STAY: Amstel III by Stephanie Erwin

stay:

live + work + play + engage

Stephanie Erwin

Master of Landscape Architecture Candidate 2014 Department of Landscape Architecture University of Minnesota - Twin Cities

Project introduction ............................................................................................... 4 Preliminary research .............................................................................................. 6 A new planning paradigm ............................................................................................................................................6 Preliminary questions ...................................................................................................................................................6 Dutch context ...............................................................................................................................................................7 Role of the designer .....................................................................................................................................................7

Bottom-up urbanism ............................................................................................. 8

Making the case ...........................................................................................................................................................8 Establishing initial conditions .......................................................................................................................................9

Zuidoost context + history .................................................................................. 10

Site discovery + personal experience .......................................................................................................................10 Zuidoost [Bijlmer] history............................................................................................................................................11 Demographics ............................................................................................................................................................15 Land use.....................................................................................................................................................................16 Existing community assets.........................................................................................................................................17

Landing on a location .......................................................................................... 18

Where is an intervention needed? ..............................................................................................................................18 Tapping into an existing network ..............................................................................................................................18 Understanding Amstel III ............................................................................................................................................20

Synthesizing ........................................................................................................ 22

Identifying the main obstacles ...................................................................................................................................22 Identifying the assets .................................................................................................................................................23 Primary thesis question ..............................................................................................................................................27

Strategies ............................................................................................................ 28

How can these strategies be implemented? .............................................................................................................30 Site systems .........................................................................................................................................................32 Network of human scale public space .................................................................................................................34 Identity through elements + materiality ..............................................................................................................36 Design informants, precedents + fodder....................................................................................................................39

Stay: Amstel III .................................................................................................... 42 Amstel Plaza + Adaptive Street ..................................................................................................................................45 Collaborative Cove .....................................................................................................................................................51 Polder Sportpark ........................................................................................................................................................57 Grassy Lounge ...........................................................................................................................................................63

Conclusions ......................................................................................................... 68 Acknowledgments ............................................................................................... 69 Bibliography ........................................................................................................ 70 3

Project introduction I am passionate about people and places. Specifically, I am interested the intersection of design and social capital. Social capital is the inherent value associated with networks of people that infuse fellowship, goodwill and investment into a place, all, in which, is needed for a happy, lively community. STAY explores the adaptive reuse of a monofunctional business park to create a network of public space that infuses community assets in to Amstel III and establishes initial conditions that foster bottom-up urbanism.

Preliminary research

regeneration in terms of social, cultural,

Introduction Throughout my preliminary research, I investigated bottom-up initiatives in Amsterdam Zuidoost through a theoretical framework. I came to understand the structure, activities, and demands of these initiatives by studying precedents, reviewing literature and conducting interviews with stakeholders. Through my research, I came to understand the policies and procedures behind realizing a bottomup project and defined the relationship between the, so-called, top and bottom. My plan was to use my findings to frame a culturally appropriate design project in Amsterdam Zuidoost in the form of urban public space. A new planning paradigm There is a shift in the way in which we develop our cities. Over the past twenty years, the expert driven, capital investment urban development paradigm has slowly been augmented by gritty, grassroots urbanists who are rapidly gaining legitimacy. This shift is attributed to increased access to information and technology, collapse of the global economy, and a loss of trust in governments to â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;do the right thing.â&#x20AC;&#x2122; Bottom-up urbanism is a movement in which citizens engage the urban built environment to improve their quality of life by providing services and creating places the government (top-down) would normally provide. These interventions act as a catalyst for urban

Preliminary questions +How can bottom-up interventions improve user enjoyment, encourage citizen engagement, promote physical health, and create community cohesion? +How can designers act as advocates and experts in this new planning environment? +What are the impacts of new forms of public space in a neighborhood? Above: Hannekes boom in Amsterdam is the product of a partnership between the city, residents, and designers that resulted in a successful reuse of under utilized infrastructure into a community asset..

environmental and economic community assets. Citizen-initiated urban interventions are a selfperpetuating force that empowers community members to engage their built environment by nontraditional means. The creation of public 6

space through this method means more social and cultural relevancy for the users. This is increasingly important in todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s globalized society where cities have large numbers of non-native residents.

Dutch context The Netherlands is one of the most planned countries in the world, and rightly so. As the ninth most densely populated country with nearly one third of its land below sea level, comprehensive spatial planning is a necessity. Historically, spatial planning was mostly decided at the national level with decision-making ability trickling down to regional and municipal levels. To date, there have been five national spatial policy memorandums that have governed and guided development. The first four memoranda focused on a top-down approach to physical conditions, spatial planning, housing, and economic growth, with a heavy focus on the Randstad. In 2001, the fifth memorandum on spatial planning, VROM 2001a, was published but was not finalized until 2006 with the release of the national spatial strategy (Nota Ruimte), VROM 2006, the updated memorandum, subtitled: Ruite Maken, Ruimte Delen, meaning “making space, sharing space,” relinquished the traditional decision making process and gave the power to the municipalities and the people. The move from prescribed spatial planning at the national level to municipal based planning was partly due to the previous memorandum’s failure to make the Randstad a real, economically sound metropolis (Wagner, 515). Cities were called to bolster the Netherlands position in the global economy by embarking upon their own major development and re-construction campaigns (Wagner, 516). National regulations were reduced and municipalities were given planning discretion.

Additionally, after the global economic crisis in 2008, three significant societal shifts occurred: governments were no longer able to provide the same level of [social + infrastructural] service due to austerity measures, citizens no longer trusted their governments to ‘do the right thing,’ and investment from the private sector halted.

A need for places that foster citizen-based development emerged.

