Kristian Vukadinovic

ARTICLE

An essay that explores the Dutch planning tradition from

the 80’s and on and adopts a stand for future urban plan

ning

ATIVE BUILT ENVIROMENTA REGENER

1

From a restrictive and locked to a flexible and regenerative

built environment

An essay that explores the Dutch planning tradition from the 80’s and on and adopts a stand for future urban planning

Kristian Vukadinović

vukakris@hotmail.com

Februari, 2014

Abstract – Urban planning and design reacts on previous developments. Now we have arrived at a point where we want to reintroduce traditional urban planning, the planning modernistic movements thought was inadequate for its time. With this the role of the urban designer changes from one who creates blue prints to one who carries out strategic planning. To ensure liveable, durable and prosperous living environments, urban designers should look at the identity of the city and the neighbourhood and complement this identity by looking at the needs of the inhabitants. It are these needs which have been forgotten the last decades. Inhabitants should be granted freedom to adapt the living environment to these needs. Therefore a flexible urban layout is essential which allows adaptations and makes a regeneration possible. This regeneration assures adaptations can be carried out which are required from a sustainability view.

Key words – Urban planning, New Town Almere, , Sustainability, Flexibility

1 Introduction

It is believed that the built environment reflects its society. This also means that the urban built environment is prone to changes in society. Events like the improvements in agricultural methods, the industrial revolution, the World Wars and modernisation have all had a major impact on how cities came to develop. This essay explores the trends and development of urban planning and design in the Netherlands after the 70’s until now, through looking at a case study. It seeks for reasons why typical formats came into existence and looks for their impact. The

situation where we are now is explained and eventually it pleads for adapting urban planning and design to future developments in society by searching through trends in literature. The obtained knowledge is eventually integrated in a design project.

2 The recent history of urban planning in the Netherlands through the New Town Almere

After a vast population growth after World War Two the strategy of the Dutch

governments during the 60’s was focused on creating concentrated deconcentration nuclei throughout the country. One of those nuclei was the New Town Almere which was designed to absorb the huge population growth in Amsterdam and the region Het Gooi. The Dutch Welfare state was in full development. If we believe that the built environment reflects its society then we can assume that society was out of control and therefore needed to be restricted.

2.1 Bloemkoolwijken

The first dwellings were constructed in 1976 following the tendencies in urban design of that moment. This moment in time criticised the modernistic developments directly after World War Two. The large housing high-rise estates were considered as being too functional and monolithic. As a reaction neighbourhoods were set up with meandering and twisting streets in order to create a more humane natural setting for people. Later on referred as ‘Bloemkoolwijken’. The first examples constructed in Almere Haven (figure 1) show a clear cauliflower structure, but not even a decade later this structure has faded out of usage, due to reactions which implied that the neighbourhoods caused people getting lost easily. The upcoming neighbourhoods in the 80’s (figure 2) followed this critique and were built according to the same principle, but were more rectangular in shape.

Figure 1: De Marken 1978

Figure 2: Waterwijk 1984

2.2 Vinex wijken

Due to negative impacts of the nuclei strategy, for example the high commuter traffic and the outflow of middle and high income families out of cities, the Dutch Government changed the strategy to strengthening and making existing urban environments more compact. Most of the urban plans of the 90’s were realised according to this strategy.

In Almere it can be clearly seen that the

Bloemkoolwijk thought has been abandoned in the 90’s. The organic forms which were a protest against the modernistic rational shapes came to disappear and ironically the ‘woonerfen’ made place for more rational and rectilinear streets again (figure 3).

Figure 3: Seizoenenbuurt 1998

Although a change in form occurred, many principles of suburbisation remained. Zoning principles were still taken by heart and resulted in monotonous housing estates.

This monotony was again nourishment for another experiment called ‘Het Wilde Wonen’ (figure 4). The thought was that the people should have the chance to have more participation in the building process. The discussion changed from urban form to how the plots were filled in. This was seen as the cause of the dullness new constructed neighbourhoods in The Netherlands suffered from.

