Opportunistic Urbanism by Patrick Bullen

OPPORTUNISTIC URBANISM

MELBOURNE <> SOUTH HOLLAND

MELBOURNE SCHOOL OF DESIGN MASTERS THESIS ARCHITECTURE & URBAN DESIGN STUDIO

UNDERSTANDING COMPARATIVE LIVING ENVIRONMENTS IN MELBOURNE & SOUTH HOLLAND SEMESTER 2 | 2016

Acknowledgements The research and investigation in this book was only possible with the abundant knowledge of all the guest speakers providing an in depth view on urban issues affecting Melbourne and South Holland. As well as, the collaboration with TU Delft and Deltametropool to coordinate the investigation and two-way exchange between Melbourne and South Holland. In addition to the guidance, knowledge and encouragement from both Katherine and Andy, the tutors for the Masters Studio Opportunistic Urbanism, to produce the information and research within this book.

This booklet was compiled by the students of the Opportunistic Urbanism studio in a number of opportunistic locations including airport lounges, hostels, co-working spaces, lecture halls, planes, trains and cafes. As such, the booklet was considered â&#x20AC;&#x153;never complete, but always ready to useâ&#x20AC;?.

Contents 01: Introduction 7 02: Contributors 9 03: Metro Comparison

04: Neighbourhood Comparison

05: Typology Comparison

06: Hypothesis 123

THE HAGUE

DELFT

ROTTERDAM

Introduction This book comprises of the research explored in the masters level studio at the University of Melbourne consisting of a two-way exchange between two contrasting metropolises: Melbourne, a sprawling monocentric city, and South Holland, a polycentric urban region comprising Rotterdam, Delft, the Hague and Leiden. Responding opportunistically to a chance to collaborate with partners Deltametropool and TU Delft, this research aims to explore the outcomes of Melbourne’s dynamic market driven city form, in contrast to the rigour of Dutch urban thinking. This new relationship offers an opportunity to explore hybrid urban thinking whilst maintaining a strong local focus in the ultimate design projects. The studio is integrated with a broader research project led by the Deltametropool Association, a Dutch urban think tank. The Deltametropool Association is founded on the concept that the Randstad should be considered as one dispersed but well connected metropolis. The underlying ambition is to investigate how this ‘delta metropolis’ can better compete with dominant monocentric European capitals, while also improving the living conditions of inhabitants. It is intended that this collaboration can explore the paradigm of infill development that brings together Melbourne’s dynamic design and development culture with a real world research project exploring the possibilities of an intensified Randstad agglomeration.

02 Contributors

In addition to the core student group and studio leaders, an expert group of contributors have provided a myriad of information and insights into the urban, social, cultural, political and environmental issues surroundings urban living environments to assist with our research.

Guest Speakers - Melbourne

Professor Rob Adams

Nigel Bertram

Jeremy McLeod

City of Melbourne

NMBW Architects

Breathe Architecture

Andrea Sharam

Leanne Hodyl

Penny Barnes

Swinburne Institute for Social Research (SISR)

Hodyl + Co

City of Melbourne

Guest Speakers - South Holland

Anastasia Chranioti

Daan Zandbelt

Rients Dijkstra

Deltametropolis Association

TU Delft

TU Delft Maxwan Architects + Urbanists

Theo Hauben

XXX

Hauben Architecture & Urbanism

XXX

Studio Leaders Katherine Sundermann | MGS Architects Katherine Sundermann is an Associate at MGS Architects and Assemble Papers contributor. Katherine brings experience in architecture and urban design practice locally, as well as in Germany and the Netherlands. She has completed a post-professional Master in Urbanism at TU Delft, focusing on regional design, performative urban design and collaborative planning. Since returning to Melbourne, Katherine has sought to explore the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Dutch approachâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; to urbanism in a local context, seeking to integrate the often segregated fields of architecture, urban design and planning.

Andy Leigh Fergus | City of Melbourne Andy Fergus is an Urban Designer at the City of Melbourne. Andy currently works on major projects and the development of design policy in central Melbourne and small architectural projects. In urban design and architecture, Andy has experience and interest across all scales of the urban environment. With current and past roles in government, not-for-profit, private sector planning and urban design, activism as well as architectural practice Andy brings a strong understanding of both top-down and bottom-up approaches to urbanism.

Students

Kate Pleban

Shahnaz Namira

Azarya Ashadi Putra Halim

Steph Choy

Urban Design

Architecture

Urban Design

Architecture

Laura Miller

Randy Andrian Wihardja

Wu RuRu

Shwiti Ravisankar

Architecture

Urban Design

Architecture

Urban Design

Sejal Bhikha

Job Gabriels

Pat Bullen

Architecture

“The city is never complete, but always ready to use” - Daan Zandbelt

Metro Comparison The initial comparative exploration of Melbourne and South Holland explored information within the broad scope of the Metropolis scale in order to understand the larger, complex situation. This research drew up key facts, information and findings within the complex nature of urban living environments focusing on 4 keys areas: Governance, Urban Expansion, Connectivity and Housing.

03_METRO COMPARISON

GOVERNANCE Melbourne

PLANNING INSTRUMENT

Department of Infrastructure & Regional Development

National Urban Policy 2010

NATIONAL

Planning & Environment Act 1987 Planning & Environment Regulations 2005 Department of Environment, Land, Water & Planning

Ministerial Directions Victoria Planning Provisions State Planning Policy Framework Plan Melbourne

STATE Planning Scheme Municipal Strategy Statement Local Councils

Local Planning Policy Framework Structural Plans Urban Design Framework Development Plans

LOCAL

GOVERNANCE South Holland

PLANNING INSTRUMENT

Ministry of Housing, Planning & the Environment Ministry of Transport, Public Works & Water National Spatial Strategy Ministry of Agriculture, Nature & Food Quality

Randstad 2040 Vision

Ministry of Economic Affairs

NATIONAL

Executive Councils of Provinces

Provincial Visions & Plans

Provincial Assemblies

PROVINCIAL

Structure Plans & Visions Local Authorities Part of Municipal Cooperation

Zoning Plans & Visions

LOCAL

03_METRO COMPARISON

PLANNING REGIME Melbourne

NATIONAL

Limited federal involvement prior to National Urban Policy in 2010

STATE

The Victorian Civil and Adminstrative Tribunal (VCAT) resolves spatial and environmental planning disputes

LOCAL

PLANNING REGIME South Holland

BEFORE 2008

AFTER 2008

NATIONAL

NATIONAL structural plans

PROVINCIAL

DUTCH SPATIAL PLANNING ACT

PROVINCIAL

structural plans

National and Provincial Structural Plans are now internal guidelines and no longer bind lower level government

LOCAL

structural plans

03_METRO COMPARISON

URBAN EXPANSION Melbourne

South Holland

1850

1970

2016 3

URBAN EXPANSION

URBAN EXPANSION South Holland

Melbourne 1850

1850 1970

1970 2016

2016 2

03_METRO COMPARISON

CONNECTIVITY Melbourne

80km

MELBOURNE CBD

Train Tram SmartBus

CONNECTIVITY South Holland

80km AMSTERDAM

LEIDEN

UTRECHT THE HAGUE DELFT

ROTTERDAM

DORDRECHT

Metro Tram/Light Rail Bus

03_METRO COMPARISON

MELBOURNE & SOUTHERN RANDSTAD: HOUSING PROVISION

HOUSING Melbourne

21,727,158 HOUSING IN MELBOURNE

7, 535, 317 HOUSING IN NETHERLANDS

SOCIAL HOUSING

14%

PROVISION

Caravan,incabin, Flat, unit unit or or apartment apartment fourhouseboat orstorey moreblock storey block Flat, in aa three Flat, unit or apartment in a one or two storey block

23%

PRIVATE HOUSING

63%

Semi-detached, row or terrace house, townhouse etc with two or more storeys RENTING Semi-detached, row or terrace house, townhouse etc with one storey

63%

OWNER OCCUPIED

77%

56%

30%

Owner Occupied

PURCHAS HOUSIN

SOCIAL HOUSING

SEPARATE HOUSE

MELBOURNE & RANDSTAD: HOUSING STRESS RENTAL HOME

RENTAL HOME Ref.: Australian Bureau of Statistics, published 2011 https://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/webapi/jsf/selectTopic.xhtml Access: 07 August 2016

25%

Ref.: Netherlands Association of Real Estate Brokers and Real Estate Valuers Property Market in Focus : Facts and Figures 2015.

COST

26%

75%

of income for renting

75%

of income for housing

of income for other MELBOURNE & SOUTHERN RANDSTAD: expenditures HOUSING TYPOLOGY

10%

of income for other expenditure

of income for utilities

FIRST TIME BUYER

OWNER-OCCUPIED HOME

26%

35%

FLAT

10%

MID-TERRACE HOUSE

4% OTHER

of income for other expenditure

SEMI-DETACHED HOUSE

TYPOLOGY

18%

FLAT & UNIT

o fo

DETACHED HOUSE

14%

77%

SEMIDETACHED HOUSE

TRADE UP BUYER

77% 82%

DETACHED HOUSE of income for housing

75%8%

Detached houses

of income of income for utilities for other expenditure

23%

MID-TERRACE HOUSE

Ref.: Housing stress in Melbourne’s suburbs revealed, published 2011 http://housingstressed.org.au/2011/12/03/housing-stress-in-melbourne’s-suburbs-revealed/ Access: 08 August 2016

16%

END-OF TERRACE HOUSE

27% FLAT

Ref.:14% Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, 2014. Investin END-OF TERRACE HOUSE

18%

17%

SEMIDETACHED HOUSE

DETACHED HOUSE

MELBOURNE & SOUTHERN RANDSTAD: HOUSING PROVISION

HOUSING South Holland

7, 535, 317 HOUSING IN NETHERLANDS

14% PRIVATE HOUSING

PROVISION 56%

30%

PURCHASED HOUSING

SOCIAL HOUSING

56%

Purchased Housing

MELBOURNE & RANDSTAD: HOUSING STRESS Ref.: Netherlands Association of Real Estate Brokers and Real Estate Valuers, 2016. The Dutch RENTAL HOME Property Market in Focus : Facts and Figures 2015.

