Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin

Urban nodes of soft infrastructurein Amsterdam and Berlin

How bottom-up initiatives facilitate and stimulate

vital and viable cities

New Urban Language ConferenceJune 25 - TU Delft

Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected] Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected]

0. Structure:1) Relevance: Academic and public demand for vital and

viable neighborhoods and cities, adapted to the needs of (local) residents, developed by and with democratic involvement of the civic society and inhabitants

2) Research subject: Urban nodes of soft Infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin

3) Case Studies: Park Frankendeal (AMS) and ExRotaprint (BER)- Features, characteristics, functions and effects- Development process: actors, obstacles and barriers

4) Findings and Discussion: Characteristics, consequences and limits of civic driven urban development in European cities

mailto:[email protected]



Academic and public demand for vital and viable neighborhoods and cities, adapted to the needs of (local) residents, developed by and with democratic involvement of the civic society and inhabitants

1. Relevance:




Social, architectural and urban problems in older, pré and postwar (modernistic) neighborhoods,

lack of spatial and social quality of new cities and new towns

Banne Buiksloot Amsterdam © Janssen & Johann

Transvaalbuurt Amsterdam © Janssen & Johann

IJburg Amsterdam © Janssen & Johann




SfA Open Call (2010)

Finding new answers and research on innovative urban arrangements and strategies that could respond to current and future economic and social issues, trends and conditions concerning the urban and social program of the city




SfA Open Call (2010)Background (findings):- A (growing) gap between the concerns and policies of

urban planners and (local) authorities and the societal challenges and issues in the field of education, healthcare, welfare, sports, arts and culture, leisure, transportation and public space for meeting.

- Lack of involvement of local social and civic organizations and citizens in urban planning and development and supply of local community services and facilities.

- Lacking funds (partly due to the financial crises of 2008) with traditional parties responsible for urban development and a strong social and communal infrastructure.




The phenomenon of the informal city and organic (DIY) planning attracts more and more attention from the urban and spatial academic research community and urban research literature




2. Research subject: Bottom-up originated, developed and operated Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin




Definition:1) Urban nodes of soft infrastructure are local,

community oriented urban initiatives that manifest themselves in unused locations and spaces, like wastelands, released plots, vacant offices, school buildings and abandoned factories.

2) On a structural basis they offer a broad and coherent mix of cultural, economic, recreational and social facilities, functions and services to the local neighborhood and broader city.

3) Attracted by their often appealing appearance and offered facilities and functions, local residents, city dwellers, tourists and other groups come to these places, to meet, work, recreate and make use of the offered facilities and services.




Examples:

ExRotaprint (BER): Former printing machine factory in a monumental (modernistic) complex which now contain studios, offices, craft businesses, childcare, training centers, a neighborhood canteen, a conference and debate space and several community projects

HC AthenA (AMS): New clubhouse from a large, young hockey club, in which the building contains a rehabilitation and physiotherapy practice, a joint gym, club canteen, a homework school, sports BSO, a Cancer Care Center and open house for elderly and cancer patientsTimorplein complex (AMS): Large former (historical) school complex that now houses a hostel, an educational and conference organization, craft businesses, offices for creatives, a movie theater and restaurants with art and culture stage and large terrace and public playgroundPark Frankendael (AMS): Large ecological park with several particular historical gardens, plenty of space for water (storage), several (ecological) playgrounds, scouting and childcare organizations and two special hospitality establishments with fidelity capability, focus on art & culture, et cetera……… ……

ufaFabrik (BER): A large former film studio site with art and culture stage, catering, hotel, conference center, sports and games facilities, a petting zoo, crafts, shopping, festivals, community center and various forms of renewable energy

Brotfabrik (BER): The Brotfabrik is a cinema-cum-art and cultural center in an old, converted and extended baker shop / bakery, with various community events and a neighborhood cafe, a beer garden and a large terrace on the self-designed square in front of the door




1) What are the (specific) features and characteristics of bottom-up originated and developed Urban nodes of soft infrastructure?

2) How do these urban nodes emerge, develop and work and what drives and motivates their initiators?