Figure 4: Eilandenbuurt 2001

2.3 Proliferation of the closed urban block and Particulier Opdrachtgeverschapwijken

Until the millennium the Dutch Government and the Welfare State had a major role in the urban planning process. Due to decentralisation this power has been transferred to local governments and municipalities. The individualisation of society has started. Citizens should have more control of their own environment was and still is the thought.

This process goes in line with the

trends in the built environment. From monotonic terraced houses the trend grew or rather grabbed back from history the PrivateOwnership. Not only has this element been reintroduced, the closed urban block has been as well (figures 5 and 6). The unclear

demarcation line between public and private zones were seen as one of the shortcomings of modern and postmodern developments. By reintroducing the closed urban block streets and public space will have a clear shape and will move from residual space to used and defined public space again.

Figure 5: Stripheldenbuurt 2005

Figure 6: Europakwartier 2010 (in development)

The case of Almere illustrates how the city moved from blue print planning to a more flexible and strategic way of planning where the citizens have more power in deciding if they want to contribute in the building process. This is combined with more or less reintroducing traditional urban planning and design. This is where urban development has stranded at the moment. But is this sufficient enough to ensure liveable, durable and prosperous living environments?

3 Lively cities and place making with a focus on the needs of the inhabitants

Having lived a considerate amount of years in the New Town studied above myself, it surely had a great impact on how I view cities. The town is known throughout the whole Netherlands for its dullness and having grown up in this town myself I can’t disagree. It may be even logical that the town turned out that way. There were many problems present in cities during and after the industrialization. One of them being pollution and over crowdedness. By following the garden city principles it was thought that these problems will get solved and they got solved indeed. What planners and designers forgot to anticipate on was the dropping household sizes, the rising demand for more square meters of living space per person and cleaner technology. Resulting in a lower concentration of people in cities and less pollution. Cities which were once considered as overcrowded and polluted, became one of the most desired locations for many people to live in again. Cities have managed to cure themselves and we are left with banal solutions like Almere which can hardly anticipate on even further changes in society, for example the dilution of amenities due to the internet.

It is stated amongst many that

livelihood cannot be created immediately but that it needs to grow in time. If this is true then it is necessary to make this growth possible. New urban developments have been and are being constructed where the livelihood which characterises cities does not get visible. Jane Jacobs (1961) stated that livelihood is seen as obvious amongst planners and designers and in her book ‘The death and life of great American cities’ explains what the conditions for lively cities are. It is this obviousness which has created the monotonies and overly planned cities of today. The overly zoning of districts, setting regulations on heights are all solutions which are not adequate anymore and which locks the city from further developing itself and inhibits creating that livelihood which is supposed to grow in time.

Livelihood should not be taken as granted, but should be designed for, not by restricting but by making things possible with an eye on the human scale. Jan Gehl (2010) has made pleadings for this scale. He stated how urban plans are mostly designed from above, but it is the walking height where people experience it. It is at this height were the plinths are mostly visible and they should be designed in that manner that they allow openness. The two mentioned authors can be grouped in a term which is called place making. Another contributor to this term is William H. Whyte (1980) who advocated the need for creating social life in public spaces. This is one of the tasks for urban designers of today, to make sure public space is not residual space but used and defined space for people to enrich their lives.

When looking back to Almere and the

last developments and especially in Almere Poort it is clearly seen that these pleas which have started in the 70’s have rather late but finally started to crystallise. This together with the proliferation of the closed urban block. Komossa, S. (2010) studied the Dutch Urban Block in a timeframe of the past four hundred years in her book and looks at the relationship between the private space of the house with the public domain of the city. She concludes that it has again gained popularity lately because of its relationship with the urban economy, better use of public space and greater social control. The building block is not a stand-alone architectural element, but a group of plots that are connected to each other (Panerai et. Al, 1977). The last hundred years the focus was on social, cultural and hygienic aspects of living. At this time, the focus shifts from segregation to a consistency of uses that make a small urban economy possible. Attoe and Logan (1989) state that the quality of urban design is determined at the scale of buildings and that mixed activities are crucial for cities. These theories have also been crystallised in the biggest urban expansion project in Europe of the moment: Hafen City Hamburg. One of the pillars of this urban design project is the creation of high quality urban public space.

