Urban renewal and social mixing in Bijlmermeer, Amsterdam Wouter van Gent Urban Geographies, Amsterdam Institute for Social Science Research (AISSR) Universiteit van Amsterdam

Presentation

Seminar “Urban Renewal Projects in Europe” Institut dÚrbanisme de Paris, 8 March 2011

Outline 1. History of Bijlmermeer 2. Problems 3. Renewal and interventions 4. Social appraisal

Amsterdam Metropolitan Housing Policy Wouter van Gent, ENHR 09, Prague, 28 June- 1 July 2009

3

MAP

Living will be good in Bijlmer

CITY of the FUTURE …with spacious sound-proof flats, parks, and four shopping centres

Rationalistic Planning

Second post-WWII urban extension after the Western Garden Cities 1964-1965: Designed according to principles of Congress International d’Architecture Moderne (CIAM) Urban planning experiment with ‘scientific’ and rationalistic principles: separation of functions, lots of green space and elevated roads.

Rationalistic Planning

Rationalistic Planning

Rationalistic Planning

Separation of traffic

(Tativille)

Housing

Exclusively high-rise apartment blocks

…in parkland

Honey-comb structure

Housing - 23,000 nearly identical dwellings - Comfortable and spacious (100-125 m2) - Middle class housing - Rented and managed by housing associations

2. Problems • Vacancies and high turn-over rates (highest: 25% in 1985) • Social problems: poverty, crime, nuissances, youth gangs, unsafe public space, unemployment, sans-papier • Manageability problems (high costs) • Most stigmatised neighbourhood in NL (‘Black ghetto’)

Cause I: Planning failures • Late arrival of amenities, shopping centres and subway (1980s) • ‘Indefensible’ space • Too much (semi-)public space • Monotonous and disproportionate design and housing market

Parking Garage

Cause II: External developments - Suburbanisation of middle classes (since 1960s) - Decolonisation: independence of Surinam (1975) - ‘Cleaning up’ of city centres (1990s)

1980s: First efforts: “Nieuw Amsterdam” • • • • • • • •

A new housing association (1983) Technical improvements Demolishing parts of parking garages Rearranging public space Galleries and inner-streets closed off Lowering rents and free parking Splitting apartments Private gardens

However, • Still maintenance problems, vacancies, social issues and crime • Threatening bankruptcy

3. Renewal and interventions • Remaining problems yet central state refused to help financially • Early 1990s: ambitious programme (extended in 2001) to transform the neigbourhood socially and physically • Aim: ‘socially varied population living in an attractive and varied housing stock’ • Social mixing for neighbourhood and for residents – Positive neighbourhood effects through socialisation, role modelling, social efficacy, social capital – Less negative effects

• 3 Pillars (integrated effort) – Large-scale renewal – Management and public safety – Social economic programmes

Large-scale renewal

‘It is beneficial to use, if possible, solid but less durable materials, as this will decrease the life span of housing, which will allow for earlier replacement of housing and for adaptations to changing technical and societal conditions.’

Mr. van der Velde (1968)

Large-scale renewal • 15 years after last construction: demolishing high rises (1/4 in 1992, expanded to 2/3 in 2001 and 2008) • Intensive renovation of remaining high-rises • New construction: densification (+13%) • Housing market restructuring (92% social rent -> 55%)

Large-scale renewal • • • •

Demolishing: 7000 New: 8000 (70% owner occupied – 30% social rent) Renovation: 4000 Privatisation: 1500

• Renewal public space: 400 hectare • Demolished parking garages: 16 • Renewal shopping centres: 2 • Development of Bijlmer Arena • Costs: €1600 million (excl. Arena), €450M covered by public

Management and safety • more cleaners in public areas and extra cleaning operations in apartment blocks • anti-pollution squads to fine offenders • temporary closing-off of box-rooms, lobbies, dead ends etc. in flats to be renovated • service and repairs outside office hours • wardens in flats and public areas • neighbourhood safety offices • cameras in interior corridors of flats

End of ‘Bijlmer Paradise’ • • • • •

Undocumented immigrants (sans papiers) Homeless and drug users ‘Soft’ policies: shelter, health, ‘use spaces’ ‘Hard’ policies: criminalization, forcing to move around Bijlmer junkies versus non-Bijlmer junkies

Social economic programme e.g. • Employment training (ArenA initiative) • Financial and administrative support for start-up businesses and entrepreneurs • Artist spaces • Religious spaces • Language courses for older immigrants • Children welfare and ICT projects • Festivals and festivities for social cohesion • ‘Woman at work’ & Women Empowerment • Youth work (anti-gangs, sports, policing) • Community gardening and maintenance projects • ‘Behind the front door’ approach • ‘Housing training’

4. Appraisal of social transformation Persuasive physical changes but social transformation is not complete yet (and may not be that revolutionary)

55000

50000

45000

Population Bijlmermeer Non Western Immigrants

40000

35000

30000 1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

50,0% 45,0% 40,0% 35,0% low income Bijlmer

30,0%

high income Bijlmer

25,0%

Low income A'dam

20,0%

high income A'dam

15,0% 10,0% 5,0% 0,0% 1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

4. Appraisal of social transformation Positive version: ArenA area Attracted real estate investments Improved reputation

Improved manageability (in social and physical terms) Effective cooperation between justice, police, social work and health

Emancipation of black middle class Housing careers possible Model for regeneration in the Netherlands

4. Appraisal of social transformation Critical ArenA area is separate from housing estate Improved reputation, yet still highly vulnerable housing market position (slow sales, no upper market). Also, still media attention for incidents with youth gangs and crime (‘Parisian Situation’) Bijlmermeer no longer a safe haven for sans papier Individual poverty and social economic problems remain (complex neighbourhood effect mechanisms)

4. Appraisal of social transformation Critical Transformation through social mixing: - Direct displacement of residents - ‘Waterbed effects’ (same issues pop up elsewhere) - Broken support networks Tenure restructuring at the periphery and gentrification of centre -> less housing for lower income housing in Amsterdam (Amsterdam housing policy: -20% lower income housing; -10% low income households in 2020)

Conclusion Radical transformation: good for neighbourhood, but not necessarily for residents Comparative perspective: - housing market status, - housing and urban policy framework, - social housing stock and housing associations

Questions

My research Comparative study of nine neighbourhoods undergoing physical and social economic regeneration in four Western European countries (thesis: four neighbourhoods) Aim: contextual factors (institutional) and social outcomes Q: What is the capacity of neighbourhood regeneration policies for social and societal change, and how does the housing and policy context affect this capacity? Case selection: welfare state typology Method: mixed, mostly interviews with experts, professionals, policy-makers.