Role of the designer

In the book Urban Catalyst, the authors argue that planners, designers, administrators and initiators should define themselves first and foremost as urbanists, or someone who is an advocate for the character of urban life. The authors go on to say that urbanists “become the spiders in a web of stakeholder interests – filling a gap as coordinators, managers, and visionaries, even becoming developers themselves.” (Oswalt 2013) I agree with this sentiment; the role of the designer is changing. However, I am not sure to what extent. It seems as if there will never be a prescriptive, definitive role for the designer; that cities will continue to be dynamic in their development patterns. Designers must be thoughtful in their interventions, as these will set the stage for all engagement in society and the built environment. These initial conditions should foster ownership and encourage economic and emotional investment. 7

Randstad

Above: the Randstad is a conurbation made up of the four largest cities in the Netherlands: Amsterdam, Rotterdam, Utrecht, and the Hague.

Bo om-up urbanism Making the case To understand the initial conditions for bottomup urbanism to exist, I synthesized information found in three books: Urban Catalyst: The Power of Temporary Use, Self-made City, and Handmade Urbanism: from Community Initiatives to Participatory Models to make the following claims:

+Bo om-up urbanism is a viable way for cities to realize projects that would otherwise be unrealized. +These bo om-up initiatives strengthen community cohesion and social innovation through participation and engagement. +Bo om-up urbanism is actively becoming a more resilient alternative to traditional planning and urban design. Urban Catalyst: The Power of Temporary Use, by Philipp Oswalt, Klaus Overmeyer, and Philipp Misselwitz, outlines numerous case studies showing how temporary use can act as generator for urban revitalization. The authors reveal the potentials of informal development, how to engage the public, and how to cultivate temporary use. Self-made City, by Kristien Ring, is comprised of forty case studies illustrating how citizens of Berlin are reshaping their environment through baugruppe projects (co-housing) with the goal of collaboration and sustainability. In Handmade Urbanism: from Community Initiatives to Participatory Models, by Marcos Rosa, community initiatives and participatory models in five cities across the globe through a series of case studies are discuessed. This book explores how urban transformations

can come from within the community and act as successful development models.

places and providing services where cities are unable.

Bottom-up urbanism is a viable way for cities to realize projects that would otherwise be unrealized. In Urban Catalyst: the Power of Temporary Use, the authors make the claim that we are experiencing a new planning paradigm and bottom-up urbanism is becoming “…more relevant in an age where urban wastelands and other residual spaces are prevalent and traditional development methods have failed” (Oswalt 2013). With the 2008 collapse of the global economy, more cities are unable to revitalize derelict, under-utilized places. In Handmade Urbanism: from Community Initiatives to Participatory Models, Rosa states that bottomup initiatives “…are a response to the incapability of today’s cities to cope with urban challenges via traditional planning culture and its instruments” (Rosa 2013).

These bottom-up initiatives strengthen community cohesion and social innovation through participation and engagement. “Between the 1970s-1990s citizen engagement and participation was a part of development techniques, but sometime in the 1990s the investors and central governments regained their power” (Oswalt 2013). Within the past ten years, citizens stopped relying on the government to ask them to participate, resulting in the creation of robust, diverse interventions. Ring writes “the more people that actively take part in creating our city, the better. The city is the ultimate crowd-sourced project” (Ring 2013). Rosa adds to this thought in writing that “by creating local startups, services, and cultural events- sometimes leading to the improvement of these initiatives have a positive impact on their neighborhoods, enhancing social cohesion” (Rosa 2013). “Shared spaces lead to a better social awareness and interaction with the surrounding neighborhood. Community oriented projects have created astounding and ideal living situations that promote social awareness as well as interaction among neighbors” (Ring 2013). He goes on to say, “…as modest as some of these initiatives may be, they are successfully improving residents’ lives and transforming collective space in cities” (Rosa 2013). “Self-initiative helps people have a sense of identity with and to take responsibility for where they live from which the entire neighborhood can benefit. Self-made projects help in creating well functioning neighborhoods and communities whose residents get involved” (Ring 2013). Communities that

Ring makes the argument that “by designating publicly owned land for development in the form of leasehold land trusts, the social, cultural and urban political goals of the city can be realized through private initiatives and within long term self-administration” (Ring 2013). She continues, “Self-made projects make experiments in buildings possible, which would normally not be realized by profit-oriented investors. The status quo is countered by self-made projects that have an eagerness and love for experimentation. They forge new ground in the planning, organization, and technical realization of new buildings” (Ring 2013). Suggesting that these types of interventions are more innovative because of their experimental nature and their non-monetary motives. Citizens are intervening in their built environment, creating 8

engage the built environment, creating contextual interventions, through citizen participation, have a stronger sense of cohesion and identities usually connected to the places they help create. Citizen-initiated urban interventions, or bottomup urbanism, is a self-perpetuating force that empowers community members to engage their built environment by non-traditional means, with the potential of activating the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s charge of promoting public health, safety, and welfare. Establishing initial conditions The creation of public space though these means results in social and cultural relevancy for the users. The relevancy of spaces created through and in the spirit of bottom-up urbanism encourages previously disenfranchised populations to become attached and invested in their neighborhoods - creating community cohesion and fostering social innovation. These interventions should to be flexible and adaptive, thus more resilient. The newly created places act as catalysts for urban regeneration.