3) Which stakeholders (actors) are closely involved in the genesis, functioning and success of these vital urban nodes?

4) What are the benefits of these bottom-up Urban nodes and what is their impact on the viability and vitality of the district, neighborhood, or city as a whole?

5) What sort of problems are encountered when setting up and operating bottom-up (Urban) nodes and what sort of resistance and obstacles are met?

Research Questions:




Researched nodes in Amsterdam




Researched nodes in Berlin




3. Case study (detailed) examples:

Park Frankendael (Amsterdam - Oost)ExRotaprint (Berlin - Wedding)- Features, characteristics, functions

and effects- Development process: actors,

obstacles and barriers




Park Frankendael (Amsterdam - Oost)




Park Frankendael: Functions and facilities

Kunst- en cultuurgebouw

Moes- en kruidentuinHondenuitlaatzone

Waterberging

Cultureel erfgoed

Ecologische hoofdzone

Rococo tuin

Volkstuinencomplex

Schoolwerktuinen




Park Frankendael: Development process



Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected] Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected] Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected] Idea and

initiation phaseExploitation and

(regular) operation phaseRealization phaseConcept, design, finance and acceptance phase

Neighbor-hood, civil

society

Users

Real estate parties

Financiers

Politics

Media

Government admini-stration

Initiators

Park Frankendael: Actor involvement / activity




Leisure activities and facilities

Employment and local economy

Livability neighborhood

Local real-estate value

Imago & popularity

Art & cultural activities

Park Frankendael: Benefits and revenues

Health & wellbeing

Environment and ecology




Park Frankendael: Benefits and revenues => Employment (direct and induced): about 45 fte=> Induced tax revenues: about 1 million euro per annum=> Long term social, ecological and economic value: about 45 million euro=> uplift in real-estate value (neighborhood): more then 100 million euro

=> Significant positive effects on physical and mental health and wellbeing of visitors => Significant positive effects on wellbeing and physical health of inhabitants of East Amsterdam=> Significant positive effects on the livability of surrounding neighborhoods

=> Ranks fifth in most popular parks of Amsterdam=> Yearly around 250.000 visitors=> Amongst the highest valued parks of Amsterdam

=> Several popular catering places=> Several popular playgrounds=> Culture and heritage centre en historical monuments=> Several extraordinary (historical) gardens and wandering areas

=> Important role as storage area and bufferzone for water (flood) and rain => Part of the ecological main structure of Amsterdam, nesting of several protected birds=> Important function in lowering high city temperatures and the level of particulates




ExRotaprint (Berlin - Wedding)




ExRotaprint: Functions and facilities




ExRotaprint: Development process



Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected] Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected] Janssen & Johann | Research for Urbanism | Amsterdam - Berlin | [email protected]

ExRotaprint: Actor involvement / activity

Idea and initiation phase

Exploitation and (regular) operation phaseRealization phaseConcept, design, finance

and acceptance phase

Neighbor-hood, civil

society

Users

Real estate parties

Financiers

Politics

Media

Government admini-stration

Initiators




Local economy

Employment (direct and indirect)

Livability neighborhood

Local real-estate value

Imago & popularity

Art & cultural activities

ExRotaprint: Benefits and revenues

Health & wellbeing

Emancipation and empowerment




ExRotaprint: Benefits and revenues => Employment (direct and induced: artists, entrepreneurs, et cetera): about 304 fte=> Direct and induced tax revenues: about 3,4 million euro per annum=> Long term social, ecological and economic value of ExRotaprint: tens of millions (euro)=> Uplift in real-estate value (neighborhood): more then 70 million euro=> Strong improvement of job opportunities for drop-outs and non German speaking inhabitants of Wedding

=> Small but significant positive effects on physical and mental health and wellbeing of visitors and users => Strong positive effects on the livability of surrounding neighborhoods in the district Wedding=> Important role in emancipation and empowerment of people living in the district Wedding=> Important role in educating people in the district Wedding

=> driver of growing popularity of Wedding and real-estate in Wedding and improved imago of Wedding=> Yearly around 150.000 visitors (10.000 unique), many of them from abroad=> Amongst the highest ranked modernistic monuments in Berlin