LBOURNE & SOUTHERN RANDSTAD: HOUSING TYPOLOGY FIRST TIME BUYER

COST 26%

of income for housing

10% 26% FLAT

of income for utilities

64% of income for other35% expenditure MID-TERRACE HOUSE

64%

of income for other expenditures

DETACHED HOUSE

14%

SEMIDETACHED HOUSE

OWNER-OCCUPIED HOME

16%

END-OF TERRACE HOUSE

TRADE UP BUYER

17%

of income for housing

23%

MID-TERRACE HOUSE

8% 75% of income

FLAT

of income for utilities for other expenditure

14%

END-OF TERRACE HOUSE

18%

17%

TYPOLOGY

of income

27%for utilities

27% Flats

DETACHED HOUSE

SEMIDETACHED HOUSE Ref.: Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations, 2014. Investing in the Dutch Housing Market.

Ref.: Netherlands Association of Real Estate Brokers and Real Estate Valuers, 2016. The Dutch Property Market in Focus : Facts and Figures 2015.

03_METRO COMPARISON

CULTURAL MIGRATION Melbourne

SOUTH HOLLAND MIGRATION DOMINATED BY FORMER COLONIES

CULTURAL MIGRATION South Holland

MELBOURNE MIGRATION DOMINATED BY ASIA

03_METRO COMPARISON

CULTURAL ACTIVITY Melbourne

80km

TOTAL POPULATION BORN OVERSEAS 45 - 54% 35 - 44% 25 - 34% 15 - 24% 11-14% < 10%

CULTURAL ACTIVITY South Holland

80km

TOTAL POPULATION BORN OVERSEAS 45 - 54% 35 - 44% 25 - 34% 15 - 24% 11-14% < 10%

03_METRO COMPARISON

Visual Connectiv Visual Connectivit

VISUAL CONNECTIVITY Melbourne

Melbourne TOWERS OVER 18 STOREYS > 60METRES Melbourne TOWERS OVER 18 STOREYS > 60METRES

TALLEST TOWERS

Urban Connectivity - Metro Com

Urban Connectivity - Metro Compa

Visual Connectivity

VISUAL CONNECTIVITY South Holland

Rotterdam TOWERS OVER 18 STOREYS > 60METRES

Visual Connectivity Rotterdam TOWERS OVER 18 STOREYS > 60METRES

TALLEST TOWERS

rban Connectivity - Metro Comparisons

Urban Connectivity - Metro Comparisons

03_METRO COMPARISON

FUTURE GROWTH DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG

FUTURE GROWTH FUTURE FUTURE FUTURE GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH FUTURE GROWTH Melbourne Melbourne

Melbourne Melbourne Melbourne Melbourne

HOUSING T HOUSING HOUSING HOUSING TYP TY

NORTH GROWTH CORRIDOR NORTH NORTH NORTH NORTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

Existing urban Existing urban Existing area urban Existing areaarea urban area Potential Growth Corridor PotentialPotential Growth Corridor Growth Potential Corridor Growth Corridor

34%

DETACHE DETACHED DETACHED DETACH H Area Area Farming Farming AreaFarming Area Farming

SUNBURY GROWTH CORRIDOR

Outer Melbourne Outer Melbourne Outer Melbourne Ring Outer Melbourne RingRing Ring Rail Link RegionalRegional Rail Regional Link Rail Regional Link Rail Link

34% 34% 34% 34%

+ 420,000 dwellings POPULATION 420,000 dwellings +++420,000 +420,000 420,000 dwellings dwellings dwellings POPULATIO POPULATIO POPULATI SUNBURY SUNBURY SUNBURY SUNBURY GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

60% in Established Urban Areas

+ 250,000 + 250,000 dwellings dwellings30% 250,000 +50,000 250,000 dwellings dwellings + 50,000 250,000 +250,000 250,000 250,000 dwellings dwellings dwellings dwellings dwellings dwellings WEST WESTWEST WEST GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

60% inEstablished Established Urban Areas 60% 60% 60% in in Established in Established Urban Urban Urban Areas Areas Areas

WEST GROWTH CORRIDOR

30% 30% 30% 30%

MELBOURNE

MELBOURNE MELBOURNE MELBOURNE MELBOURNE

APART APARTME APARTM APAR

200,000 people 200,000 200,000 200,000 people people people

40% n Established inin Established Urban Urban Areas Areas % 0% n Established 0% 40% in Established Established inin Established Established Established Urban Urban Urban Areas Urban Areas Urban Areas Areas Areas Areas 0% 40% in Established inUrban Established Urban Urban Areas Areas

2001 2001 2001 200 TOWNHO TOWNHOUSE TOWNHOU TOWNH

DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG

FEMALE: 1,704,022 (51.0%) FEMALE: FEMALE: FEMALE: 1,704,022 1,704,022 1,704,022 (51.0%) (51.0%) (51.0%)

DANDENONG

2 19 199 19 1

MALE: 1,634,682 (49.0%) MALE: MALE: MALE: 1,634,682 1,634,682 1,634,682 (49.0%) (49.0%) (49.0%)

36% 36% 36% 36% FEMALE: 1,704,022 (51.0%) SOUTH EASTEAST SOUTH SOUTH EAST SOUTH EAST GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

MALE

SOUTH EAST GROWTH CORRIDOR

36% 20 200 20 2

PROJECTION ROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION FEMALE: FEMALE: 1,831,683 (51.0%) MALE: 1,760,908 (49.0%) FEMALE: FEMALE: 1,831,683 1,831,683 1,831,683 (51.0%) (51.0%) (51.0%) MALE: MALE: MALE: 1,760,908 1,760,908 1,760,908 (49.0%) (49.0%) (49.0%) Source: Plan Melbourne Source: Source: Source: Plan Plan Melbourne Plan Melbourne Melbour ‘Gro ‘ GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH 2011 2011 2011 201 PROJECTION MELBOURNE SPATIAL GROWTH MELBOURNE MELBOURNE MELBOURNE SPATIAL SPATIAL SPATIAL GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH FEMALE: 1,831,6830% (51.0%) MALE 0% 0% OTH OTHERS OTHE OT SPATIAL GROWTH OF MELBOURNE 20300% Source: Victorian Governement Source: Source: Source: Victorian Victorian Victorian Governement, Governement, Governeme ‘Pla GROWTH 2016 2016 2016 2016 MALE: 1,966,503 (49.2%) FEMALE: 2,033,479 (50.8%) MALE: MALE: MALE: 1,966,503 1,966,503 1,966,503 (49.2%) (49.2%) (49.2%) FEMALE: FEMALE: FEMALE: 2,033,479 2,033,479 (50.8%) (50.8%) (50.8%) Source: Episcope.eu, ‘The statist Source: Source: Source: Episcope.eu, Episcope.eu, Episcope.eu, ‘The ‘The statistic ‘The statistic sta of MELBOURNE SPATIAL GROWTH SPATIAL GROWTH OF2,033,479 MELBOURNE 2030 SPATIAL SPATIAL SPATIAL GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH OFOF MELBOURNE OF MELBOURNE MELBOURNE 2030 2030 2030 0% Source: cencusdata.abs.gov.au. ‘Population Greater Melbourne’ Source: Source: Source: cencusdata.abs.gov.au. cencusdata.abs.gov.au. cencusdata.abs.gov.au. ‘Population ‘Population ‘Population Greater Greater Greater Melbourne’ Melbourne’ Melbourne’ 1.5 MILLION 1.5 1.5 1.5 MILLION MILLION MILLION Existing Urban Area Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 ‘Growth Corridor Plan’

Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 ‘Growth Corridor Plan’ Source: Source: Plan Source: Plan Melbourne Melbourne Plan Melbourne 20502050 ‘Growth 2050 ‘Growth Corridor ‘Growth Corridor Corridor Plan’Plan’ Plan’

2016

Potential Growth Corridor MALE FEMALE: (50.8%) Farming Area Existing urban area Existing urban areaarea Existing Existing urban Existing urban area area urban area Existing urban Existing urban area area urban Existing Urban Area Existing Existing Existing Urban Urban Urban Area Area AreaExisting SPATIAL GROWTH OF 2,033,479 MELBOURNE 2030 Potential Growth Corridor Potential Growth Corridor Potential Potential Growth Potential Growth Corridor Growth Corridor Corridor Potential Potential Growth Potential Growth Corridor Growth Corridor Corridor Outer Melbourne Ring Pottential Growth Corridor Source: cencusdata.abs.gov.au. ‘Population Greater Me Pottential Pottential Pottential Growth Growth Growth Corridor Corridor Corridor Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 ‘Growth Corridor Plan’ MILLION Farming Area Farming AreaArea Farming Farming Area Farming Area Area Farming Farming Area Farming Area Regional Rail MILLION MILLION MILLION Farming Area Farming Farming Farming Area Area AreaLinkMILLION Outer Melbourne Ring Metro traintrain OuterOuter Melbourne Melbourne Outer Ring Melbourne Ring Ring MetroMetro train train Metro Outer Melbourne Ring Outer Outer Melbourne Outer Melbourne Melbourne Ring Ring Ring Regional Rail LinkLink Regional LinkLink Regional Regional Rail Regional Link RailRegional Link Rail Regional Regional Rail Regional Link RailRail Link Rail Rail Link Regional Regional Regional RailRail Link Rail Link Link Existing urban area Source: Victorian Government, ‘Plan Melbourne by Numbers’ Source: rce: Source: Victorian Victorian Victorian Government, Government, Government, ‘Plan ‘Plan Melbourne ‘Plan Melbourne Melbourne by by Numbers’ Numbers’ by Numbers’ Existing urban area Existing Urban Area

2025 2025 2025 2025 PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTIONPOPULATION PROJECTION POPULATION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION POPULATION POPULATIO HOUSIN HOUSING HOUSIN HOUSI 1.5 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH 2025 0-0 0-10 0-1 1,000,000 people 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 people people people PROJECTED GROWTH HOUSING GROWTH HOUSING SIZE 501,559 501,559 501,559 501,559 76% 24% 76% 76% 76% 24% 24% 24% Pottential Growth Corridor PROJECTION GROWTH HOUSING GROWTH HOUSING SIZE PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH HOUSING HOUSING HOUSING GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH HOUSING HOUSING HOUSING SIZE SIZE SIZE PROJECTION MILLION Farming Area1.9 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 201 2016 201 20 Outer Melbourne Ring GROWTH 10 10-2 101 4.3 MILLION 4.3 4.3 4.3 MILLION MILLION MILLION Regional Rail Link 490,716 490,716 490,716 490,716 Source: Victorian Government, ‘Plan Melbourne by Numbers’

PROJECTION PROJECTION GROWTH GROWTH

Potential Growth Corridor

Farming Area

Outer Melbourne Ring

Metro train

1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6

MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION 1,000,000 people Population : Million 6.0 Million Housing: 1.91.9 Million Population Population Population : 6.0 : 6.0 : 6.0 Million Million Housing: Housing: Housing: 1.91.9 Million Million Million 1.9 Million 6.0 Million Regional Rail Link

PROJECTION GROWTH 2025 2025 2025 2025

Regional Rail Link

25% 25% 25% 25%

75% 75% 75% 75%

HOUSING25% GROWTH 75%

24%

2016 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2016 2016 25% 617,065 617,065 617,065 617,065 MILLION 6.0 MILLION MILLION MILLION 6.0 6.0 6.0 75% 25% 75% 75% 75% 25% 25%

Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 Source: Source: Plan Source: Plan Melbourne Melbourne Plan Melbourne 20502050 2050 Source: Victorian Government, ‘Plan Melbourne Numbers’ Source: Source: Victorian Source: Victorian Victorian Government, Government, Government, ‘Plan‘Plan Melbourne ‘Plan Melbourne Melbourne by Numbers’ byby Numbers’ by Numbers’ 32 Source: CBS Statistics Netherlands, ‘Household size, compositions and position the household January’ Source: Source: CBS Source: CBS Statistics Statistics CBS Statistics Netherlands, Netherlands, Netherlands, ‘Household ‘Household ‘Household size,size, compositions compositions size, compositions andand position position and position in the inin the household inhousehold the household January’ January’ . January’ . . .

Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 Source: Source: Source: Plan Plan Melbourne Plan Melbourne Melbourne 2050 2050 2050

20 20-3 202

DORDRECHT

DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG

FUTURE GROWTH FUTURE FUTURE FUTURE GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH

FUTURE GROWTH

South Holland South Holland

Melbourne Melbourne Melbourne Melbourne

HOUSIN HOUSING HOUSING HOUSIN

dor !

NORTH NORTH NORTH NORTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

37%

Existing urban Existing urban Existing area urban Existing areaarea urban

Potential Growth Cor PotentialPotential Growth Corridor Growth Potential Corrido Grow

LEIDEN

Outer Melbourne Outer Melbourne Outer Melbourne Ring Outer Melbou RingRin

Rail Link RegionalRegional Rail Regional Link Rail Regional Link Rail L

34% 34% 34% 34%

SUNBURY SUNBURY SUNBURY SUNBURY GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

DETA DETACH DETAC DET Area Area Farming Farming AreaFarming Area Farming

+ dwellings 250,000 420,000 dwellings +++420,000 +420,000 420,000 dwellings dwellingsdwellings POPULA POPULATI POPULAT POPUL !

THE HAGUE

40% Urban Areas 60% inEstablished Established Urban Areas 60% 60% 60% inin in Established Established in Established Urban Urban Urban Areas Areas Areas !

250,000 + 250,000 dwellings dwellings 250,000 + 250,000 +250,000 +250,000 250,000 250,000 dwellings dwellings dwellings dwellings dwellings dwellings 17% 50,000 000 dwellings dwellings % 40% % 0% 40% 40% 40% GOUDA

AP APAR APA A

WEST WESTWEST WEST GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

DELFT

200,000 people 200,000 200,000 200,000 people people people

30% 30% 30% 30%

MELBOURNE MELBOURNE MELBOURNE MELBOURNE

SCHOONHOVEN

,600 FEMALE: 1,629,239 (50.6%)ROTTERDAM in(49.4%) Established inin Established Urban Urban Areas Areas inin Established in Established Established inin Established Established Established Urban Urban Urban Urban Areas Urban Areas Urban Areas Areas Areas Areas !

hed stablished Urban Urban Areas Areas

DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG DANDENONG

FEMALE: 1,704,022 (51.0%) FEMALE: FEMALE: FEMALE: 1,704,022 1,704,022 1,704,022 (51.0%) (51.0%) (51.0%) !

,883 (49.5%)

FEMALE: 1,751,861 (50.5%)

33%

2 200 20 TOWN TOWNHO TOWN TOW

MALE: 1,634,682 (49.0%) MALE: MALE: MALE: 1,634,682 1,634,682 1,634,682 (49.0%) (49.0%) (49.0%) !

36% 36% 36% 36% !

DORDRECHT

SOUTH EASTEAST SOUTH SOUTH EAST SOUTH EAST GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR CORRIDOR

PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION FEMALE: FEMALE: 1,831,683 (51.0%) FEMALE: FEMALE: 1,831,683 1,831,683 1,831,683 (51.0%) (51.0%) (51.0%) dor Plan’ GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH MELBOURNE SPATIAL GROWTH MELBOURNE MELBOURNE MELBOURNE SPATIAL SPATIAL SPATIAL GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH

MALE: 1,760,908 (49.0%) MALE: MALE: MALE: 1,760,908 1,760,908 1,760,908 (49.0%) (49.0%) (49.0%)

Source: Plan Melb Source: Source: Source: Plan Plan Melbourn Plan Melbo M

2 201 20

0% 0% 0% 0% O PROJECTION SOUTH HOLLAND SPATIAL GROWTH OTH SPATIAL GROWTH OF SOUTH HOLLAND 2030

Source: Victorian Governe Source: Source: Source: Victorian Victorian Victorian Governeme Governem Gove 2016 2016 2016 2016 MALE: 1,966,503 (49.2%) MALE: MALE: MALE: 1,966,503 1,966,503 1,966,503 (49.2%) (49.2%) (49.2%) Source: Episcope.eu, ‘The Source: Source: Source: Episcope.eu, Episcope.eu, Episcope.eu, ‘The ‘The stat ‘Ts GROWTH Source: cencusdata.abs.gov.au. ‘Population Greater Melbourne’ Source: Source: Source: cencusdata.abs.gov.au. cencusdata.abs.gov.au. cencusdata.abs.gov.au. ‘Population ‘Population ‘Population Greater Greater Greater Melbourne’ Melbourne’ Melbourne’ 1.5 MILLION 1.5 1.5 1.5 MILLION MILLION MILLION Existing Urban Area Source: Axelos ‘Global Best Practice’

13%

FEMALE: 2,033,479 (50.8%) FEMALE: FEMALE: FEMALE: 2,033,479 2,033,479 (50.8%) (50.8%) (50.8%) SPATIAL GROWTH OF2,033,479 MELBOURNE 2030 SPATIAL SPATIAL SPATIAL GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH OFOF MELBOURNE OF MELBOURNE MELBOURNE 2030 2030 2030 Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 ‘Growth Corridor Plan’ Source: Source: Plan Source: Plan Melbourne Melbourne Plan Melbourne 20502050 ‘Growth 2050 ‘Growth Corridor ‘Growth Corridor Corridor Plan’Plan’ Plan’

2016 2025 2025 2025 2025 PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION POPULATI PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION POPULATIO POPULATIO POPULAT HOU HOUSIN HOUS HOU 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.6 GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH 0 1,000,000 people 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 people people people PROJECTED GROWTH HOUSING GROWTH HOUSING SIZE 501,559 501,559 501,559 501,559 76% 24% 76% 76% 76% 24% 24% 24% Urban Area 2025Existing PROJECTION GROWTH HOUSING GROWTH HOUSING SIZE PROJECTION PROJECTION PROJECTION GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH HOUSING HOUSING HOUSING GROWTH GROWTH GROWTH HOUSING HOUSING HOUSING SIZE SIZE SIZE PotentialPROJECTION Growth Corridor 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 2016 20161.85 MILLION 20 Farming Area 12 Metro Train 4.3 MILLION 4.3 4.3 4.3 MILLION MILLION MILLION GROWTH 490,716 490,716 490,716 490,716

Potential Growth Corridor mbers’. Farming Area Existing urban area Existing urban areaarea Existing Existing urban Existing urban area area urban area Existing urban Existing urban area area urban Existing Urban Area Existing Existing Existing Urban Urban Urban Area Area AreaExisting ,631 (49.4%) FEMALE: 1,806,401 (50.6%) Potential Growth Corridor Potential Growth Corridor Potential Potential Growth Potential Growth Corridor Growth Corridor Corridor Potential Potential Growth Potential Growth Corridor Growth Corridor Corridor Metro Train stock’ Pottential Growth Corridor Pottential Pottential Pottential Growth Growth Growth Corridor Corridor Corridor SPATIAL GROWTH OF SOUTH HOLLAND 2030 Farming Area Farming AreaArea Farming Farming Area Farming Area Area Farming Farming Area Farming Area Regional Rail LinkMILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION Farming Area tistic Netherlands, ‘Population Pyramid’ Farming Farming Farming Area Area Area Source: Axelos ‘Global Best Practice’ MILLION Outer Melbourne Ring Metro traintrain OuterOuter Melbourne Melbourne Outer Ring Melbourne Ring Ring MetroMetro train train Metro Outer Melbourne Ring Outer Outer Melbourne Outer Melbourne Melbourne Ring Ring Ring Regional Rail LinkLink Regional LinkLink Regional Regional Rail Regional Link RailRegional Link Rail Regional Regional Rail Regional Link RailRail Link Rail Rail Link Regional Regional Regional RailRail Link Rail Link Link Source: Victorian Government, ‘Plan Melbourne by Numbers’ Source: Source: Source: Victorian Victorian Victorian Government, Government, Government, ‘Plan ‘Plan Melbourne ‘Plan Melbourne Melbourne by by Numbers’ Numbers’ by Numbers’

PROJECTION PROJECTION GROWTH GROWTH 1.6 1.6 MILLION MILLION 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 1.6 MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION MILLION

Population : Million 6.0 Million Population Population Population : 6.0 : 6.0 : 6.0 Million Million 3.5 Million

37%

2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 2025 MILLION 6.0 MILLION MILLION MILLION 6.0 6.0 6.0

20162016

Existing

Potential Growth Corridor

Potent

Farming Area

Farmin

Outer Melbourne Ring

Metro t

Regional Rail LinkRail Link Region Regional Housing: 1.91.9 Million 25% 75% Housing: Housing: Housing: 1.91.9 Million Million 25% 25% 25% 75% 75% 75% Source: Cushman &Million Wakefield,’Residential Market 1.85 Million 40% 60%in the Netherlan 1,000,000 people

2025 2025 2025 2025 60 Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 Source: Plan Source: Plan Melbourne Melbourne Plan Melbourne 20502050 2050 G SIZE Source: HOUSING GROWTH Source: Victorian Government, ‘Plan Melbourne by Numbers’

Existing urban area

PROJECTION GROWTH

75% 25% 75% 75% 25% 25% 75% 201625%

Source: Source: Victorian Source: Victorian Victorian Government, Government, Government, ‘Plan‘Plan Melbourne ‘Plan Melbourne Melbourne by Numbers’ by Numbers’ by Numbers’ 617,065 03_METRO COMPARISON 617,065 617,065 617,065 Source: CBS Statistics Netherlands, ‘Household size, compositions and position the household January’ Source: Source: CBS Source: CBS Statistics Statistics CBS Statistics Netherlands, Netherlands, Netherlands, ‘Household ‘Household ‘Household size,size, compositions compositions size, compositions andand position position and position in the inin the household inhousehold the household January’ January’ . January’ . . .