Together cities, designers, and citizens should designate land as public with the social, cultural and political goals of the community. Simply enough, the public space created by this designation should be flexible and adaptive. Establishing these initial conditions would: +encourage local start-ups and cultural events +provide shared spaces for interaction +facilitate engagement in the built environment +brand the neighborhood with contextual interventions 9

Zuidoost context + history Site discovery + personal experience My interest in the area originated with my first visit to Amsterdam in the summer of 2012. I stayed longer than planned and a new friend offered to lease his apartment on Bijlmerdreef to me for a month while they were out of town. Little did I know, that I would be living on the first and, arguably, one of the most significant historic streets in Amsterdam Zuidoost. The apartment I stayed in was in a newer building adjacent to a public square that was desolate six days a week. Every Sunday, before sunrise Annie Romeinplein filled up with vendors from Ghana and Suriname selling fresh food and wares. I loved living just a minute away from some of the best food in Amsterdam. Each day, I walked my bike down Bijlmerdreef to the Gazenhoef metro stop. The ground floor of the buildings along the way was a mixture of retail and service. Surinamese and West African men occupied the sidewalks that lined the buildings. While above, women and children leaned out the windows greeting those who passed by. The path was littered with chicken bones, newspapers, and other refuse. Although the street, the landscape, was alive with a culture I had never experienced before, the people who lived there seemed to use the streetscape out of necessity, or lack of other public space to occupy. I felt the new buildings were lovely and they seemed to be constructed well, but the debris on the paths and the separation of users were indicators that these places were not culturally appropriate for the people who actually lived there.

Once I arrived at the stop, I carried my bike up the escalator to the platform and got on the metro. In the evening, I would have to make sure I was on the last metro. This is hard because the days are longer in the Netherlands and it was easier to lose track of time. The times I didn’t make the metro, I had three choices: crash at someone’s house in the city, ride my bike 10 km, or take one of the on-thehour night buses for 4.50 €.

landmark and turned onto a road. What I thought was a normal road, shared by both cars and cyclists, turned out to be a full-blown highway. I wasn’t sure exactly how to make the connection from which path I came to Bijlmerdreef. In fear for my life, I frantically peddled toward my building, hoping to avoid the police and any morning drivers. Luckily, because it was so early, there wasn’t a car in sight.

Of the two, the most challenging was when I attempted to ride my bike home. Before embarking, I looked up the bike route as to not get lost. In the wee hours in the morning, I made my way and highways. After about an hour, I recognized a

Before knowing the dire history of Bijlmer, these two experiences shaped my perception of it as a quasi-dysfunctional and disconnected place.

Apartment buildings lined with shops on Bijlmerdreef

Zuidoost [Bijlmer] history Once a peat bog, then poldered grassland, it is now a dense urban borough of the municipality of Amsterdam. Zuidoost has experienced immense change over the past fifty years.

the city converted the vacant buildings into more affordable social housing.

With a history of housing shortages, Amsterdam started developing satellite city districts to accommodate the growing population after WWII. The city annexed the Bijlmerpolder in 1966 and development of Bijlmer began shortly after. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Planners and architects, working with the city of Amsterdam, designed with an amount of freedom many can only dream of todayâ&#x20AC;? (Failed Architecture, 2013). Bijlmer, a Le Corbusier style development, was supposed to be the city of tomorrow with separated vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle routes. The new area, in what is now the district Amsterdam Zuidoost, was marketed and designed for upper-middle class families who were looking to experience modern living without the hustle and bustle of the city. Though, because of the nature of development in this era, there was not direct citizen engagement or participation in the design process. It was only until after several of the buildings were erected that the city sought out feedback from the potential residents. The feedback was positive which supported the continued construction of the rest of the Bijlmer development.

Hoogord located in the Bijlmerpolder prior to the annexation

Bijlmer polder - 1870

Perspective sketch of a covered walkway.

Map from 1560

However, after completion, Bijlmer was seen as an inconvenient and uncomfortable place to live because its lack of connectivity to the centrum and mega-structure apartment buildings. Occupancy within the first ten years was slow growing so 11

Queen Beatrix visits the new Bijlmer development

At the very same time, Suriname won its independence and nearly one-third of the population immigrated to the Netherlands. Additionally, people from West Africa also immigrated to the area. With the low cost of housing and proximity to Amsterdam, many immigrants chose to move to Bijlmer.

Suriname immigrants arriving in the Netherlands

Piles of sand in during construction of Bijlmer

Fourteen housing agencies owned the buildings and were responsible for maintaining the new development. However, just like Pruitt Igoe in St. Louis, the buildings fell into disrepair. The low-income immigrants were disconnected from the city and living in run-down buildings. The covered walkways connecting the buildings to the commercial area became a breeding ground for rape, prostitution and drug abuse. In 1992, a plane crashed into one of the honeycomb-shaped structures bringing national and global attention to the horrible living conditions of the area. The tragedy prompted re-investment into the area bringing improvements like an extension of the metro system and the Bijlmer sports arena.

Layout of kleiburg, one of the honeycomb buildings

Devastation in the wake of the plane crash

Cues of disinvestment

Aerial of Bijlmer during construction

Amsterdam

Zuidoost Geographically, Zuidoost is disconnected from Amsterdam proper by two other cities: Duivendrecht and Diemen. Three metro subway lines service the area with connections to Amsterdam centraal.

The borough of Amsterdam Zuidoost was established in 1987. It is made up of five boroughs: Amstel III, Bijlmer, Nellestein, Holendrecht, and Gein. Amsterdam Zuidoostâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s total area is 22 sq km.

The Netherlands

Zuidoost has a population of over 69,000 with an average population density of 3,161 per square kilometer, which is comparable to Staten Island, New York. Most of the residents live in the northeast Bijlmer neighborhood, where that density almost doubles. Only 175 people live in Amstel III. Residential use is primarily in the east and office and commercial to the west. Community assets for recreation, leisure and education are present, but sparse.