Designing such public space in an order

that it creates value for the inhabitants of a city

is one of the main tasks for an urban designer and planner, with emphasis on the inhabitants. Urban designers have lately ignored this human aspect and have built according to their own ideologies. The ‘Bloemkoolwijken’ discussed in the case study of Almere are nowadays regarded as history by professionals according to a survey study of the TU Delft (Quaedflieg et.al., 2013). On the other hand the inhabitants of such neighbourhoods are satisfied to fully satisfied with their living environment, due to an abundant green structure, quietness and contact with neighbours. Here lies the discrepancy which is overly present in the discipline. There is much emphasis put on mixed use and an assumed resulting livelihood in urban development these days. But is this a trend which everyone is waiting for? To prevent this mismatch urban designers should adapt their design to the requirements of the current and upcoming inhabitants and the identity of the city or town, discussed later on, instead of following trends. Not everyone wants to live in a neighbourhood full of vibrancy.

Coming back to a town like Almere

where this discrepancy is mostly not visible for young families, because the town has been designed for this population group. The discrepancy can be found in other population groups. Teenagers, students, young urban professionals all have been mainly left out during the set-up of the town. This explains why the town has a lower percentage of these age groups than the average in the Netherlands ( Sociale atlas Almere, 2012) and why they have left the town and settled in cities like Amsterdam. The question is: should every city or town be able to accommodate the needs of every population group or should cities distinguish themselves and focus mainly on one population group? With increasing costs for transport it may be the most strategic direction for towns and cities to accommodate the needs of every population group. And instead of distinguishing themselves on national level they can distinguish themselves on a neighbourhood level. Create different neighbourhoods rather than creating a spread out monotony. Neighbourhoods which allow livelihood and neighbourhoods which are focussed on inhabitants who are keen on tranquillity should all be present in cities. The

city of Rotterdam is an example where this theory is implemented. It fights and keeps on transforming in order to maintain and attract a wide population group. With plans like City lounge Rotterdam (Gemeente Rotterdam, 2008) it tries to create a liveable city centre according to place making theories and on the other hand tries to create more neighbourhoods for single families with a middle and high income which have left the city the last decades.

4 Sustainable cities

From out of a liveliness perspective Jane Jacobs (1961) already stated that the need for concentration is a required condition. Concentrating people also has another effect. David Owen (2010) explains in his book ‘The Green Metropolis’ how increasing the density is key in creating sustainable cities and ways of living. People simply drive less, live smaller and live closer to amenities. Creating more compact cities leads to more sustainable ways of living, but it has drawbacks on the urban ecology, it creates urban heat islands effects and causes unfilterable soils which toughens the water management in urban environments. The solution looks easy, combining density with greenery. The modernist movement has been a protagonist of this principle. And it was this thoughtlessness which made it fail. In Collage city by Rowe and Koetter (1978)urban fabrics are compared on basis of their voids and fills and states that modernistic urban planning promotes the object and that traditional planning promotes space. As long as the green structure is part of the latter and does not account for as residual space, we can combine ecology and social activity. Green structures in the city should be introduced in the form of defined and usable spaces. Another typology of space which became unusable after the industrialisation were public streets, due to the high amounts of car traffic. Cities after the industrialisation became unmanageable due to the large crowds and traffic. The last decades the home occupation has been considerably reduced and more and more cities come up with measures to give automobiles less space .The city is becoming attractive again and people are leaving low populated areas. Gehl (2010) states that a

certain type of users i.e. pedestrians and cyclists need to have full access and priority in the public domain. From many urban projects he has observed where the road dimensions for the car have been minimised showed that the liveliness in the public area has increased. Many roads constructed during the age of the automobile in the Netherlands are too ergonomic for the car. The traffic engineer has had too much influence in the past and has created an unsightly urban landscape. Urban designers should have more input in the design of these public spaces.

