AMSTERDAM PAPAVERDRIEHOEK

SCALES — S - Urban architecture LOCATION — Papaverdriehoek POPULATION — City 835,000 inhab. STRATEGIC SITE — 4.82 ha / PROJECT SITE — 0.15 ha SITE PROPOSED BY — City of Amsterdam OWNER OF THE SITE — Buro Amsterdam POST-COMPETITION PHASE — Design assignment on project site and urban design assignment for wider area

Sabine Lebesque — Department of City Development, City of Amsterdam. Investors Office for Housing/ Team Spatial Quality

1. WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF THE SITE MUTATION? The Papaverdriehoek is a small business/industrial area part of Buiksloterham, a transformation area on the Northern side of the IJ. Some changes of the Papaverdriehoek have already taken place, such as the start of De Ceuvel, a centre for sustainability, few years ago. Investor Buro Amsterdam owns some of the locations within the area and is, right from the start of this Europan competition, a stakeholder in the whole process. An initiative on their site could function as a kick-off and boost for the transformation of the whole area. At this hour, the municipality is working on the destination plan to decide density and functions in the area.

2. HOW CAN THE SITE BE INTEGRATED IN THE ISSUES OF PRODUCTIVE CITIES? HOW DO YOU CONSIDER THE PRODUCTIVITY ISSUE? The municipality intends to keep a percentage of 50/50 for housing and productivity. Some of the small businesses can stay in the area and new ones can come.

3. HAVE YOU ALREADY DEFINED A SPECIFIC PROCESS FOR THE URBAN AND/OR ARCHITECTURAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE AFTER EUROPAN? Investor Buro Amsterdam will give a study commission to start with the winners of the site. Depending on the capacities of the winners, they propose to collaborate with an established architecture office in Amsterdam. Buro Amsterdam recently got hands on the adjacent site, which opens the possibility to extend the Europan commission by inviting as well the runner-ups for a study commission.

Makers Neighbourhood

AUTHOR(S) — Alessandro Macaluso (IT), Architect-urbanist; Carlotta Basoli (IT), Landscape architect; Andrei Deacu (RO), Urbanist; Giovanni Lavanna (IT), Architect

AMSTERDAM PAPAVERDRIEHOEK (NL) — WINNER

CONTACT — UP4, Stockholm (SE) T. +46 737399884 info@up-4.org, www.up-4.org

TEAM POINT OF VIEW — Our exploration starts from the tension between high-density needs and the local self-built spirit. We see the area organised around 4 core principles: a density gradient, strong axis and flexible fabric structure, water access and view lines, and production and collective spaces (accommodating the themes of re/make - re/use and recycling - re/invent). We consider our collective spaces the glue that binds together the proposed work and living areas. The designed fabric has blurred boundaries with in-between zones, connecting elements on various levels. In the project site, the in-between buildings public space plays an essential role in the achievement of the overall strategy, where shared and collective hubs are a programmatic extension of the inner space.

JURY POINT OF VIEW — This project stands out by its clear, strong urban strategy and its system of little squares functioning well as public spaces oriented to the sun. It is an intriguing structuring scheme leading to a beautiful urban scheme. This scheme shows a good gradient of density and balance in height differences and flexibility between firm guidelines and flexibility in the working out of the plot spaces. Instead of removing the existing productivity of the area, the project proposes to integrate these structures by stacking productivity and housing and by integrating existing uses.

CoLIVING - An open Neighbourhood

AMSTERDAM PAPAVERDRIEHOEK (NL) — RUNNER-UP

AUTHOR(S) — Vincenzo Tuccillo (IT), Mariagrazia Panunzio (IT), Architects CONTACT — Como (IT), T. +39 3923261634 vincenzotuccillo@hotmail.it

TEAM POINT OF VIEW — Within an area characterized by a highly fragmented ownership that implies bizarre plot shapes in the case of plots grouping, the strategy consists of occupying the edges with clearly defined forms and working on the generated voids as extensions of the collective domain. This principle could be freely adapted to different plots shapes and, on a wider level, these voids could be organized in a future network. In this first intervention, inner freed-up space is the living core of the settlement: conceived as a semi-public space, there are, there, highly differentiated activities taking place and discovering a fertile meeting point. With the aim of being an alternative to dwellings blocks based on the exclusive presence of nuclear families, there is also a diversified threedimensional mix of uses and typologies happens.

JURY POINT OF VIEW — This proposal is convincing due to its strong, seductive (architectural) image. The jury sees its image as an intelligent statement for “marking” the area with a building which points at the opportunities for further developments. It is an intriguing development for the first site to start having an interesting concept system of closed courtyards to be developed in phases. This creates public space that is very introvert, and linked to the quality of the building itself. But this space does not link to the surrounding spaces, which is important for the overall functioning of the area as a whole.