Amsterdam

Zuidoost

Amstel III

Next page: *Amstel III + bullewijk population too small to be represented **Amstel III + bullewijk & driemond number of dwellings too small to be represented; no data available for nellestein + gein

Bi b u jlm ur er t D Ce , F ntr + um H ,

len

Driemond

stein Nelle n i + Ge

Bijlmer Oost, buurt E, G + K pop: 25,750 density: 6,838 km2

dre

cht

Bijlmer Centrum, buurt D, F + H

Zuidoost Pop: 69,560* , Bijlmer Centrum buurt D, F + H

Bi bu jlme urt r O E, ost G , +K

len

Amstel III + Bullewijk

78% 70%

Holendrecht

59%

Nellestein / Gein 7%

Appolobuurt (Zuid)

€23,500

64%

€24,400

25%

€156k

€24,600

21%

€169k

66% 77%

€33,600

78%

€32,400

71% 63%

26%

64%

26%

Driemond

Owner occ. + Avg. Home value NA

62%

Bijlmer Oost, buurt E, G + K

Stationbuurt (Zuid)

Employment rate + avg. Income

36%

Bijlmer Centrum, buurt D, F + H

pop: 18,420 density: 7,084 km2

pop: 175 density: 35 km2

Zuidoost Dwellings: 32,995**

Non-western immigrants

Holendrecht

Amstel III + Bullewijk

dr ec

Bijlmer Oost, buurt E, G + K

Neighborhood

Nellestein + Gein pop: 2,845 density: 1,293 km2

pop: 20,870 density: 6,892 km2

€68,000 €30, 400

€147k

18%

€163k

36%

€266k

53% 56%

€777k 91%

€325k

Land use

Key

Offices

Retail

HORECA

Warehouses

Unknown

Parking

Social

Community assets

Key

Bike

Arena

Sports

Pedestrian

School

Park

Landing on a location Over the past year, I have met with dozens of stakeholders and experts regarding Zuidoost and Amstel III, made numerous visits and explored all 22 square kilometers of the borough, translated innumerable demographic reports and deciphered Dutch GIS data. Where is an intervention needed? In 2011, Amsterdamâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s city council passed a bill that allows fallow lands to be used temporarily. The city actually owns 80% of the parcels in the municipality. The new legislation addresses the issue of vacancy while stimulating the local culture and economy without decreasing the property value or disrupting long-term plans. This change in policy has sparked great public interest and fostered a partnership between top-down planners and bottom-up initiators. I used this website, coupled with a vacancy map, to identify where the municipality would like to see interventions. Tapping into an existing network While in Amsterdam for a site visit, I met with Saskia Beer, an architect and partner Glamour Manifest, a bottom-up platform aimed at improving the quality of life of Amstel III. Prior to meeting with her, I knew I wanted to work in Zuidoost, but I wasnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t sure where I should focus my efforts. She explained to me the complex nature of Amstel III and the delicate dance between designers, planners and stakeholders in the area. After meeting with her, I was certain that Amstel III was where I should focus my capstone.

Interactive map that allows initiators to view where derelict, city-owned property is available for temporary use.

17% Vacancy rate 43 Vacant buildings 193,225 Sqm

Key

100-75%

40-75%

<39%

Previous buildings

Current buildings

Above: over half of the honeycomb buildings in Bijlmer have been torn down and replaced with low-rise, high-density apartments. Crime rates are in steady decline and quality of life has improved significantly, but there still is a stigma associated with living in there.

Understanding Amstel III In the 1980s construction of Amstel III in the western portion of Zuidoost began. Simultaneously, four other business parks in Amsterdam were also developed, saturating the market. Since completion, no business park in Amsterdam has been fully occupied. These areas are unique in terms of Dutch development as they were mostly realized by private developers. Traditionally, the national government has been involved in all urban development and planning. Numerous developers, all economically motivated, contributed to creation of the new business districts that were single use

and auto-centric. In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the municipality of Amsterdam began investing in Zuidoost in the spirit of polycentricity, or multiple city centers. A new train station and arena were built north of Amstel III. Additionally, student housing was built in the area. The city used these new assets to attract outside investors and it worked. However, with the collapse of the global economy and subsequent austerity measures, investment in Zuidoost (and Amstel III) came to a screeching halt.

With the economy recovering, attention is being paid again to the areas of Amsterdam that could benefit from an infusion of urban revitalization. With vacant business parks just like Amstel III all over Europe and North America, how we treat this area will influence how future business parks are reenvisioned.

ArenA Boulevard

Amsterdam ArenA

Bijlmer ArenA Station

Aerial of Amstel III

1 Sloterdijk

4 Osdorp 3 Zuidas

Map showing business parks in Amsterdam

2 Amstel I

Amstel III

Student housing

Synthesizing Although there is a shift in planning policy and increased citizen interest in bottom-up urbanism, it seems nearly impossible to facilitate this phenomenon in Zuidoost or in Amstel III. I came to this conclusion after interviewing bottom-up activists and initiators in Amsterdam. Some have tried to engage the people living in Zuidoost, but experienced great resistance towards outsiders. Some have realized built projects, but

only managed to bring users from the greater metropolitan area rather than engage community members. Bottom-up initiatives need citizens and community members that are economically and emotionally invested in their neighborhood. The investment is formed over time and slowly generates social capital. [Social capital is the inherent value associated with networks of people that infuse fellowship, goodwill and investment into a

place, all, in which, is needed for a happy, lively community.] Identifying the main obstacles The main challenge of the borough is that the users do not stay. There are 60,000 Ajax fans that visit the arena twice a month, 26,000 daily commuters, 69,000 residents with an average tenure of 4 years and 900 university students come and go annually.

None of these users stay...

60,000 Regional Ajax fans Twice a month

69,560 Zuidoost residents Avg. tenure of 4 years

26,000 Amstel III workers Every day

900 UvA students in Zuidoost Annually

Some of that is due to natural migration patterns, but much of it can be attributed to the poor spatial qualities of the area. For example, as a result of the single use and high vacancy rate, Amstel III feels desolate. It is disconnected because of the extreme amount of surface parking and lack of public space. And with the lack of way-finding features, it is very disorienting. Identifying the assets

Because Amstel III is...

