development_all phases 1990s - 2010

development_all phases 1990s - 2010 Art and culture - the ArenA area contains various cultural facilities important to people living in the city - Bijlmer Park Theatre on Anton de Komplein was completely fitted up to meet the needs of various permanent users - “Street of 1000 Cultures� (S1000C) accommodates economic and cultural activities - 30 studios and workshops have been created on the ground floor of flat blocks - six monumental works of art will be created on the side walls in the area where the flat block are being maintained and renovated Renewing facilities for primary education Energy saving and reduced CO2 emissions

development_all phases 1990s - 2010

Bijlmermeer renovation of F-section (1999)

criticism_ LEWIS MUMFORD

- Megalopolis - an ‘oft-repeated urban cycle of growth, expansion, and disintegration’ - believed that megalopolis represented the last stages of urban development whose ‘profoundly catastrophic success’ would carry within itself the seeds of its own destruction ‘Every overgrown megalopolitan centre today, and every province outside that its life touches, exhibits the same symptoms of disorganization, accompanied by no less pathological symptoms of violence and demoralization [as did imperial Rome before its fall]’.

And this is what happened to Bijlmermeer 1 (original project). Its lack of organization in urban planning and principles that would connected all the functions the area offered along with a connection to the city centre failed. The area became a heaven of crime, immigrants, vacant spaces and poor maintenance.

-urban industrial society needs to respect scale: Bijlmermeer 1 (original) was a superhuman scale project, being out of context of both the local neighbourhood area and the wider city of Amsterdam area. The following of CIAM utopian ideals led to a quick fall of a new construction Bijlmermeer 2 (redevelopment) focused into making buildings of lower floors, better internal communal areas, open space with identity, less voids and confusing space -above all balance, proportion, harmony through respect for organic norms and natural limits: The redevelopment of Bijlmermeer was carried in a human scale, rebuilding and constructing in a scale closer to a human, integrating the systems into one, connecting the different functions, putting open space (nature) before parking spaces (cars).

When Mumford says “maternal enclosure and intimacy’ of the village and stresses ‘oneness with the forces of nature”, it becomes clear that renewal for Mumford is in large part a restoration of the ‘maternal, life-nurturing functions’ to the city (parts Bijlmermeer reconstruction can be clearly found in Mumford`s writing) -on munumentality: the roads, subways and new traffic arteries of the modern metropolis are built with sublime collective indifference to earthly realities

In Bijlmermeer 2, the reconstruction and redevelopment of infrastructures showed that Mumford`s ideas on how a city functions were “followed” - streets were lowered, they were taken the primary functions within the neighborhood, less parking was alowed on open spaces, roads do not divide the areas etc.

criticism_ LEWIS MUMFORD

Bijlmermeer through the eyes of Lewis Mumford - the structure of modern cities is partially responsible for many social problems seen in cities Bijlmermeer 1 suffered from crime, drug abuse, lack of satety, little jobs Bijlmermeer 2 was planned to fight and impprove the situation - activities on ground floors, more commerence, better public tranport, mixed-uses etc. changed the image Bijlmermeer once had - urban planning should emphasize an organic relationship between people and their living spaces Bijlmermeer 2 - on ground floors of redeveloped buildings, apartments were made with gardens, community orchards were planted, biggeg green network with water elements (bijlmermeer was a polder) - the crises facing urban culture - feared “metropolitan finance,” urbanisation, politics, and alienation

“The physical design of cities and their economic functions are secondary to their relationship to the natural environment and to the spiritual values of human community”

Bijlmermeer 1 was a top down urban planning process - investors and government did not foster for what local community values could have been there Bijlmermeer 2 was made by involving associations and brining ideas on table - the real needs, the real uses and the real users

criticism_ JANE JACOBS

- Jane Jacobs would argue that what happened in the first development of Bijlmermeer area is exactly what happened in American cities: it gained the post-war urban renewal, an ÂŤ orthodox city planning Âť - This suburban area, chosen for its proximity to the main city of Amsterdam did not work, suffering from the mistakes of the modernist planning: the monotonous and radical project are characterized by uniformity, standardization against any vitality of city life - Successful renewal of the planning: rethought in a human spatial and social dimension Best ideas on livable cities originate from close observation of true aspects of life rather huge scale plans - they cancelled the separation of functions that created distance in the total neighborhood - unsafety was improved by small-scale redesign: public space, decrease traffic-ways to enable people to use more sidewalks

criticism_ KEVIN LYNCH

“there is more than the eye can see, more than the ear can hear” -Kevin bla Lynch - The Image of the City stresses the importance of build rich environmental images of their surroundings..