We as designers have the concern of designing the built environment and therefore play a major role in the sustainability of a community. We are building for a society and there lies one of the most important aspects. Once the inhabitants are satisfied with their environment they will take greater care of it. By making sustainable designs or more adapting existing environments these days, we can make people more conscious. New York is a good example of a city that is striving to become a leading green city by adapting its environment. The city council has set up the PLANYC 2030 strategy in order to realise this. The city is tackling many problems on different themes and scale levels. This is a major issue today. The city is giving less space for the car and is introducing a vast amount of bicycle lanes. It is about adapting the already existing built environment instead of building complete new ones.

5 Regenerative and flexible cities

Johan and Nabielek (2006) state how comprehensive plans created by ideologies of the Welfare State and the economic ideology of Project Developers created rigidity instead of flexibility. These plans are hard to adapt to future developments because they are designed for only one programme. Attoe and Logan (1989) also state that zoning and land-use patterns create inflexible cities which cannot adopt to changing circumstances, that urban design must be strategic which responds to existing elements and that the urban fabric must accommodate space for catalytic reactions. Many great world cities like New

York, London, Tokyo are flexible and changed rapidly during the last centuries. The problem does not lie in modernist architecture, the problem is found in modernist urban design which sucks the life out of cities. A great example is Tokyo, where modernist architecture was predominant after World War Two, but combined it with traditional urban design. These cities are known for their vibrancy and economic prosperity. Another great example is the Barcelona grid, Cerda designed a grid system with a two slab building on each block. During the development the fill in of this clear structure turned out to be ruled by the market. Urban designers should focus on designing public spaces and think in strategies for the city. The market is capable of creating the rest.

Spiro Kostof in his book ‘The city shaped’ (1991) addresses the meaning of different urban patterns which have developed through history: organic patterns, the grid, the city as a diagram and the grand manner. He states how all of these patterns have their own qualities. They can contribute to the identity of a city. Cities are not about their general form, the organic, grid, diagram form all have their own qualities. It is about how these forms are filled in, the division of plots etc. Urban designers should stop forcing blue print planning and view the city as a growing entity which is not finished.

6 Cities with identity and

differentiated cities After the industrialisation resources

were not place restrictive anymore and the mobilisation of knowledge and thoughts helped in creating a common architecture. Le Corbusier and other modernists with their works and writings had a major impact on inspiring many to create this new architecture called the International Style. Modernist architecture dispersed itself continent wide and created what many nowadays view as soulless places without identity. But isn’t this a bit too short sighted? The Renaissance for example had a somewhat comparable effect on dispersing an architectural language and places constructed during these times are still being adored today. The question which rises (again): is it modernist architecture or urbanism which

gives places little identity? Modernistic architecture in Japan as discussed earlier has not lead to less identifiable places. Kevin lynch (1960) in his book has the image of the city which is based on his survey researches explains how inhabitants of a city create images in their mind and that these consist of elements. Many people should be able to create an image of Tokyo in their minds I assume. This again leads to flexibility in the urban fabric created by traditional urban design and which is being reduced in modernistic urban design. When creating flexible networks inhabitants can complement it by introducing something of their own culture. The problem with modernistic urbanism and the follow ups is that it provides neighbourhoods the same monotonous entity without a strong identity.

People identify themselves with their

built environment. Therefore people should be able to participate in the building process in order to create more identifiable cities.

(Butina-Watson et. Al., 2007) states how creating place identity in urban design has become increasingly import the last decades due to social, political and economic pressures. In the book ‘In de dienst of the stad’ by Meyer and Van den Burg (2010) it is explained how the cities of Amsterdam, Rotterdam and The Hague are all creating their own identity by applying different strategies. This on the other hand is directed from the top through strategic planning and has an effect which is noticeable. Therefore combining strategic urban planning and giving more freedom to people in the form of community design can yield more identifiable cities which can distinguish themselves in this age of globalisation.