Desolate Single use + 17% vacancy

But, this area has a lot to offer! Zuidoost is teeming with creative entrepreneurs, it is conveniently located just 15 minutes by train from Amsterdam Centraal and 20 minutes from Schipol Airport, and is it surrounded by natural features like the Groene Hart and Europeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s largest freshwater lake, the Markermeer.

Disconnected No pubic space + 226k sqm surface parking

Disorienting Poor way-finding + lack of green 23

Creative entrepreneurs

Conveniently located Sloterdijk

Amsterdam Centrum Almere

A10 Osdorp

Zuidas

Amstel A1

A10

egional Conne Critical R ction

GVB Metro

Amstel III NS Train

A2 25

Utrecht

Het Ij

Am s

Markermeer

t el

Adjacent to natural assets

Am st er da

Ri jn

al an

Weesper Trekvaa rt

Polders + Pastures

Bijlmerweide

Amsterdam Bos

Polders + Pastures

Gaasperplas

Polders + Pastures

Ouderkerplas

Groene Hart

How can we transform Amstel III from the single use, auto-centric business park into a happy, lively community that encourages people to stay in order to establish initial conditions to foster boÂ&#x201C;om-up urbanism?

Strategies

Leverage investment in landscape + reprogram buildings

In this concept, I chose to keep as many of the structures as possible. And so that means developing a strategy for adaptive reuse and reprogramming the buildings by using landscape interventions as leverage.

Current state/vacancies Partially vacant building costs the owners money and decreases community resources.

Leverage investment in landscape + Reprogram buildings By encouraging small investments, improvements in spatial quality are made, increasing the value of the area. We can leverage each new investment for future investment until the final, improved state complete with mixed uses, affordable working and dwelling units, community assets, and green infrastructure like green roofs.

Green space Conversion of surface parking to public space improves working conditions + acts as a leverage point for more reinvestment.

Remove barriers + create networks

First floor retail + service Reprogramming the first floor increases the community activity, making this area more attractive to live + work.

Amstel III is parcelized by fences, hedges, and infrastructure. It feels very private and hard to navigate. As a pedestrian or cyclist, I felt completely out of place. This can be easily resolved by allotting green space as completely public. From there a nodes of uses can create envelopes of outdoor, public space. New circulation routes are added to make mobility throughout the area more free flowing. After public space, nodes, and circulation are created, four typologies are established to act as anchors for a new and improved neighborhood. This new neighborhood establishes fosters social capital and the initial conditions for bottom-up urbanism to occur.

New uses Increasing the diversity + occupancy allows for investment in green infrastructure and other site amenities.

Green infrastructure Installing green roofs helps mitigate storm water run off, reduces the heat island effect, contributes to a better visual aesthetic + provides addition public space.

Remove barriers + create networks

Current state: fragmented + parcellated Users feel unwelcome and lost. Usually, there isnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t a pedestrian connection between buildings, and users have to backtrack to use the primary streets.

Improve circulation Connect auxiliary streets to main thoroughfares and create obvious pedestrian connections.

Ground plane as public space Removing the boundaries and reconsidering the ground plan as public space creates the possibility for programmed and unprogrammed places that are open to everyone.

Create a public space spine This designed line of open, public space provides users with places to interact with each other and engage their environment.

Organize new uses Many buildings are vacant and of the ones that are occupied, are used solely as offices. Organizing districts within the neighborhood by type of facade, adjacencies to landscape + use creates a more robust, diverse community.

Focus on four typologies in phase 1 By creating four typologies in the early phases, stakeholders can provide feedback and tweak future redevelopment.

How can these strategies be implemented to infuse community assets into Amstel III and establish initial conditions that foster boÂ&#x201C;om-up urbanism? This project will attempt to answer this through a 1.6 Km design spine that will embed a diversity of uses and users into the community, thus acting as a catalyst for future investment.

Desolate

Disconnected

Disorienting

Rethink site systems Enliven

Create network of human scale public space Connect

Foster identity through elements + materiality Orientate 31

Rethink site systems

Circulation

Figure ground

Circulation Most of the “blocks” in Amstel III have one way in and one way out, with only a few pedestrian or cyclist connections. I am addressing circulation issues by increasing pedestrian access and two new streets. Figure ground For the most part, I tried to work within the limits of the existing structures. In a few instances, I chose to remove, splice or add buildings. Surface parking The first thing you notice when you enter one of the “blocks” in Amstel III is the immense amount of surface parking. After crunching the numbers, I propose that the parking is reduced to about 1 per 200 or 250 sqm depending on the nature of building use.

2 New streets + Obvious pedestrian connections

Surface parking

add remove

Public space

splice

Public space As Amstel III is currently an urban area that is only occupied during business hours, there is one public green space located south of A9. I propose that much of surface parking is converted to public green space and connected via a pedestrian and cyclist friendly path, spanning the entire North/ South length of Amstel III.

1120 Parking stalls 16,800 Sqm

280 Parking stalls 4,200 Sqm

1 Public place

5 Public places joined by a corridor

Primary uses Amstel III was developed only to be business park. Workers come by train or car in the morning and leave before dinner. The only amenities available to a potential resident are a gas station and an Ikea, not exactly an environment in which anyone would want to linger after business hours. In order to encourage people to stay, I propose that many of the vacant under-utilized buildings are reprogrammed to accommodate affordable housing, live/work units, and community assets like retail and service.

Service/retail 3,200 sqm to 45,415 sqm 40 units

co-working 0 sqm to 96,418 sqm 482 units 1,828 people

This concept would create an additional 40 units of retail and service and infuse 4,329 diverse users through affordable startup spaces, co-working facilities and cozy housing and live/work units.

Live/work 0 sqm to 43,427 sqm 434 units 651 people

Residential 4,000 sqm to 92,506 925 units 1,850 people

Office 514,663 sqm to 239,697 sqm

3,250 people

Create network of human scale public space Bosque

The average building height in Amstel III is 15 meters, or 5 floors. Some of the streets are lined with trees, but do little to bring the buildings down to human scale. This concept proposes to make Amstel III more inviting and inhabitable by mitigating the height of the buildings and the bleakness of the surface parking through textural vegetation, colorful pergolas and fun elements.