Source: Plan Melbourne 2050 Source: Source: Source: Plan Plan Melbourne Plan Melbourne Melbourne 2050 2050 2050

Key Findings >> Many layers in Melbourne’s governance, but relatively ineffective; whereas South Holland has a more simplified structure, with a National and Regional focus. >> ‘Polder politics’ and collective decision making in Holland, vs. apathy, adversarial politics in Melbourne. >> Green Heart as a central pivot in South Holland vs. the perimeter green belt on Melbourne’s edge. >> Melbourne’s monocentric structure. Inefficient transport due to congestion; conversely South Holland has polycentric structure, less time travel between cities, and more effective transport. >> Comparable levels of housing stress (mortgage and rental proportionate to income). >> Country of origin heavily influences by ex-colonies in South Holland, whereas Melbourne more influenced by location within Asia. >> Melbourne growth shaped by natural constraints, but expanding into open agricultural land; whereas a more strategic management of expansion as infill within South Holland.

03_METRO COMPARISON

“If you design a good street, you design a good city” - Professor Rob Adams

Neighbourhood Comparison Building upon the Metropolitan comparison, this section narrows down into a finer scale of analysis. The following section explores the comparative neighbourhood areas in Melbourne and South Holland. This research explores four key areas types: High Density Inner Suburban, Mixed Inner Suburban, Inner Suburban Residential and New Suburban Residential.

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

Forrest Hill > Wijnhaven Inner Urban High Density

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LOCATION & ACCESS Forrest Hill, Melbourne

80km

MELBOURNE CBD

3KMS - FORREST HILL >> MELBOURNE CBD

12min

13min

15min

LOCATION & ACCESS Wijnhaven, Rotterdam

80km AMSTERDAM

LEIDEN

UTRECHT THE HAGUE DELFT

ROTTERDAM

DORDRECHT

3KMS -WIJNHAVEN >> ROTTERDAM CBD

8min

7min

12 min

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

eople

e/Ha

DEMOGRAPHICS

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha

LAND 57 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021700 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly weekly 1,021 weekly weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON Forrest Hill, Melbourne PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people e/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + STATUS + + STATUS INCOME LAND AREA 251 ha LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,372 weekly 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 17,2% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%weekly 0% PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION POPULATION property14,669 26,795 people ? ? property? HOUSEHOLD owner INCOME HOUSEHOLD TENURE owner 700 weekly 1,021 weekly + 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly TENURE STATUS PER PERSON + + occupied STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occupied LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha DWELLINGS /HA 58/ha ? ? 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% +

people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% other

32,9%

STATUS POPULATION 20,0% DENSITY

470 people/Ha 24,0% 56,0%

â&#x201A;¬550-700/wk $800-1000/wk property property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occupied owner occupied INCOME PER PERSON other ?

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

HOUSEHOLD+ STATUS 22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other owner occupied

property

TENURE

Station pier

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

+ 20,0%

24,0%

property

40%

56,0%

42%

18%

owner occupied

Huygen Museum

Leger Museum

TOURISM

English

Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Australian English Irish Scottish Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Australian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian Germany

StationOther pier Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

Bay Street

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

Huygen Museum

Other English

OWNER-OCCUPIED Leger Museum SOCIAL HOUSING Other RENTING Turkish

Turkish

Other

Western Immigrant

Non Western Immigrant

Australian English Irish

PLACE OF BIRTH Scottish Irish

Scottish

Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Australian

Greek Italian

S. AFRICA 5%

PLACE OF BIRTH

Morroco

INDIA 6%

Dutch

Suriname Suriname Turkish

Turkish INDONESIA Other 6% Other

Germany

GermanyOther Other

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

UK 30%

VIETNAM 7%

MALAYSIA 9%

GREECE 9%

NZ 17% CHINA 11%

Western

Non We

Morroco Dutch

Surinam Turkish Other

Wester

Non W

Morroc Dutch

Surinam

Turkish Other

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

8 people

eople/Ha

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha DEMOGRAPHICS

LAND 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021700 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly weekly Rotterdam 1,021 wee weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON Wijnhaven, PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people eople/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + + STATUS + STATUS INCOME LAND AREA 162 ha LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly kly 27,9% 1,372 weekly 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 17,2% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%wee PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION her 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION POPULATION 14,447 26,795 people property ? property? HOUSEHOLD owner INCOME HOUSEHOLD TENURE owner 700 weekly 1,021 + weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON TENURE + STATUS + occupied y STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occup LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha DWELLINGS /HA 63/ha ? ? 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% + + STATUS POPULATION her people/Ha 470 people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% other DENSITY â&#x201A;¬650-750/wk $1000-1100/wk property INCOME PERother PERSON property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied y owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occup owner occupied

kly

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

HOUSEHOLD +STATUS 22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other property

TENURE

Station pier

owner occupied

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

+ 20,0%

24,0%

property

64%

56,0%

24%

12%

Huygen Museum

Leger Museum Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Australian English Irish Scottish Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Australian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian Germany

Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

StationOther pier

Bay Street

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

OWNER-OCCUPIED

Turkish

Huygen Museum

Leger Other Museum RENTING Other

SOCIAL HOUSING

Other English

Western Immigrant

Non Western Immigrant

Australian English

Irish PLACE OF BIRTH

Western Immigrant

Australian

Scottish Greek Italian

owner occupied

TOURISM

English

Irish

Scottish Greek Italian Germany

PLACE OF BIRTH

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA 5% TURKEY 7%

GERMANY 5%

Morroco Non Western Immigrant Morroco

Dutch

Suriname Suriname Turkish

Turkish

Other

GermanyOther

Other

INDONESIA 22%

Other

TURKEY 7%

MOROCCO 20%

CAPE VERDE 8% ANTILLES + ARUBA 10%

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

URBAN STRUCTURE Forrest Hill, Melbourne

vehicular road bike lane

pedestrian lane shared street

primary road secondary road

primary road lane

secondary road tram line

lane tram line

building blocks: constructed in 1997s

building blocks: constructed in tram stop 1997s tram stop

URBAN STRUCTURE Wijnhaven, Rotterdam

vehicular road vehicular road

bike lane

bike lane pedestrian lane

pedestrian lane

shared street

primaryprimary road road secondary road

secondary road lane

lane

building blocks: constructedin in building blocks: constructed 1997s 1997s tram stop

tram stop

tram line

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

DENSITY & LAND USE Forrest Hill, Melbourne

Low density residential Low density residential

Highrise

low rise apartments low rise apartments

Mid-high density residential Mid-high density residential

Public utility

DENSITY & LAND USE Wijnhaven, Rotterdam

Low density residential

Mid-high density residential

Highrise

Public utility

Low density residential

low rise apartments Highrise

Mid-high density residential Public utility

low rise apartments

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Forrest Hill, Melbourne

Public Open Public Open Space Space

Residential Residential Hard

PrivateOpen Open Space Space Private

Residential Soft

Street Trees

Hard

Residential Soft

Commercial Active

Commercial Inactive

Commercial Parking/Service

Inactive

Parking/Service

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Wijnhaven, Rotterdam

Public Open Space

Residential Hard

Private Open Space

Residential Soft

Street Trees

Commercial Active

Public Open Space Private Open Space Street Trees

Residential Hard

Residential Commercial Inactive

Soft

Parking/Service

Commercial Active Commercial Inactive Parking/Service

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Forrest Hill, Melbourne

TOWER

CORNER SHOP

TOWNHOUSE

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Wijnhaven, Rotterdam

PERIMETER BLOCK / TOWER

MID-CENTURY OFFICE

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

Fitzroy > Oude Noorden Inner Suburban Mixed

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LOCATION & ACCESS Fitzroy, Melbourne

80km

MELBOURNE CBD

3KMS - FITZROY >> MELBOURNE CBD

12min

13min

15min

LOCATION & ACCESS Oude Noorden, Rotterdam

80km AMSTERDAM

LEIDEN

UTRECHT THE HAGUE DELFT

ROTTERDAM

DORDRECHT

3KMS - OUDE NOORDEN >> ROTTERDAM CBD

8min

7min

12 min

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

eople

e/Ha

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha

DEMOGRAPHICS LAND 57 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021700 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly weekly 1,021 weekly weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON Fitzroy, Melbourne PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people e/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + + STATUS + STATUS LAND AREA INCOME 140 ha 57 Ha LAND AREA 457 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,372 weekly 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,99717,2% weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%weekly 0% PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people ? POPULATION 9,430 property ? ? HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSEHOLD property owner TENURE 700 weekly 1,021 weekly + 1,997 weekly 1,372 owner weekly TENURE STATUS PER PERSON + + occupied STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occupied LAND AREA 63 457 Ha 57 Ha POPULATION DENSITY persons/ha ? ? 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% +

people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% other

32,9%

STATUS POPULATION 20,0% DENSITY

470 people/Ha 24,0% 56,0%

â&#x201A;¬788/wk $530/wk property property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occupied INCOME PER PERSON other HOUSEHOLD STATUS ?