=> Large playground / green field: meeting place for the neighborhood => Popular canteen for workers and local inhabitants=> Cultural and debating centre=> Important (modernistic) architectural and urban monument

=> not applicable




Kunstquartier Bethanien (Berlin - Kreuzberg)




Kunstquartier Bethanien: Functions and facilities




Kunstquartier Bethanien: Development process




Characteristics, consequences and limits of civic driven development of Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in European cities

4. Findings and Discussion:




1) Successful Urban nodes of soft infrastructure are conspicuous places with a broad and eclectic offer of community oriented functions and facilities, including attractive cheap catering and place for meeting

2) Bottom-up initiated Urban nodes of soft infrastructure often have considerable (local) economic, social and cultural impact and are important drivers of innovation

3) Origination and succes of bottom-up initiated Urban nodes of soft infrastructure cannot be planned by politics, planners or developers

4) Initiators of Urban nodes are barely noted or acknowledged by politics and traditional stakeholders involved in urban planning and development

5) Origination of urban nodes is often hindered by planners and politics

6) German initiators generally operate much looser and independent from (local) authorities then their Dutch counterparts.

Findings:




Hard / physical

infra-structure

Neigh-borhood /

civil society

Real estateparties

Users

Traditional urban development actors

Soft infrastruct

ureparties

Urbandevelopment

Commercial companies

Soft infra-structure

Spaces(housing, working)

Media

Financiers

Politics

Government

(admini-stration)




Real estateparties

Users

Bottom-up urban development (actors)

Politics

Media

Neigh-borhood

civil society

Urban node(places)

Government

(admini-stration)

Financiers

Soft infra-structure

Initiators




Urban node

Users

Initiators

Actors involved (detail)

Voorzieningaanbieders

Buurtbewoners(groepen)

ParticipantenHuurder - aanbieders

Kleine ondernemersfreelancers

Reïntegratie aanbieders

Huurders

ontmoeten en maken gebruik

van voorzieningen

huren ruimte

bieden diensten en voorzieningen aan

Kunstenaars

huren ateliers en studioruimte

investeren en organiseren mee

laten er mensenreïntegreren

huren

huren werkruimte

Maat-schappelijke organisaties

huren kantoorruimte

Neigh-borhood

civil society

Buurtbewoners

Buurtbewoners /

ondernemers

(lokale)Experts

Sym-pathisanten

Vrijwilligers

makengebruik van

lobbyen tegen

helpen,ondersteunen

lobbyen voor

schenkengeld

adviseren(vrijwillig)

gaan mee-participeren

Tegenstanders

Sym-pathisanten




Government

(admini-stration)

Urban node(location)

Initiators

Financiers

Groter publiek

Banken

Overheid

Fondsen

MVOStichtingen

Participanten

Beleggers

lenen

kopen en verpachten

lenen,investeren

investeren, co-financieren

crowdfunden(investeren,schenken)

schenken

subsidiëren,lenen,

investeren

Bestuurders

Ambtelijkediensten

Centraal stedelijke

bestuurdersLokale (stadsdeel) bestuurders

Gemeentelijkgrondbedrijf

Gemeentelijkontwikkelings

bedrijf

Advies- en expertise centrum

Vrienden, familie en relaties

lenen,investeren

Provinciale bestuurders


adviseert

bepalen en voeren beleid uit

adviseert,zet standaarden,

verkoopt - verhuurt

dragen visie uit,bepalen beleid

adviseert,ontwikkelt,financiert







Knooppunt(locatie)

Real-estateparties

Initiatiefnemer(s)

Vastgoedbeheerders Gemeentelijk

vastgoed adviseurs

Vastgoedeigenaren

Ontwik-kelaars

Gemeentelijk vastgoed of grondbedrijf

Media

verkopen of verhuren

faciliteren verhuur, beheer of overname

van vastgoed

nemen vastgoedin beheer

kopen vastgoeden ontwikkelen

bepaalt erfpacht, grond- en vastgoedprijs of verkooppropcedure

Centralestad

politici

Lokale(stadsdeel)

politici

steunen of verwerpen


Politics

besteden aandacht aan

Landelijkepolitici






Discussion: Key issues - There is still a large gap between the informal (civic) actors and the

complex, official urban planning regime with its formal procedures, goals, language, et cetera