Cafe seating

Street trees

Amstel Plaza

Pocket park

Street parking

Living street

04 02

Adaptive Street

Colorful forest

Movable furniture

Pergola

Collaborate Cove

woodland path

turf + stone path

**Master plan + sections are not to scale

Woodland Through

semi-public plaza

Movable furniture

Dike Bleachers

running track

Polder Sportpark

Pedestrian bridge Forest

Screening

Pedestrian Bridge

Path Street

Grassland Brackish water

Amstel Grassland

through way Cafe seating

Grassy Lounge

Wisteria green wall

Cafe seating

Lounge deck Brackish water

Wetland

Grassland

Foster identity through elements + materiality

Cohesive materials

Amstel III was developed piecemeal, resulting in random building typologies throughout the decades and with no real neighborhood identity. This concept fosters an identity through cohesive surface materials and colorful outdoor elementsbranding Amstel III as a new and improved neighborhood.

Rubber surfacing

Herringbone pavers

Herringbone decking

Elements that embody humanistic qualities

Collaborative

Playful

Movable

Unique

Comfortable

Bijlmer park theater Peppers from the Annie Romeinplein weekend market

Amsterdam arena

Osdorp oever

Bijlmer park

Design informants Amstel III feels like it is constantly overcast with its gray buildings and bland surfaces. While just across the train tracks there is a rainbow of bright colors. I drew my inspiration from the fresh produce at the daily markets, the Amsterdam ArenA, Bijlmer Park, and the Bijlmer Park Theater.

Amsterdam arena

Heesterveld

Museumplein

Piet heinkade

Westergasfabreik

Schouwburgplein

Pakhuis de zwigler

Precedents + fodder While there is no one precedent that attempts to rethink a failed business park, there are several examples of innovative adaptive reuse, bottom-up urbanism, and unprogrammed, democratic open space in the Netherlands. Here are just a few that serve as successful precedents for this project.

Bijlmer sportspark

stay:

live + work + play + engage

live: Amstel Plaza + Adaptive Street

e w l i geh

pe s r a

ef e r ld

stay:

live + work + play + engage +Reprogram vacant buildings +Convert parking into plaza +Add colorful pavers + pocket park +Create obvious pedestrian connections +Stitch the vertebrae together with forested bike path +Increase circulation with a new connection

live: Amstel Plaza

Diversity of uses + public space

Amstel plaza + adaptive street As the beginning of the designed spine, this intervention converts vacant buildings into residential use. The new residential block contains a plaza, bosque, and wetland boardwalk, lined with retail and service on the first floor. A new street connection to Hogehilweg is made, improving circulation. Primary use on this street remains the same, but the street itself is infused with colorful paving and a pocket park. During off-business hours, this street can be used for events, festivals or play. Pedestrian connections are made obvious with pink crossing indicators.

01 02

Key Pedestrian bridge

Wetland boardwalk

Willows

Bosque

Cafe seating

Patio

Plaza green

Pocket park

Parking lot

Pedestrian crossing

a Amstel plaza

Uses

Bosque Cafe seating

Collaborative cove

**Master plan + sections are not to scale

Street trees

Pocket park

Adaptive street

Proposed

Circulation

Existing

Figure ground

Street parking Living street

Amstel plaza

Adaptive street

live: Adaptive Street

working days

night + weekend events

Traffic calming trees

Colorful paths

Obvious pedestrian crossings

[co]work:

Collaborative Cove

lle

we erg g

f e e r d spel

Kar

stay:

live + work + play + engage +Reprogram vacant buildings +Convert parking into collaborative flex space + plaza +Add colorful, diverse trees +Add interesting elements +Stitch the vertebrae together with forested bike path +Create a plaza space

[co]work:

Colorful trees enliven the space with texture

Collaborative Cove

Adaptive Street a

Collaborative Cove

Collaborative Cove This area shall serve as a breeding ground for creative ideas. Co-working spaces inside and outside foster an atmosphere conducive to collaboration. Colorful trees and pergolas bring the 7 story buildings down to human scale. Movable seating elements + collaborative tables encourage interaction within the community. The existing bike path is enhanced with interesting lighting elements peppered through the colorful forest that continues along it. A woodland planting mitigates the angularity posed by the buildings. Key

c 05

Woodland Through

Patio

Movable furniture

Bike path forest

Co-working tables

Parking

Woodland

Pedestrian crossing

Circulation

Pergola

Uses

Colorful forest Polder Sportpark 08

**Master plan + sections are not to scale

Woodland path Turf + stone path

Movable furniture

Pergola

Collaborative Cove

Proposed

Figure ground

Existing

Angular Through

Semi-public plaza

[co]work:

Co-working spaces, inside + out

Collaborative Cove

Interesting illumination

Colorful autumn trees

Vegetated bike path

Tree pallet

Tila cordata

20-25 Meters tall Yellow-white flowers in the spring Yellow foliage in the fall

Acer rubra

15-20 Meters tall Red flowers in the spring Red-orange foliage in the fall

Populus x canadensis

30-35 Meters tall Brown catkins in the spring Green-yellow foliage in the fall

Populus nigra ‘italica’

15-20 Meters tall Brown catkins in the spring Green-yellow foliage in the fall

Acer saccharum

15-20 Meters tall Yellow flowers in the spring Orange foliage in the fall

Gleditsia triacanthos

20-25 Meters Light green flowers in the spring Golden foliage in the fall

Betula ermanii ‘holland’

10-15 Meters tall Yellow catkins in the spring Yellow foliage in the fall

Amelanchier laevis ‘cumulus’

4-6 Meters tall White flowers in the spring Red foliage in the fall

play: Polder Sportpark

be en

ll Hu w rg eg

IKEA 56

stay:

live + work + play + engage +Convert parking into sportpark +Infuse sports program +Adapt dike into bleachers + grassy slopes +Add interesting elements +Welcome users

play: Polder Sportpark

Active recreation for a healthier community

Polder sportpark Once overflow parking, used a few times a month, this wide open space shall be converted into a place of active recreation with basketball courts, football fields, ping pong tables and a running track. Users can watch from the dike bleachers or the grassy slopes.