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other owner occupied

property

TENURE

Station pier

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

+ 20,0%

24,0%

property 53%

56,0%

20%

23%

Scottish Greek Italian

Huygen Museum

Leger Museum Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Western Immigrant

Australian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian

StationOther pier Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

Germany

Bay Street

Dutch

OWNER-OCCUPIED Turkish SOCIAL HOUSING Leger Museum Other RENTING Suriname Suriname

Huygen Museum

Turkish Other

Other English

Western Immigrant

Australian English

Irish PLACE OF BIRTH Australian

Scottish Greek Italian

Irish

Scottish Greek Italian Germany Other

Germany Other

PLACE OF BIRTH

1.2% SUDAN 1.2% US 3.1% CHINA NEW ZEALAND

Non Western Immigrant

Western Immigrant

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

OTHER

5.1%

Morroco

Dutch

3.1%

Suriname Suriname Turkish

Turkish

ENGLAND

Other

3.7%

VIETNAM

Other

4.2%

AUSTRALIA

55%

owner occupied

Australian English Irish

TOURISM

English

owner occupied

Western

Non We

Morroco Dutch

Surinam Turkish Other

Wester

Non W

Morroc Dutch

Surinam

Turkish Other

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

8 people

eople/Ha

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha

DEMOGRAPHICS LAND 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly 700 Noorden, weekly Rotterdam 1,021 wee weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON Oude PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people eople/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + + STATUS + STATUS INCOME LAND AREA 101 ha LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly weekly kly 27,9% 1,372 weekly 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 1,021 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 17,2% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%wee PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION her 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people ? POPULATION 16,910 property ? HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSEHOLD property owner TENURE 700 weekly 1,021 weekly + 1,997 weekly 1,372 owner weekly TENURE PER PERSON + STATUS + occupied y STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occup LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha POPULATION DENSITY persons/ha ? ? 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 16724,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% + + STATUS POPULATION her people/Ha 470 people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% other DENSITY â&#x201A;¬400/wk $600/wk property INCOME PERother PERSON property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied y owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occup owner occupied

kly

HOUSEHOLD STATUS ?

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other

TENURE

property

Station pier

owner occupied

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

20,0%

24,0%

property 5.2%

56,0%

19%

29%

Huygen Museum

Leger Museum Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Australian English Irish Scottish Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Australian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian Germany

Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

StationOther pier

Bay Street

Dutch

OWNER-OCCUPIED RENTING SOCIAL HOUSING

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

Huygen Museum

Turkish

Leger Other Museum Other

Other English

Western Immigrant

Australian PLACE OF BIRTH

Non Western Immigrant

English

Irish

Scottish Greek Italian

46.8%

owner occupied

TOURISM

English

Western Immigrant

Australian Irish Scottish Greek Italian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

PLACE OF BIRTH

Morroco

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

OTHER

21%

Germany

DUTCH

35%

GermanyOther

Turkish

Other

Other MOROCCAN

17% 14% TURKISH

13% SURINAMESE & ANTILLEAN

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

URBAN STRUCTURE Fitzroy, Melbourne

FITZROY

ROAD NETWORK

primary road

2 Lane Road secondary road 1 Lane Road lane

building blocks: constructed in 1997s tram stop

Laneway tram (Fitzroy) line Pedestrian & Bike Lane (Oude Noorden) Tram/Light Rail Line

ehicular road

URBAN STRUCTURE Oude Noorden, Rotterdam

OUDE NOORDEN

primary road

bike lane

secondary road

pedestrian lane

lane

hared street

building blocks: constructed in 1997s tram stop

tram line

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

DENSITY & LAND USE Fitzroy, Melbourne

FITZROY

Low density residential HOUSING TYPOLOGIES

Mid-high density residential

Highrise Row House

Public utility

low rise apartments Apartments

Warehouse Conversion (Fitzroy) Maisonette (Oude Noorden)

DENSITY & LAND USE Oude Noorden, Rotterdam

OUDE NOORDEN

Low density residential

Mid-high density residential

Highrise

Public utility

low rise apartments

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Fitzroy, Melbourne

FITZROY

INTERFACES Public Open Space

Residential Hard

Private Open Space

Residential Soft Soft (1-3m) Residential

Street Trees

Commercial Active

Public Open Space Private Open Space Street Trees

Residential Hard

Residential Soft (>3m)

Commercial Inactive

Commercial Active

Parking/Service

Commercial Inactive Parking/Service

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Oude Noorden, Rotterdam

OUDE NOORDEN

Public Open Space

Residential Hard

Private Open Space

Residential Soft

Street Trees

Commercial Active Commercial Inactive Parking/Service

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Fitzroy, Melbourne

CONVERTED WAREHOUSE

ROW-HOUSE

SHOP-HOUSE

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Oude Noorden, Rotterdam

SHOP-HOUSE

WALK-UP APARTMENT

ROW-HOUSE

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

Elwood > Delft West Inner Suburban Residential

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LOCATION & ACCESS Elwood, Melbourne

80km

MELBOURNE CBD

9KMS - ELWOOD >> MELBOURNE CBD

26min

35min

40min

LOCATION & ACCESS Delft West, Delft

80km AMSTERDAM

LEIDEN

UTRECHT THE HAGUE DELFT

ROTTERDAM

DORDRECHT

750m - DELFT WEST >> DELFT

9min

3min

12 min

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

eople

e/Ha

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha

DEMOGRAPHICS LAND 57 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021700 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly weekly 1,021 weekly weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON Elwood, Melbourne PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people e/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + + STATUS + STATUS LAND AREA INCOME 260 ha 57 Ha LAND AREA 457 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,372 weekly 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,99717,2% weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%weekly 0% PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people ? POPULATION 107,127 property ? ? HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSEHOLD property owner TENURE 700 weekly 1,021 weekly + 1,997 weekly 1,372 owner weekly TENURE STATUS PER PERSON + + occupied STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occupied LAND AREA 50.84 457 Ha 57 Ha POPULATION DENSITY persons/ha ? ? 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% +

people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% other

32,9%

STATUS POPULATION 20,0% DENSITY

470 people/Ha 24,0% 56,0%

â&#x201A;¬725/wk $1,060/wk property property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occupied INCOME PER PERSON other HOUSEHOLD STATUS ?

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other owner occupied

property

TENURE

Station pier

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

+ 20,0%

24,0%

property 42.99%

56,0%

23.4%

14%

owner occupied Huygen Museum

Leger Museum

TOURISM

English

Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Australian English Irish Scottish Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Australian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian

StationOther pier Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

Germany

Bay Street

Dutch

OWNER-OCCUPIED Turkish OTHER Leger Museum Other RENTING Suriname Suriname

Huygen Museum

Turkish Other

Other English

Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Australian English

Irish PLACE OF BIRTH

Western Immigrant

Australian

Scottish Greek Italian

Irish

Scottish Greek Italian

PLACE OF BIRTH

Morroco

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

SCOTTISH 10.4%

Germany

Turkish

ENGLISH 31.8%

Germany

IRISH 14.1%

AUSTRALIAN 27.8%

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

ITALIAN 5.3%

Other

owner occupied

Turkish

Other

Western

Non We

Morroco Dutch

Surinam Turkish Other

Wester

Non W

Morroc Dutch

Surinam

Turkish Other

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

8 people

eople/Ha

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha

DEMOGRAPHICS LAND 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly 700 weekly weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON Delft West,1,021 Delft wee PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people eople/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + + STATUS + STATUS INCOME LAND AREA 54 ha LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly weekly kly 27,9% 1,372 weekly 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 1,021 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 17,2% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%wee PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION her 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people ? POPULATION 101,075 property ? HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSEHOLD property owner TENURE 700 weekly 1,021 weekly + 1,997 weekly 1,372 owner weekly TENURE PER PERSON + STATUS + occupied y STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occup LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha POPULATION DENSITY persons/ha ? ? 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 44.29 24,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% + + STATUS POPULATION her people/Ha 470 people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% other DENSITY â&#x201A;¬654/wk $958/wk property INCOME PERother PERSON property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied y owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occup owner occupied

kly

HOUSEHOLD STATUS ?

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other

TENURE

property

Station pier

owner occupied

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

+ 20,0%

24,0%

property 56%

56,0%

22%

21%

owner occupied Huygen Museum

Leger Museum

TOURISM

English

Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Australian English Irish Scottish Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Australian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian Germany

StationOther pier Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

Bay Street

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

RENTING SOCIAL HOUSING

Turkish

Huygen Museum

Leger Other Museum Other

Other English

Western Immigrant

Australian PLACE OF BIRTH

Non Western Immigrant

English

Irish

Scottish Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Australian Irish Scottish Greek Italian

PLACE OF BIRTH

Morroco

Dutch

Suriname Suriname Turkish

Turkish

Germany

Other

GermanyOther Other

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

OTHER NONWESTERNERS

NONWESTERNERS

DUTCH 13%

Other

19%

MOROCCANS

WESTERN IMMIGRANTS

13%

ANTILLEANS & ARUBANS

SURINAMES TURKISH

SURINAMES

2% 2%

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

URBAN STRUCTURE Elwood, Melbourne

primary road secondary road lane

ane

tram line

building blocks: constructed in 1997s tram stop

URBAN STRUCTURE Delft West, Delft

ehicular road

primary road

ike lane

secondary road

edestrian lane

lane

hared street

building blocks: constructed in 1997s tram stop

tram line

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

DENSITY & LAND USE Elwood, Melbourne

Mix use (residential and commerical) Residential

merical)

Commercial

com ntial and e id s e r ( ix use

tial Residen ial

rc Comme

ity

til Public u

DENSITY & LAND USE

Delft West, Delft

ide

nt ia

Mix use (residential and commerical)

co m

Residential

Public utility

ica

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Elwood, Melbourne

Public Open Space

Residential Hard

Private Open Space

Residential Soft

Street Trees

Commercial Active

Public Open Space Private Open Space Street Trees

Commercial Inactive Parking/Service

INTERFACES Residential Hard Residential Soft (1-3m) Residential Soft (>3m) Commercial Active

Commercial Inactive

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Delft West, Delft

HUGO DE GROOTSTRAAT

CASPAR FAGELSTRAAT

HUGO DE GROOTSTRAAT

ANTOINE HEINSIUSSTRAA

ide

nt ia

co m

Public Open Space

Residential Hard

Private Open Space

Residential Soft

Street Trees

Commercial Active

ica

VERLENGDE SINGELSTRAAT

Commercial Inactive Parking/Service

JAN DE WITTSTRAAT

VERLENGDE SINGELSTRAAT

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

PAXLAAN

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Elwood, Melbourne

MIXED USE

DETACHED DWELLING

MAISONET

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Delft West, Delft

ROW HOUSE

WALK-UP APARTMENT

APARTMENT BUILDING

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

Beacon Cove > Ypenburg New Suburban Residential

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LOCATION & ACCESS Beacon Cove, Melbourne

80km

MELBOURNE CBD

5.6 KMS - BEACON COVE >> MELBOURNE CBD

8min

25min

30min

LOCATION & ACCESS Ypenburg, The Hague

80km AMSTERDAM

LEIDEN

UTRECHT THE HAGUE DELFT

ROTTERDAM

DORDRECHT

7.1 KMS - YPENBURG >> THE HAGUE

12min

26min

33 min

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

eople

e/Ha

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha

DEMOGRAPHICS LAND 57 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021700 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly weekly 1,021 weekly weekly 1,372 weekly PERSON Beacon Cove,PER Melbourne PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people e/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + + STATUS + STATUS LAND AREA INCOME 457 ha 57 Ha LAND AREA 457 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,372 weekly 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,99717,2% weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%weekly 0% PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people ? POPULATION 14,508 property ? ? HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSEHOLD property owner TENURE 700 weekly 1,021 weekly + 1,997 weekly 1,372 owner weekly TENURE STATUS PER PERSON + + occupied STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occupied LAND AREA 31.76 457 Ha 57 Ha POPULATION DENSITY persons/ha ? ? 7,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% +

people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% other

32,9%

STATUS POPULATION 20,0% DENSITY

470 people/Ha 24,0% 56,0%

â&#x201A;¬1,997/wk $1,372/wk property property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occupied INCOME PER PERSON other HOUSEHOLD STATUS ?