7 Conclusion Through the case study of the New

Town Almere it can easily be seen how urban planning and design reacts on previous developments. New developments are immediately criticised and new plans are adapted. It also shows the overall sentimental tendencies of people to grab back to retrospective styles. If a new development is not effective we look back in history to find solutions. Now we have arrived at a point where we want to reintroduce traditional urban planning, the planning modernistic

movements thought was inadequate for its time. With this the role of the urban designer changes from one who creates blue prints to one who carries out strategic planning. To ensure liveable, durable and prosperous living environments, urban designers should look at the identity of the city and the neighbourhood and complement this identity by looking at the needs of the inhabitants. It are these needs which have been forgotten the last decades. Inhabitants should be granted freedom to adapt the living environment to these needs. Therefore a flexible urban layout is essential which allows adaptations and makes a regeneration possible. This regeneration assures adaptations can be carried out which are required from a sustainability view. Transforming neighbourhoods so that they can cope with the upcoming environmental and energy changes and inspire people to change their depleting behaviour. Urban designers and planners should also not take liveliness for granted. Putting a focus on public space design should be one of the main concerns. Integrating flexibility makes sure liveliness can be created whenever desired and in the amount desired.

7 References

BUTINA-WATSON, G. & BENTLEY, I. 2007. Identity by Design, Oxford, Elsevier Ltd. GEHL, J. 2010. Cities for People, Washington, Island

Press. GEMEENTE ALMERE. 2012. Sociale Atlas van

Almere, Monitor van wonen, werken en vrije tijd.

GEMEENTE EDE. 2011. Veiligheidsmonitor Rapportcijfer leefomgeving, via buurtmonitor.nl

GEMEENTE ROTTERDAM. 2008. Binnenstad als city lounge, Binnenstadsplan Rotterdam 2008-2020.

HELLEMAN, G. & WASSENBER, F. 2003. The renewal of what was tomorrow’s idealistic city. Amsterdam’s Bijlmermeer high-rise, Oxford, Elsevier Ltd., Vol. 21, p. 3-17

JACOBS, J. 1989. The death and life of great American cities, New York, Vintage Books.

KOMOSSA, S. 2010. The Dutch Urban Block and the Public Realm: Models, Rules, Ideals, Nijmegen, Vantilt.

KOSTOF, S. K. & TOBIAS, R. 1991. The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History, London, Thames & Hudson, Limited.

LYNCH, K. 1960. The Image of the City, Cambridge, MIT Press.

MEYER, H. & VAN DEN BURG, L. 2006. In dienst van de stad: 25 jaar werk van de Stedenbouwkundige Diensten van Amsterdam, Den Haag, Rotterdam, Amsterdam, SUN.

OWEN, D. 2010. Green Metropolis: Why Living Smaller, Living Closer, and Driving Less Are the Keys to Sustainability, New York, Penguin Books, Limited.

PANERAI, P., CASTEX, J., DEPAULE, J. C. & SAMUELS, I. 1997. Urban forms: death and life of the urban block, Oxford, Architectural Press.

PROJECTBUREAU VERNIEWING BIJLMERMEER. 2002. Finale plan van aanpak, Amsterdam

QUAEDFLIEG, J. & MOOIJ, H. 2013. Bloemkoolwijken: een uitgekookt concept, Een onderzoek onder bewoners naar de waardering van ruimtelijke kenmerken voor toepassing in toekomstige woningbouwopgaven.: Bouwfonds Ontwikkeling, TU Delft.

ROWE, C. & KOETTER, F. 1978. Collage City, Cambridge, MIT Press.

THE CITY OF NEW YORK. 2011. PLANYC 2030 a greener, greater New York.

VAN OOL, M. 2006. Stad noch land: de ruimtelijke ontordening van Nederland, Rotterdam, NAi Uitgevers.

WHYTE, W. H. J. 1980. The Social Life Of Small Urban Spaces, Project for Public Spaces Incorporated.