08 b 05

03 02

04 d

05 06 07

Key

Existing

Entry seating

Football field

Basketball field

Running track

Ping pong

Bleachers

Moveable furniture

Parking

Pedestrian bridge

Proposed

Circulation

Woodland Through

Uses

Basketball Football

Recreational

Polder Sportpark

Track Ping pong Walking

Walking

05 Dike

Bleachers

09 **Master plan + sections are not to scale

Polder Sportpark

Moveable furniture

Running track

play: Polder Sportpark

Pause + ping pong

Recreation, dawn to dusk

Infrastructure intersects entertainment

Stepped seating

Grassy slope

Watch from the dike

engage: Grassy Lounge

VB +G Rai

eg w g r e b s Pieter

ef e r d g r e Meib 62

stay:

live + work + play + engage +Splice + reprogram vacant buildings +Create place for interaction with the water + nature +Restore a cultural landscape +Add interesting elements +Increase circulation with a new connection +Foster fellowship with a large, democratic grassy space

engage: Grassy Lounge

Open turf spaces are available for pop-up events

Grassy Lounge Before Amstel III was a business park, it was poldered grassland for hundreds of years. The Grassy Lunge provides an interface for the new users with the legacy of the landscape. The existing brackish canal is widened and a softer wetland edge is created. Comfortable lounge seating is added to enjoy the sun while its out. A large unprogrammed space is available for pop-up events. The building is spliced for better circulation and now has a diversity of uses. A new road connects Pietersbergweg and Meibergdreef, improving neighborhood circulation. .

Key

Grassy Lounge

Grassland

Cafe seating

Lounge

Wetland

Turf

Plaza

Parking

Proposed

Circulation

Pedestrian Bridge

Existing

Uses

Figure ground

Through way Wisteria green wall

04 a

**Master plan + sections are not to scale

Grassy Lounge

Cafe seating

Lounge deck Brackish water

Wetland

Grassland

engage: Grassy Lounge

Discover the legacy of a polder landscape

Filters runoff

Path through grasslands

Turf into valuable habitat

Common bream

Habitat: brackish + nutrient rich water Diet: larvae

Common kestrel falcon

Habitat: cultivated grasslands + marshland Diet: rodents + reptiles Winter migration to s. Europe Adapts well to human settlement

Grassland birds

Amphibians

Fish

Birds of prey

Small mammals

Potential wildlife

European hedgehog

Habitat: cultivated grasslands + woodlands Diet: invertebrates, birds, rodents, + reptiles Hibernates in brush + grassland Most abundant next gardens + parks

Marsh frog

Habitat: marshes + wetlands Diet: dragonflies, spiders Hibernates in muddy banks Breeds in brackish water

Common reed bunting

Habitat: cultivated grasslands + wetlands Diet: seeds + insects Nests: brush + reeds Winter migration to s. Europe

Conclusions Bottom-up urbanism is a viable way for cities to realize projects that would otherwise be unrealized. These initiatives strengthen community cohesion and social innovation through participation and engagement. Bottom-up urbanism is actively becoming a more resilient alternative to traditional planning and urban design. Citizen-initiated urban interventions are a selfperpetuating force that empowers community members to engage their built environment by nontraditional means. The creation of public space at this level means more social and cultural relevancy for the users. This is increasingly important in todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s globalized society where cities have large numbers of non-native residents. The relevancy of spaces created through bottom-up urbanism encourages previously disenfranchised populations to become attached and invested in their neighborhoods - creating safer, more appealing communities. The newly created places, again, act as catalysts for urban regeneration.

increased citizen interest in bottom-up urbanism, it seems nearly impossible to facilitate this phenomenon in Zuidoost or in Amstel III because the transient nature of the uses. Bottom-up initiatives need citizens and community members that are economically and emotionally invested in their neighborhood. The investment is formed over time and slowly generates social capital. Simply put, users need to STAY.

My concept builds upon existing community assets to generate social capital and establish the initial conditions needed to foster boÂ&#x201C;om-up urbanism by +rethinkinging site systems â&#x20AC;&#x201C; improving circulation with new connections and obvious pedestrian ways; + creating a network of human scale public space through textural vegetation and colorful pergolas; +fostering community identity through cohesive surface materials and by embedding playful elements into the neighborhood.

Together cities, designers, and citizens should designate land as public with the social, cultural and political goals of the community. Simply enough, the public space created by this designation should be flexible and adaptive. Establishing these initial conditions would encourage local start-ups and cultural events, provide shared spaces for interaction, facilitate engagement in the built environment, and brand the neighborhood with contextual interventions. Although there is a shift in planning policy and 68

Acknowledgments This has, by far, been the most challenging experience of my life. I have grown as a person and as a professional. Thank you to all of you, who have supported, inspired, informed and guided me. Capstone Committee Kristine Miller (LA) - Committee Chair Rebecca Krinke (LA) Julia Robinson (Arch) University of Minnesota Faculty Jonathan Blaseg Anna Bierbrauer Carrie Christensen Vincent deBritto Joseph Favour Jamuna Golden Michael Keenan John Koepke, Cynthia Lapp Laura Musacchio David Pitt Ozayr Saloojee Ignacio San Martin