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other owner occupied

property

TENURE

Station pier

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

+ 20,0%

24,0%

property 32.9%

56,0%

27.9%

Scottish Greek Italian

Huygen Museum

Western Immigrant Non Western Immigrant

Western Immigrant

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian

Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

StationOther pier

Bay Street

Dutch

RENTING Turkish OTHER Leger Museum Other OWNER-OCCUPIED Suriname Suriname

Huygen Museum

Turkish Other

Other English

Western Immigrant

Australian English

Greek Italian

Scottish Greek Italian

Western Immigrant

Germany

Australian Irish

Non Western Immigrant

Other

Irish PLACE OF BIRTH Scottish

PLACE OF BIRTH

Morroco Non Western Immigrant Morroco

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

Italian

Turkish

Germany Other

Germany

Other

Greek

English

Other

Irish

22%

Leger Museum

Australian

Germany

17.2%

Australian English Irish

owner occupied

TOURISM

English

Australian

Other

Western

Non We

Morroco Dutch

Surinam Turkish Other

Wester

Non W

Morroc Dutch

Surinam

Turkish Other

457 Ha POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY

8 people

eople/Ha

LAND AREA 26,795 people POPULATION

57 Ha 26,795 people

POPULATION 470 people/Ha DENSITY

470 people/Ha

DEMOGRAPHICS LAND 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME LAND AREA 457AREA Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,3721,997 weekly 700 Ypenburg, weekly The Hague 1,021 wee weekly 1,372 weekly PER PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION POPULATION 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people eople/Ha 470 people/Ha ?470 people/Ha 31,76 people/Ha DENSITY ? HOUSEHOLD DENSITY HOUSEHOLD + + STATUS + STATUS INCOME LAND AREA 101 ha LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha INCOME 700 weekly weekly kly 27,9% 1,372 weekly 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 1,021 56,0% 0%24,0% 1,021 700 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly 22,0% 17,2% 32,9% 20,0% 56,0%wee PER 27,9% PERSON PER PERSON POPULATION her 31,76other people/Ha 470 people/Ha DENSITY 14,508 people POPULATION 26,795 people ? POPULATION 16,910 property ? HOUSEHOLD INCOME HOUSEHOLD property owner TENURE 700 weekly 1,021 weekly + 1,997 weekly 1,372 owner weekly TENURE PER PERSON + STATUS + occupied y STATUS owner occupied occupied property owner occup LAND AREA 457 Ha 57 Ha POPULATION DENSITY persons/ha ? ? 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 167.43 24,0% 56,0% HOUSEHOLD 22,0% 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 0% 24,0% 56,0% + + STATUS POPULATION her people/Ha 470 people/Ha 22,0% 31,76 17,2% 27,9% 32,9% 20,0% 24,0% 56,0% 0% other DENSITY â&#x201A;¬400/wk $600/wk property INCOME PERother PERSON property owner INCOME TENURE owner property 700 weekly 1,021 weekly 1,997 weekly 1,372 weekly owner PER PERSON TENURE TENURE occupied y owner occupied occupied property occupied property owner occup owner occupied

kly

HOUSEHOLD STATUS ?

HOUSEHOLD STATUS

22,0%

17,2%

27,9%

32,9%

other

TENURE

property

Station pier

owner occupied

TOURISM

TENURE

Bay Street

+ 20,0% property 20%

24,0%

56,0%

24%

Huygen Museum

Scottish Greek Italian

Non Western Immigrant

Morroco Non Western Immigrant

Irish Greek Italian Germany

Morroco

PLACE OF BIRTH

Scottish

Germany

Bay Street

Dutch

Suriname Suriname

Huygen Museum

Other English

Greek Italian

Turkish

Leger Other Museum Other

Non Western Immigrant

English

Scottish

RENTING OWNER-OCCUPIED

Turkish

Western Immigrant

Australian PLACE OF BIRTH Irish

Leger Museum

Western Immigrant

Australian

StationOther pier

56%

Western Immigrant

Australian English Irish

owner occupied

TOURISM

English

Western Immigrant

Australian Irish Scottish Greek Italian

Morroco Non Western Immigrant Morroco

PLACE OF Turkish BIRTH

Dutch

Other

Germany

Dutch

Suriname Suriname Western Immigrant Turkish Turkish Other

GermanyOther

Other

Suriname

Non Western Immigrant Dutch Morroco

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

URBAN STRUCTURE Beacon Cove, Melbourne

2 Lane Road primary road

1 Lane Road

secondary road Laneway

lane

Tram / Light Rail Line

tram line

Tram Stopblocks: constructed in building 1997s Bus Stop

tram stop

ehicular road

URBAN STRUCTURE Ypenburg, The Hague

2 Lane Road

primary 1road Lane Road

ke lane

secondary road Laneway

edestrian lane

lane Tram / Light Rail Line

hared street

tram stop

building blocks: constructed in 1997s tram stop

tram line

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

DENSITY & LAND USE Beacon Cove, Melbourne

Low density residential Low density residential

Highrise

Apartments Commercial

low rise apartments

Mid-high density residential Public utility

DENSITY & LAND USE Ypenburg, The Hague

Low density residential Low density residential

Highrise

Mid-high density residential Public utility

Public utility

Apartments

low rise apartments Commercial

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Beacon Cove, Melbourne

Active Commercial

Public Open Space Inactive Commercial

Residential HardIndividual Open Space

Street Tree

Soft Residential Private Open Space

Residential Soft Private Open Space

Personal Object

Hard Residential

Street Trees

Public Open Space

Commercial Active

Commercial Inactive Parking/Service

LANDSCAPE & PUBLIC REALM Ypenburg, The Hague

Inactive Commercial

Public Open Space

Residential Hard

Private Open Space Hard Residential

Residential Soft

Street Trees

Commercial Active

Soft Residential

Individual Open Space

Street Tree

Private Open Space

Personal Object

Public Open Space

Commercial Inactive Parking/Service

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Beacon Cove, Melbourne

APARTMENT TOWER

ROW-APARTMENT

DETACHED HOUSE

URBAN FORM & TYPOLOGY Ypenburg, The Hague

ROW HOUSE 1

ROW HOUSE 2

ROW HOUSE 3

ROW HOUSE 4

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

Key Findings >> Both high density neighbourhoods have a low sense/display of ownership, with hard interfaces and less diversity. >> Inner suburban mixed areas were relatively accessible by public and active transport, Oude Noorden had active frontages clustered around intersections, whereas in Fitzroy, active frontages followed the linear corridors of the tram line. >> Inner suburban residential neighbourhoods both have underutlised public space. Delft West was better connected via public and active transport. Elwood has a greater diversity in land uses. >> New suburban areas were particulary different. Beacon Cover, Melbourne had a greater diversity in typologies, whereas Ypenburg, South Holland contained only row houses. Beacon Cove had public space distrbuted however it was unused with a low sense of ownership; whereas Ypenburg had more defined public space.

04_NEIGHBOURHOOD COMPARISON

“The odd things that don’t fall into a category are often the things that stick in our minds the longest” - Nigel Bertram

Typology Comparison The typology scale is the final phase of the comparative analysis between Melbourne and South Holland. This section narrows down to scope to a finer scale, analysing exemplary project in both Melbourne and the Netherlands. Each of comparative project focuses on a particular type, includi: Apartment Precincts, Townhouse Precincts, Towers, Apartments and Townhouse Infill projects.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

>> Neutral, ambiguous ground-floor zones whereby â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;programmeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is not strictly defined >> Small, square building footprints, accommodating 4-5 storey townhouses >> Design that provides the flexibility for functional transformations over time

Melbourne

Project Name:

Lothian Street Townhouses

Architects:

Freadman White

Location:

North Melbourne, Melbourne

Completed: 2014 Typology:

Townhouses

Site area: 188m2 Building area: 680m2 Average footprint: 47m2 Plot ratio: 3.5:1

The project has been described as ‘an experiment in hybrid planning’ whereby the four townhouses have been planned to allow for both residential and commercial functions - in the one vertical space. More of an experiment in hybrid building typologies, each townhouse morphs downwards from rooftop terrace (apartment style) - to residential town house - to what reads as a small shop front or office at the street level. The addition of transparent roller doors further adds to the ambiguity of the ground floor frontage. It is in fact a lack of planning and programming that makes this project exemplary. A kind of townhouse in disguise - providing the possibility for a variety of activities to coexist inside of its tall square footprint. Whilst ‘mixed-use’ development is not unique in this predominantly mixed-use area of inner Melbourne, this project pushes the true sense of the term in a manner that responds to a current and realistic need for flexible, indeterminate space that is capable of adapting to the changing lifestyle needs of its inhabitants.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

>> High density, low rise dwelling, 100 dwellings per hectare >> 30-50% internal voids in every dwelling >> All dwellings designed individually by different architects and designers

100

South Holland

Project Name: Borneo Architects:

West8 and various architects

Location:

Amsterdam, Netherlands

Completed: 1996 Typology:

Townhouses

The Masterplan for the Borneo Project by West 8 reinterpreted the traditional Dutch canal house by exploring low rise family terraces within a high density environment using a framework to provoke innovative dwellings within the boundaries of the ‘terrace’ typology’. Various architects independently designed each dwelling using a design code which dictated building height, plot width, materials and access. A unique feature to the project is its implementation of the requirement for 30-50% of the plot being used as a void, allowing natural ventilation, daylighting and outdoor space within a high density residential development.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

101

>> Narrow plans separated by external deck spaces >> Clad in a single material sitting discreetly above preserved shopfronts >> Communal backyard and parking at rear of property

102

Melbourne

Project Name:

Simpson Street Apartments

Architects:

Baracco + Wright Architects

Location:

Northcote, Melbourne

Completed: 2006 Typology:

Shophouse Apartment

Two two-bedroom apartments and one studio apartment straddle the two shopfront buildings on the first floor. The apartments are wedge-shaped in both section and elevation with the highest part pointing away from the street, yet they sit behind the existing brick parapet in order to preserve the existing shopfronts. Simple pergolas complete the form through the front and rear. Clad in a single material, the forms sit foreign yet quietly above the jumbled shopfronts. The narrow plans are arranged so that each apartment is bookended and separated by external deck spaces, resulting in the living room facing the courtyard for its entire length rather than just on one side. Understated in its street elevation, this project explores a new hybridisation of a shophouse and apartment typology.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON 103

>> Possible future programs conversion >> Public interface to impart and sustain urban vibrancy >> Three distinct volumes of residential and commercial programmings

104

South Holland

Project Name: B’Tower Architects:

Wiel Arets Architects

Location:

Rotterdam, Netherlands

Completed: 2013 Typology:

Apartment Tower

Located in the centre of Rotterdam, B’Tower is a expansion of Marcel Breuer’s 1955 ‘Bijkenkorf’ department store. Adjacent to the modernist commercial building with poor public interface, B’Tower’s retail and shops are fully accessible by pedestrian in a way to retain the urban vibrancy in drastically restructuring precinct. Featuring an additional elevators for vehicles and bicycles sustains the privacy between residential program and commercial program underneath the hybrid tower. Envisaging the future possible change of uses, the tower are programmed as flexible units to allow a conversion from ‘short-stay apartment’ to cooperative housing. They recognized housing as the most flexible programming.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON 105

>> Apartments show traces of history through interior design, incorporates ESD in stage 2 onwards, encourages stair use, 80% construction waste recycled, car share facilities, bicycle storage >> Dwelling diversity including studios, 1,2 and 3 bed single and double level apartments and 4 bedroom townhouses >> Landscaping includes communal kitchen gardens, community squares, public squares, free flowing planting and installation of new mature trees >> City of Yarra collaboration for community cafe

106

Melbourne

Project Name:

GTV 9 | Studio-Nine Apartments

Architects:

Hayball (Masterplan/ Architect) Kerstin Thompson (Architect) Oculus (Landscape Architect)

Location:

Richmond, Melbourne

Completed: 2011-2014 Typology:

Mixed (Apartment, Townhouses and Retail)

Studio Nine Apartments is an outstanding medium to higher density residential development staged on a historic site which once housed Wertheim Piano Factory (1909), Heinz Canned Food Company (1935) and General Television Corporation (1955). The adaptive reuse and redevelopment encompasses 390 contemporary apartments, 68 townhouses and 34 heritage apartments alongside community and retail use that pertains to the context. The tri-staged precinct includes luxury apartments within the heritage building, 5% affordable housing stock and 5% stocks that are adaptable and accessible for the physically challenged. Hayball has focused its masterplanning on pedestrian experience through permeability and connectivity within the grain structure of the community and to the broader neighborhood.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

107

Source: XXX

Bed Bed First floor

Kitchen Living

Apartment A 84,6 sqm

>> Staggered facades >> Irregular plot >> Varying building height and roof type in the same neighbourhood

108

South Holland

Project Name:

Wooden House

Architects:

M3H Architekten

Location:

Amsterdam, Netherlands

Completed: 2013 Typology:

Courtyard Block

Considering the significant amount brick buildings in Dutch residential neighbourhood, M3Hâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Wooden House project proved how aesthetic difference achieved through wooden facade can still address the existing urban context.

Apartment D

Living

Bed Kitchen Apartment D (second floor) 52,7 sqm

Balcony

Living

Bellamy neighbourhood integrates living and working environments, thus variety of housing designs is evident in the area. Varying heights have also become the highlight of this area as it was influenced by its planning history of a village-like configuration. It appears that the presence of residential and commercial buildings offer not only aesthetic variety, but enhances social interaction and engagement.

Bed

Apartment C (first floor) 48,1 sqm

Living

Bed

Balcony Kitchen

Apartment B (Basement) 71,3 sqm

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON 109

>> Common outdoor space that feels private >> Axial rotation of apartments >> Height + setbacks sympathetic to street context

110

Melbourne

Project Name:

32 Kerr Street

Architects:

NMBW Architects

Location:

Fitzroy, Melbourne

Completed: 2010 Typology:

Hybrid Townhouse Block

This apartment block consists of seven spacious townhouses, two or three stories high. The ground floor consists of glass-fronted garages that could be adapted into showrooms or retail. In this the design allows for a less car-dependent future, and a potential for live-work situations. Between these garages, a six-metre wide arcade runs from front to back, allowing for both vehicles and pedestrians. The private entrances to each apartment are from the garages, providing instances where residents can interact with one another in common space. From each garage the apartments are designed with a north-south orientation, meaning each one is equal in outlook, view and cross-ventilation. The land of 32 Kerr Street was formerly a one-storey brick warehouse. The owner, who owned and operated a car muffler company approached the architects to develop the land into townhouses. He has personally customised the functional and ornamental steel components for the building. n 0

First Floor Plan

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

111

Architects: 1. Lafour + Wijk 2. DKV 3. Kulper + Campagnons 4. NL Architects 5. Geurst + Schultze 6. De Architekten Cie 7.Dick van Gameren 8. Clause + Kaan

1 2

3 5 3

>> Combination of Permeter Block and Urban Villa Typology

2 7

3 4

>> The perimeter block serve as a buffer for noise from outside of this precinct, because it surrounded by train line and high way >> The pattern of this development is created by six different aspect; building footprint, scattered trees, pavement, grass, the location of the entrance and the connection between the entrance

112

South Holland

Project Name: Funenpark Architects:

de Architekten Cie, Geurts + Schulze, Claus + Kaan, DKV, Lafour + Wijk, Van Sambeek + van Veen, Dick van Gameren, KuperCompagnons

Location:

Amsterdam, Netherlands

Completed: 2012 Typology:

Combination of (Courtyard Perimeter Block, & Urban Villa)

Funenpark project is a concept that expressed 4 components: “Funenpark” as open space component, “Het Funen” as the pearl of 16 urban villas in the middle of courtyard typology, “Sporenboog” (curving arc), is the curving slab along the east side, and “Cruquiustkade”, is the southern slab of the development. These development have been designed by Frits van Dongen (Architekten Cie) as an urban designer and several different architect who designed the building. The concept from urban design perspective of creating perimeter block surrounding the courtyard is to reduce the noise pollution from the railway and highway. Furthermore, in the inside of the perimeter block, Dongen set a pattern to emphasize the open space, so people can still experience urban place between apartment building. Moreover, the architect used a special laminated glass to deflect the sound away from the building. The combination between urban design aspect and architecture aspect, can create harmony for the user.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

113

>> Quality Living >> Medium Density Development >> Streetscape Design

114

Melbourne

Project Name:

St Leonards Pl & Neptune Pl

Architects:

Nonda Katsalidis

Location:

St Kilda, Melbourne

Completed: 1997 Typology:

Apartment, Row-house

Stage I apartment 3 bedroom unit

It is a medium density experiment with the composition of two four-storey apartment complexes with communal courtyards. The development is a progressive development comprising a series of walk-up apartment buildings, individually designed townhouses. Apartment units are in one, two and three-storey configuration, accessed of independent stairwells eliminating corridor. Most of the apartments have view in at two directions with usable terraces. Rooms are large with high ceiling, abundant natural light and ventilation. Highly articulated building facades with breakdown element layers the facades into elements manageable to the eyes and reduce the visual mass impact to the street.

Townhouse in St Leonards Pl

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

115

>> Double skin facade system for environmental control >> Variety of dwellings for mix of occupants >> Successful internalisation of public space

116

South Holland

Project Name:

Het Kasteel

Architects:

Studio Ninedots

Location:

Amsterdam, South Holland

Completed: 2008 Typology:

Tower

Het Kasteel (The Castle) contains five different dwelling types, ranging from 2-person to penthouse. It is located in an active area next to a train shunting yard, with noise impacting the site. The project arranges the dwellings in a way that creates a sheltered internal courtyard. There is a tough external facade, and a warm and inviting internal space. The double skin facade system allows for ventilation as well as sound insulation through careful detailing, and this gives the apartments a human scale. Furthermore, the carparking was not prioritised, and is tucked away under the central courtyard leaving the external spaces free for activity.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

117

>> Tallest â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;sliverâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Tower in Melbourne >> Blue ribbon of steel wraps its way along the facade >> 6.7 metres wide (similar to a terrace), 28 storeys high, one apartment per floor

118

Melbourne

Project Name:

Phoenix Tower

Architects:

Fender Katsalidas

Location:

Melbourne CBD

Completed: 2014 Typology:

Residential Tower

The tower was originally proposed to be 40 storeys however Melbourne city council knocked it back. The project is unique for Australia due to its maximisation of site through thinness/height. Overseas planning schemes disallow similar tower construction, due to their popularity for example in places like Hong Kong and New York. Sites narrower than 13.7 metres over there are prevented from building high. Located on axis with the Exhibition Street extension, the building can be seen as a gateway into the city. With just one apartment per floor, spaces are tight but the views are impressive overlooking out across Birrarung Marr Park, the Yarra, the Botanic Gardens and Federation Square. Aside from a small public lobby, entry is via lift directly into each apartment, even fire stairs open directly into each apartment. Parking is via a nine storey stacker; the tallest one in Australia.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

119

Key Findings The research undertaken for this project has provided an in depth understanding of the characteristics of Melbourne and South Holland on a metropolitan, neighbourhood and typology scale. Each area has provided key findings which illustrated important differences, similarities and interesting ideas employed in each city. For the metropolitan scale of Melbourne and South Holland, it became evident of the clear distinction between the polycentric design of South Holland and the monocentric design of Melbourne. Melbourne has a population growth particularly higher than the Netherlands, with an emphasis on sprawling growth in comparison to the constrained growth within South Holland due to water. The neigbourhood scale illustrated the diversity of uses found in neighbourhoods within Melbourne, as well as the diversity of building heights and plot widths. For South Holland, there is a greater emphasis on connectivity, porosity and The typology scale explored exemplary projects in both Melbourne and the Netherlands.