- Governmental and urban planning practice still are mainly focussed on top-down (blueprint) planning and involvement of traditional urban development stakeholders

- Politics, planners, developers, architects and users are mainly focussed on products (buildings, square meters) and financial outcomes, instead of dynamic processes, soft outcomes and facilities and (soft) infrastructure promoting the vitality and viability of neighborhoods and cities

- Governmental and urban planning practice still are mainly sectoral organized which hinders initiatives and integral policy development focussed on viable and vital cities and neighborhoods




Urban node(Place)

Neigborhood

civil society

Initiators

Softinfrastructu

reparties

Users

Traditional vs bottom-up development

Media

Traditionalurban

development(facilities, services,

infrastructure, public space and buildings)

GapPolitics

Real-estateparties

Financiers

Bottom

-up

urban

develo

pment

Government

(admini-stration)




Discussion: Issues that need attention - The legal form of Urban node initiatives (in the Netherlands)- The valuation and transfer of communal land and buildings on

Urban node initiators / local community and civic initiatives- Valuation and acknowledgment of the importance of the proceeds,

effects and impact of bottom-up initiated Urban nodes of soft infrastructure on the vitality and viability of neighborhoods and cities

- Financing / funding the development of Urban nodes; specifically the purchase of land and buildings

- Financing / subsidizing Urban node exploitation- Mobilization of sufficient financial and real-estate expertise to

create a good plan and build a solid business case for development of the Urban node

- Cooperation between local (urban) authorities, traditional urban development parties and bottom-up initiators of Urban nodes of soft infrastructure




Discussion: Conclusion Instead of thinking in financial soundness and financial results of plans, in bricks, volume and involvement of professional parties, local authorities should put more trust in passionate, often highly skilled citizens who want to improve and develop the local urban environment and social infrastructure. More attention should given by (local) authorities in creating circumstances and a planning and development structure that stimulates the arise and development of sustainable, vital, viable neighborhood and city quarters through local, urban bottom-up initiatives.




Acknowledgements1) The Creative Industries Fund NL, formerly the

Netherlands Architecture Fund (SfA), especially Maarten Tas and Tim de Boer

2) All those who have contributed with their knowledge, input and enthusiasm to the success of this research project. Special thanks goes to the interviewees; founders of urban nodes and other stakeholders like, administrators, civil servants, experts, et cetera

3) Members of the consultative group: Vincent Kompier, Stefan Metaal, Jan Poolen and Eric Frijters

4) Jeroen Bakker for ICT support5) Yvonne Siegmund for designing schemes and diagrams




Website: www.vitaleknooppunten.nl



http://www.vitaleknooppunten.nl/


Researchers: Rainer Johann (Master of Science and Doctorate) works as an urbanist in research, teaching and practice. Former visiting Professor at Bauhaus-University Weimar (2007). Since 2008 assistant professor at HCU Hamburg, department of Urban and Neighborhood Planning. Studied Architecture in Cologne (2000) and Urban planning in Delft (2002). Worked with ASTOC (Cologne), UrbanUnlimited (Rotterdam), De Architekten Cie (Amsterdam) and with The Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency (Den Haag). Since 2012 partner at Janssen & Johann, Studio for Urbanism (Amsterdam - Berlin).Nico Janssen (Master of Science and Arts) works as an independent researcher, strategist and policy-adviser specialized in scenarioplanning, innovation and the creative and cultural industries. Studied Management and Engineering and Applied Psychology at the University Twente in Enschede. Former councillor at the district Amsterdam East and strategist and partner at The Ruijter Strategy (Amsterdam), Consultant at The Dutch Municipality Bank (The Hague) and lecturer and researcher at the Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences. Since 2012 partner at Janssen & Johann, Studio for Urbanism (Amsterdam - Berlin).



Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin

Government & Nonprofit

Transcript of Urban nodes of soft infrastructure in Amsterdam and Berlin