-people bla -PATHS, bla or -“the blachannel of the -observer” bla EDGES, or - bla “breaking in Bijlmer paths still reflects the previous rationalistic design: they don’t allow a sence of discovering, nor surprise in the errands around it. They are anonymous and and create a sence of rigidity.

continuity with the surrounding areas” The honeycomb structure of the 1966 are the urban elements able to identify the urban pattern of the area. For their height, their work as edges able to break the continuity with the environment, which is mostly flat.

the “imageability” of a city, a quality that helps

NODES, or “strategic points” The nodes of Bijlmer are now the social aggregation points able to constitute an urban aggregation that was lacking in the previous version of Bijlmermeer.

Now they are: -The Metro Station -The Zuidoost Cultural Educational Centre -De Kandelaar, completed in 2007, accommodates a child-care facility and several organisations, including a number of church communities - a health centre was opened in 2006

DISTRICT, or

“2-dimensional elements within which we spot a common character” The district of Bijlmermeer as a whole has a main common urban strategy based on the previous 1966 design: the 2D plan shows the ruins of an urban utopia that guided the development in the previous years. Now, in 2D we are able to see the lack of a strong district pattern due to the fact that the city of Amsterdam has been expanding incorporating this district that used to be such a strong urban element.

LANDMARK, or

“external references” The landmark that work as symbol of visual identification of the Bijlmermeer are now perceived are: - the remaining of the high rise buildings that now are the symbol of the historical past of Bijlmermeer -the presence of the new attraction point given by the A-ArenA -the presence of the modern Mosque that is now the emblem of the social and cultural mixitè of this neighborhood.

conclusions_POSITIVE - ArenA area - attracted real estate investments - improved reputation - improved manageability (in social and physical terms) - cooperation between justice, police, social work and health Emancipation of black middle class - model for regeneration in the Netherland - new amenities and improved access to services has improved quality of life for current residents while attracting new ones, making the Bijlmermeer one of the most culturally diverse areas in Europe - multiple uses, the natural setting and quality housing have made the area popular for all ages, household types and tenures Unemployment (not-working seeking work) as a percentage of the population aged 15 to 64 year, per 1st January from 1996 to 2009.

Source: Bijlmermonitor 2010.

- The number of people that saw their neighbourhood improve has almost doubled since 1997 - The average income of the residents of the Bijlmermeer has increased Source: Bijlmermonitor 2010.

conclusions_NEGATIVE

- ArenA area is separate from housing estate - improved reputation, yet still highly vulnerable housing market position - still media attention for incidents with youth gangs and crime (‘Parisian Situation’) - Bijlmermeer no longer a safe haven for sans papier - individual poverty and social economic problems remain (complex neighbourhood effect mechanisms) - transformation through social mixing: Direct displacement of residents ‘Waterbed effects’ (same issues pop up elsewhere) Broken support networks - tenure restructuring at the periphery and gentrification of centre

The ‘live-ability’ meter (Leefbarometer) shows a considerable improvement in the living environment of the Bijlmermeer from 1998 to 2012.

conclusions_GENERAL Radical transformation: good for neighbourhood, but not necessarily for residents Comparative perspective: - housing market status, - housing and urban policy framework, - social housing stock and housing associations Overcoming its previous life as a poorly serviced and isolated housing district, today the Bijlmermeer is one of the Netherlands’ more popular communities as well as a regional cultural and entertainment centre for greater Amsterdam.

1) Re-design: making it beautiful

alternative visions_

An alternative study on the transformation of post-war housing estates has been conducted by the French Architects Lacaton&Vassal in 2007. They argue that transforming, adding to and reusing existing housing blocks is much more rational than demolition. Their research suggests that money made available for demolition could be used more sensibly by redesigning the estates.

2) Re-think: design as politics To make a renewal plan work, we need long-lasting involvement with inhabitants as well as local power structures. An interesting illustration of this approach is the WiMBY!-project (‘Welcome In My Back Yard!’, 2007) completed in Rotterdam’s Hoogvliet estate. The alternative vision that WiMBY! came up with is interesting in two ways. First of all, WiMBY! recognized that the top-down planned estate had developed and grown in its own distinctive way.

The core of WiMBY!’s project is a three-layered survey that gives way to a multifaceted representation of the city: ‘hardware’ (the physical), ‘software’ (the informal) and ‘orgware’ (the organisation structures). The Wimby! project thereby kick-starts a long process of reorganizing local networks and physical, infrastructural, economic and cultural opportunities already present.