Nicole Schlepp Dan Shaw Amanda Smoot Robert Sykes Matthew Tucker Egle Vanagaite James Wheeler Craig Wilson Experts, Designers, Initiators, and Activists Rod Barnett Saskia Beer Jan Wouter Bruggenkamp Ria van Dijk Alejandro Haiek Jurgen Hoogendoorn Eva de Kerk Bob Knoester Helgra Lasschuijt Tracy Metz Bas Rรถmgens Hans Straver Rob Ververs Nienke Vijlbrief 69

2014 Master of Landscape Architecture Candidates Stefano Ascari Kevin Belair Elissa Brown Steven Foss Erin Garnaas-Holmes Solange Guillaume Montana Harinsuit Amber Hill Stephen Himmerich Mathew Kessler David Kowen Emily Osthus Michael Richardson Ryan Rutger Michael Schiebe Shoulders to cry upon Nathan Bond Ben Bjork Ryan Coates Ashley Fox Lindsay Hawks Perry Nichols

Bibliography Archis/Volume. (n.d.). Archis. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://archis.org/n/volume/2012/08/producing-the-metropolitan/. Archis/Volume. (n.d.). Archis. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://archis.org/n/volume/2012/02/editorial-volume-30-volume-for-sale/. Blogging The City ” A Chat With Luc Harings (Ilovenoord) ” The Pop-Up City. (n.d.). The Pop-Up City. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://popupcity.net/ interviews/blogging-the-city-a-chat-with-luc-harings-ilovenoord/. Booth, W. C., Colomb, G. G., & Williams, J. M. (2008). The craft of research (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Braakliggende terreinen - Gemeente Amsterdam. (n.d.). Home - Gemeente Amsterdam. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://www.Amsterdam.nl/ gemeente/organisatie-diensten/dienst-ruimtelijke/wij/stedenbouw/braakliggende-terrei/. Corfee-Morlot, J. et al. (2009), “Cities, Climate Change and Multilevel Governance”, OECD Environment Working Papers, No. 14, OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi. org/10.1787/220062444715. Deming, M. E., & Swaffield, S. R. (2011). Landscape architecture research inquiry, strategy, design. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons. Franke, S., & Verhagen, E. (2005). Creativity and the city: how the creative economy changes the city. Rotterdam: NAi Pub. GFZK Leipzig Website / Blog Archive / Hands-on Urbanism 1850-2012. The Right to Green . (n.d.). GFZK Leipzig Website . Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://www.gfzk-leipzig.de/?p=18843&lang=en. Gandy, M. (2011). Urban constellations. Berlin: Jovis. Groat, L., & Wang, D. (2013). Architectural research methods (2nd ed.). Hoboken: J. Wiley. Hajer, M. A., & Grijzen, J. (2010). Sterke verhalen: hoe Nederland de planologie opnieuw uitvindt = Strong stories : how the Dutch are reinventing spatial planning. Rotterdam: 010. Hands-On Urbanism 1850 - 2012 - YouTube. (n.d.). YouTube. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltYeKNMhagE. Heurkens, E. (2012). Private Sector-led Urban Development Projects. Management, Partnerships and Effects in the Netherlands and the UK. A+BE | Architecture And The Built Environment, 2(4), 1-480. doi:10.7480/abe. Hirsch, A. B. (2012). Facilitation and/or Manipulation? Lawrence Halprin and ˜Taking Part™. Landscape Journal, 2012(31), 117-134. 70

Houterman, R., & Sanders, G. (2009). BOTTOM-UP INITIATIVES AND THE LOCAL SPATIAL AGENDA: UNDERSTANDING LOCAL INTERESTS IN THE FUNCTIONING OF PUBLIC SPACE. The New Urban Question - Urbanism Beyond Neo-Liberalism, The 4th International Conference of the International Forum on Urbanism (IFoU), 1165-1172. Ludwig, F., & Swart, R. (2010). Tools for climate change adaptation in water management inventory and assessment of methods and tools. Wageningen [etc.: Knowledge for Climate Programme Office. Manifesto | The Spontaneous City International. (n.d.). The Spontaneous City International. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http:// thespontaneouscityinternational.org/manifesto/. Miazzo, F., & Dolghin, D. (2012, November). Editorial. CITIES the Magazine, Issue 2 Emerging Centers, 2. Oswalt, P., & Overmeyer, K. (2013). Urban catalyst: the power of temporary use. Berlin: Dom Pub. Overmeyer, K. (2007). Urban pioneers: Temporary use and urban development in Berlin = Berlin: Stadtentwicklung durch Zwischennutzung.. Berlin: Jovis. PICNIC://PICNIC â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;12 Theme. (n.d.). PICNIC://. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://www.picnicnetwork.org/theme-1. Pal, A. (2008). Planning from the bottom up democratic decentralisation in action. Amsterdam: IOS Press. Pellenbarg, P., & van Steen, P. J. (2001). Making space, sharing space: the new memorandum on spatial planning in the Netherlands. Tijdschrift vor Economische en Sociale Geografie , 92(4), 503-511. Qu, L., & Hasselaar, E. (2011). Making room for people choice, voice and liveability in residential places. Amsterdam: Techne Press. Rottenberg, F., & Provoost, M. (2007). WiMBY! Hoogvliet: future, past and present of a new town.. Rotterdam: NAi Uitgevers. Sharing Best Practicestowards Rio+20: TheNetherlands. Rio +20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development, N/A. Retrieved September 18, 2013, from http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/531Netherlands.pdf. Tijdelijk Anders Bestemmen - Home. (n.d.). Tijdelijk Anders Bestemmen - Home. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://www.tijdelijkandersbestemmen.nl/. Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: design and methods (4th ed.). Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage Publications. Polis: Coin Street Community Builders: A Bottom-Up Approach to Urban Development. (n.d.). polis. Retrieved September 20, 2013, from http://www. thepolisblog.org/2010/02/coin-street-community-builders-bottom.html. 71