05_TYPOLOGY COMPARISON

121

â&#x20AC;&#x153;If you notice the little things closely enough, they can become an ideaâ&#x20AC;? - Nigel Bertram

06 Hypothesis

From this comparative study of Melbourne and South Holland on the Metropolitan, Neighbourhood and Typology scale, students will develop a multi-scalar individual project. These projects will form part of a cumulative body of work, which will feed in to emerging Australian and Dutch research projects. Each student will employ an individual topic for research in their design projects using a hypothesis statement following the findings in the comparative analysis and their own personal agendas.

06_HYPOTHESIS

123

Cities in Netherlands are very famous for the monotonous design of abuilding. Since the second World War, Dutch population has significantly increased, and the demand of affordable housing increase as well. That is why Dutch’s Houses are using prefabrication system to fulfill the needs (Knaack, 2012). It is true that developing prefabrication building can create cheaper building and faster to build. However, the impact of prefabrication building will create a series of amonotonous building. These monotonous effect can have an effect on people’s emotional state.Ellard (2011) in his book Place of the Heart, create some experiment to measure emotional excitement. As a result, people who walk in the series of lovely restaurant and transparent frontage, show significant of ahigh level of emotional and physical excitement. Being excited physically and emotionally can increase people’s strength and vitality. In other words, being happy can have apositive impact for people’s performance to study and work.Finally, it comes to the question, what kind of design that can be made in the cities of Netherlands? Is it going to be set of rules, landscape design, architecture approach or detail design to be a catalyst for the city to change? - Azarya Ashadi Putra Halim

Home ownership becomes more and more difficult due to the unaffordability to a large number of urban population. There is social stratum issue which is causing exclusion to home buyers where good areas often mean high prices. Similar to rents, where better living areas normally mean expensive rents, and rental typology is normally generic which does not meet the diverse needs of people who require spacial rearrangement for the living and/or business. Furthermore, the restriction of common rental agreements which limit the renters be able to adjust the rental spaces. This forces renters move to other places accommodating their needs. Another reason that rental often means high turnover rate because the renters do not have the sense of belonging to the places they live in, so local communities are more difficult to form. My core focus is how to deliver the demand of aggregation rental living which is flexible with high-quality be able to reduce the financial risk and store appropriate housing stock which are accumulated and invested by local neighbourhoods where these small-scaled private rental projects can also become urban acupunctures and benefit the renters as well as the local neighbourhood investors? - RuRu Wu

124

Architecture has indulged too much in the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Spectacleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. Our constant need for bigger, better and more has caused a disjoint between our design and our environment. Our designs are objects in space rather than a complex and intensive relationship. The Dutch approach to water engineering is one of aggressive and massive pieces of infrastructure that create hard and impermeable boundaries. These do not appreciate the nuances and delicateness of human life and the water environments. The human scale must be brought back to balance this way of survival. There is an opportunity here to carefully balance the massive and the nuanced. Awe inspiring hydro and structural engineering balanced with inviting and interesting opportunities for living and being. To create designs that controls our environment but not dominate it. The Dutch landscape is fluid, and our approach to control should reflect this. - Job Gabriels

A proliferation in digital technologies over the last decade has given rise to a shift in the way in which many businesses operate - allowing individuals to share their resources in a more efficient and viable manner. From car sharing to hot-desking, a sharing economy has been born - made possible with a basis of exchange through technology. This trend is likely to continue to have implications on the ways in which people inhabit, utilise and move around the city. Whilst the threat of monotonous metropolises full of socially withdrawn, unhealthy individuals seems all the more imminent, the fact that humans crave faceto-face social interaction and physical activity is somewhat comforting. This body of research will investigate how the sharing movement may contribute positively on the physical movement patterns that form part of our daily lives. If a street network provides the rigid (permanent) infrastructure, how can we begin to challenge traditional land use patterns and living arrangements such that our level of access to essential everyday needs including social interaction, food, drink and a place to rest, is increased? - Kate Pleban

06_HYPOTHESIS

125

Today in the 21st century, the world has become so cultivated, inevitably through this cultivation process certain human values have been given precedence and credence. The Netherlands is a country that exemplifies this, where order is put over disorder, logic over intuition and stability over change. The dutch expression “Doe Normaal” which translates to “just be normal” demonstrates their rigid cultural expectations of social conventions. According to lifestyle magazine Monocleone of their main issues is a lack of diversity in urban fabric and program. This has lead to significant social issues where minority groups are excluded, a large portion unable to complete education and get jobs. According to panoply research 25% of Rotterdam and Amsterdam is Muslim populated, however their integration into dutch society has not happened due to a general fear of islamisation and terrorism. Dutch public broadcasting system “NOS television” reports that this has lead the Netherlands to become one of the highest european suppliers of islamic jihadists. How can capricious architecture and program be integrated into existing high density neighbourhoods to alleviate social tensions and create an environment where people can connect with one another. - Patrick Bullen

To provide sustainablegrowth in Dutchcitiesit requiresthe densification of urban areas to allow for efficiency and connectivity. Although there are numerousadvantagesto the consolidation of ourliving and working environments, this intensification presentsissues of the impacthigh density living has on our urban experience, social engagementand the interfacebetweenartificialand natural environments. In the Netherlands, cultural and historical circumstances are associated with the value of nature, with most areasmanipulatedto sustain its urban population usingdykes, canals and reclaimedland forthe green heart. In Melbourne, rapidurban densificationand developer driven design haspresented monotonousand disconnectedliving environments, increasing thedivide between thebuilt and unbuilt, artificial and natural,internal and external spacewhich structurea city. Natural environments play an important role in not only improvinghealth, urban qualityand open space;but it also bearspsychologicalimpacts on our sense of place, spatial thresholds and emotions. How canarchitecturalinterventionswithin the city’s fabricevokethe feeling of solace,community and ownership found in nature within high density living environments?Can the informality and complexityof natural environmentsalso providediversity inour cities? - Laura Miller

126

Cities are ever-changing and encompass numerous layers that are intrinsically transformational in nature. Today, the information layer strongly influences urban interactions, balance and the character of uses within it. Google maps, virtual gaming apps and other â&#x20AC;&#x153;wirelessâ&#x20AC;? enterprises have reshaped connectivity into a multidimensional configuration that has altered social and economic behavioural patterns across the globe. The multiplicity generated requires hybrid environments or heterogeneity with urban ecology that are collaborative in nature, potentially contributing to the enhancement of civic engagement. At this juncture, it is imperative to acknowledge these aspects and create Hybrid Cities that consist of environments that amalgamate all the said spheres. They must then enable neighbourhood activation where services are localised but global linkages co-exist and support local level innovations without sacrificing they liveability of the city. What are the consequences of these interaction patterns on place-making and city-making? What will the spatial organisation of the new crossover or hybrid environments for urban interactions look like? - Shwiti Ravisankar

At present, most mid to high density housing is designed for an unknown end-user. The residents of these developments have little to no input in their living environment. With a projected quarter-million new dwellings needing to be built in South Holland in the next decade, what will happen if this model is perpetuated for all of them? This becomes even more challengingin an urban context,with a largervariabilityof site conditions, a more diverse user group and faster rate of changefor both. This is an opportunity for architects to consider a myriad of narrativesthat willoccur in a day, a year or a decade.In them, the context, usersand programcanall change. In considering this, we can create frameworks for designthat allowsfor the users todefinetheirown living environments. Couldamodel for living environments successfully allow for and sustain recurring userdriven evolution? And how canitbe integratedinto an existing contextin a way that provides for both theoriginaland new? - Sejal Bhikha

07_HYPOTHESIS

127

Today, the cultural diversity in Netherlands and many of European countries are expected to increase due to the number of recent migration. This would lead to the increasing housing demands and complex social integration in Netherlands. Thus, quality and flexibility of living environments must ensure the well-being of people living in cities - where intensity and diversity increase from time to time. In light of the population growth and increasing diversity, small-scale biophilic interventions can potentially have an accumulative effect on preserving the well-being of people living in the neighbourhood. Biophilic design principles have the potential to bridge the intensified urban lifestyle into a more balanced city life. Can the accumulative effect of small-scale projects restore and sustain the well-being of residence and newcomers in the neighbourhood? - Shahnaz Namira

â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Existing housing stock is no longer capable of properly accommodating todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population... the predominance of the traditional patriarchal family is quickly declining as a result of increased female independence, divorce, smaller household sizes and an aging populationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;(Sousa, 2012) Has architecture kept pace with societal change?Spatial specificity and organisational rigidityin service of economyhas hindered the ability for housing to adapt to these different conditionsandfuture unknowns, leading to a mismatch between housingtypesandhousehold needs. In transitioning from the homogenous typology of Dutch postwar mass housing,architects can exploit the indeterminate in the design process. Rather than prescribing the function of every room, spatial indeterminacy allows users to redefine their spaces to suit their ever-changing needs. Can an indeterminate architecture provide a replicable typological framework of responsive housingthat can be programmatically and spatially adapted to changing household structures and site conditions?Can boundaries of public and private realms shift and overlap to become part of a productive and responsive communal realm? - Stephanie Choy

128

The â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;conventionalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; urban strategy tends to be scaling down from city scale bureaucracies. Although it has experienced a massive development that has changed the identity of the city, however some traditional issue has not been solved yet. It was true in 2012 that as many as 7 million square metres vacant high rise office tower has been a consequential issue in Netherlands. South Holland has been considered as an isolated place physically, socially, and culturally (Knights 1995). How will urban design framework accommodate the future expatriate and migrants without exagrating its local character? Flexible urbanism will be looking deeper on how the city should prepare for the future uncertainty and opportunities and focusing on the inclusion process of expatriate society as a part of urban phenonena. Will conversion of vacant buildings to a residential block be the right answer for providing housing spaces over period of time? Despite being a highly dense block, the social structure will be segregated by floors and therefore limit them to the public realm and activity. Can this flexible urbanism be scaled up to offer feasible opportunities and diversity to traditional city-building process? - Randy Wihardja

06_HYPOTHESIS

129